The Panel of Reference weighs in again
(Update: See Marhsall's posting. He's given this much more thought than anybody else I have come across.)
This time on cases involving parishes in Florida. I have just given it a very quick read. Have a look.
This would seem to be the nub of it: "As an integral part of this recommendation, we are commending what we are calling a “good neighbour” episcopal ministry. It represents a development of the plan for delegated episcopal pastoral oversight. The “neighbour” bishop would have an oversight extended to him or her from the diocesan bishop, which would include effective and necessary sharing of decisions with regard to clergy appointments for the parish and ordination process. As neighbour, the bishop would live in reasonable geographical proximity. Most important of all, the spirit of this ministry would be neighbourly."
You should note to, however, that the Panel, which thank goodness has no authority in U. S. Courts puts forward a a controversial reading of the Preamble of our Constitution.
At paragraph 26 it writes: The constitutional documents of the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada require those Churches to be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Anglican Church “throughout the world”, and loyal to the historic Anglican formularies.
But what the constituion actually says is: The Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America… is a constituent member of the Anglican Communion.
That's a statement of fact, not a legal requirement. The Panel needs to be set straight on this, if only to keep it from making further boneheaded readings of our documents and then attempting to force those interpetations upon us.
Good neighbour ministy? Would that be "Mr. Rodgers' Diocese"? Fetch the purple cardigan. ;-)
Posted by tobias haller | March 16, 2007 11:24 AM
We should also make it clear that we have no intention of abiding by the 39 articles or the 1662 book of common prayer. We have never required assent to any of the articles except number 6. Not even the C of E requires upholding them in any strict sense.
We are a constituent member of the Anglican Communion, which thank God has always held that no Lambeth resolution has binding authority unless it is adopted by the synod or General Convention of a constituent, self-governing Church. See the preface to the 1978 Lambeth report cited by the Anglican Church of Canada, inter alia.
Posted by Bill Carroll | March 16, 2007 12:39 PM
I think the most important aspect of this is the unambiguous endorsement of DEPO as defined by the Episcopal House of Bishops. The plan in paragraph 37 is in all essentials DEPO and a clear rejection of foreign interventions. This provides an interesting counterpoint to the Tanzania Communique, which suggested that such boundary crossings might continue until the Episcopal Church satisfied our most conservative critics.
Now, it remains to be seen whether the congregation (and those of like mind but not specifically addressed in this report) will accept this. This is basically what they had before. If it wasn't acceptable then, will it be acceptable now? And, what guidance will the African provinces involved offer to these clergy and congregations?
Posted by mscottsail | March 16, 2007 2:12 PM
There is simply no excuse for a Panel of Reference serving at the request of the Archbishop of Canterbury to misread or misrepresent the constitution of an Anglican province.
Nigeria and friends often assert things in such ways to create a new "reality" (examples: the ostensible, binding authority of Lambeth resolutions and Primates' requests). This is probably an oversight or mistake on the Panel's part, but, either way, there is just no excuse for it.
Posted by christopherDC | March 16, 2007 5:39 PM
Interestingly enough, the Rev. Pascoe mentioned in the report was recently defrocked by the Rwandans for engaging in an adulterous relationship with a member of his parish.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070227/BREAKING/70227014&start=1
Posted by nlnh | March 17, 2007 3:52 AM