A.S. Haley—The Constitutional Crisis in ECUSA (I)

Posted by Kendall Harmon

The revisions to the disciplinary section of the Canons ("Title IV") proposed at Anaheim in 2009 lived up to Bishop Jefferts Schori's prediction: with very little time to consider their sweeping nature, and with no line-by-line comparison of what was being changed made available to them (contrary to what the Canons themselves require), the deputies enacted changes the full scope of which no one -- not even those who had labored for years to draft them -- grasped. The extent of the disciplinary powers over other bishops alone which the new Canons give to the Presiding Bishop transform her -- in contrast to what tradition and ECUSA's Constitution say -- into a full-fledged metropolitan. Consider just these points (see this paper for the full details):

* Currently, if the Presiding Bishop wants to bring charges against another bishop, she has to send a written presentation of just the facts, without any editorializing, to an independent "Title IV Review Committee" consisting of bishops, clergy and laity. Under the new Canons, the Presiding Bishop is empowered to refer, "in any form", information about any offense she thinks "may" have been committed to an "Intake Officer", whom she alone appoints.
* Currently, the Title IV Review Committee screens and evaluates each potential charge against a bishop. Under the new Title IV, the Presiding Bishop, along with her appointed "Intake Officer", have two out of the three votes on the "Review Committee" which now screens the charges.
* Currently, the Presiding Bishop may inhibit a bishop only if the Title IV Review Committee decides to present charges, and only if a majority of all the members of the affected diocesan Standing Committee consent. Under the new Title IV, the Presiding Bishop may act alone, and out of the blue, to inhibit a fellow bishop (the word "inhibit" has been replaced by the term "place restrictions on the exercise of the ministry" of a bishop).
* Currently, any inhibition is "temporary", and is "an extraordinary remedy, to be used sparingly and limited to preventing immediate and irreparable harm to individuals or to the good order of the Church." Under the new Title IV there are no such limitations on its use -- restrictions may be imposed for any duration, and for any reason(s) the Presiding Bishop, in her sole judgment, thinks are sufficient.

Please read it carefully, follow all the links, and read it all.

Filed under: * Anglican - Episcopal • Anglican Identity • Episcopal Church (TEC) • Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori • TEC Conflicts • TEC Polity & Canons • * Christian Life / Church Life • Church History • * Theology • Ecclesiology

10 Comments
Posted September 27, 2010 at 5:00 pm [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. Ralph wrote:

Lessons of history can be illuminating.

One would do well to read a synopsis of Mein Kampf, and trace Hitler’s ascent to dictatorship, looking for parallels. Do the Title IV changes have parallels to the enabling act? Do the faux depositions of Bp Cox (and others) have parallels to the Night of the Long Knives? Are there now any checks and balances on the Presiding Fuehrerin’s authority and powers? Who’s next? The Archbishop of Canterbury? Read about Gleichschaltung.

Despot is as despot does. We shall see how she continues her term in office. Or, will she refuse to leave office?

September 27, 7:46 pm | [comment link]
2. Chris wrote:

Mussolini would be proud. :(

September 27, 8:28 pm | [comment link]
3. Blue Cat Man wrote:

It seems that the canon is being changed to fit the acts already done. Alas, I don’t think she’ll leave the office.  Mr. Haley has hit the nail on the head, again.

September 27, 8:35 pm | [comment link]
4. AnglicanFirst wrote:

A “coup de etat” by ‘moles’ who have crawled out into the sunlight over the past ten years.

September 27, 8:43 pm | [comment link]
5. A Senior Priest wrote:

God bless the Curmudgeon. He ought to write a magistral book on the wider subject - Downfall: Katharine Schori and the decline of one of America’s great historic institutions.

September 27, 11:27 pm | [comment link]
6. Daniel wrote:

This excellent article puts me in mind of the rulers described in First and Second Kings.  Bad kings meant bad things for Israel.  Bad bishops have meant, and will mean, very bad things for TEC.  I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to say that it seems God has also hardened their hearts; e.g., depositions and litigation.  A very sad situation and destined to get worse.

September 28, 8:18 am | [comment link]
7. LumenChristie wrote:

Haley wrote: “the deputies enacted changes the full scope of which no one—not even those who had labored for years to draft them—grasped.”

Oh, I believe they grasped it, all right.  Very smart people on that committee had done a lot of work and communicating “off the grid” and endlessly honed the language to create the tools they want to make the church into what they want: their hegemony.  The result is exactly what they wanted because, after all, the effects are to fall only on those horrible conservatives.  The House trusted their committee to create the desired results, and had no qualms about voting for it.  The “line by line” work had already been done and vetted in the committee.

The committee also considers themselves to be so much smarter than everyone else that they figured no one would be capable of noticing the discrepancies or dealing with the problems.

I realize my voice is not wanted here, but I have to say that some of us fought for years to improve this as much as possible; the first drafts really were a lot worse; we did what we could, being so radically out-numbered.

To quote Richard Dreyfus:  “This was no boating accident.”  Yep, it was a shark.

September 28, 8:19 am | [comment link]
8. Cennydd13 wrote:

I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if some move is made to amend TEC’s Constitution and Canons to extend KJS’s term of office indefinitely.

September 28, 4:35 pm | [comment link]
9. RalphM wrote:

Hugo Chavez is now the PB?

September 28, 10:27 pm | [comment link]
10. Cennydd13 wrote:

Hey, it could happen!  Shudder…...gasp…...cringe!

September 29, 12:45 am | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.



Next entry (above): Bishop William Wantland’s Thirtieth Anniversary

Previous entry (below): U.S. Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)