The Lead

And his fellow bishops. Read it all here (pdf). [For the moment available here in html.]

It doesn't start off well:

The Most Rev. Katherine Jefferts Schori....

That would be Katharine, not Katherine.

John-David tenders his resignation from the House of Bishops. (Didn't he already do that?). Does that end the need for action by the House of Bishop's? Does it close the case on the charge of abandonment of communion? We don't think so. (Afterall, the inhibition came after his earlier resignation.)

Readers, let us know what you think.

Added Thursday evening. From ELO:

Schofield sent a letter, dated March 1, to Jefferts Schori, resigning from TEC's House of Bishops. It was unclear if the letter would have any effect on the House of Bishops' deliberations.

"Rather than force the House of Bishops to a vote, I herewith tender my resignation as a member of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church effective midnight EST, March 7, 2008," Schofield said in the letter.

"The Episcopal Church and Bishop [Jefferts] Schori will remain in my prayers and the prayers of all parishes and missions in the Diocese of San Joaquin. The door of reconciliation will always be open," he added.

Schofield also asserted that "I am a bishop in the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone and I am the Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin. The Episcopal Church has no jurisdiction or authority to affect my status in any of these capacities."

Schofield was not in the office on March 6, said the Rev. Van McAlister, a spokesperson for the diocese, McAlister confirmed that Schofield had sent a letter of resignation to the House of Bishops.

"The letter will be posted on the diocesan website any time now," McAlister said. He added that Schofield wrote it "because he felt like it was important to provide a formal response and he wanted to have that response out there before people wasted a lot of time on it at the House of Bishops."

Neva Rae Fox, a spokesperson for Jefferts Schori, said the Presiding Bishop's Office had not yet received the letter by the afternoon of March 6.

Comments (10)

and "Jefforts" and Dear Bishop Schori?

Good grief.

Posted by Ann Fontaine | March 5, 2008 9:15 PM

Oh, that lady bishop, you know, what's her name ... Katherine, Kathryn, something. Anyway ...

Posted by Kit Carlson | March 5, 2008 9:35 PM

The House of Bishops still needs to act -- they are voting on his status as a bishop in The Episcopal Church.

Posted by Ann Fontaine | March 5, 2008 9:49 PM

Even if John-David's actions end the need for the HoB to depose him, the fact remains that he has taken property that is not rightfully his.

- Weiwen Ng

Posted by Weiwen | March 5, 2008 10:13 PM

Oh dear, Ann, I didn't even take in the Jefforts.

John-David has been apart for a long time.

Posted by John B. Chilton | March 5, 2008 10:15 PM

Yes, it appears that unless he issues a renunciation of his Holy Orders, the Deposition vote must proceed.

For what it's worth, this is a nasty situation all around. The canonical improvisation by 815 doesn't help things at all.

We should pray for the whole lot of them: San Joaquin, Southern Cone, and 815.

Pax,
Scott+

Posted by Scott Gunn | March 5, 2008 11:00 PM

2 caveats from our Constitution:

"A Bishop may not resign jurisdiction without the consent of
the House of Bishops." Constitution II.6

Furthermore, to "resign" is to retain ones seat, voice, and vote in TEC's House of Bishops:

"Each Bishop of this Church...who...has resigned a jurisdiction, shall
have a seat and a vote in the House of Bishops." Constitution I.2.

Posted by Louie Crew | March 6, 2008 7:06 AM

From where I sit in the pew, it seems to me that Bishop Schofield is a former Bishop of TEC, once he aligned with the Southern Cone. He no longer has any relevance to TEC.

And considering Katharine Jefferts Schori has been known by this name as priest, as Bishop of Nevada, and now as Presiding Bishop, Bishop Schofield and others have had plenty of time to get it right.

That they can't be bothered speaks volumes about the kind of people they are. They are unable to show respect for anyone a little different.

But, hey! That's old news!

Sister Gloriamarie Amalfitano, Episcopal Solitary in San Diego

Posted by SisterGloriamarie | March 6, 2008 10:45 AM

As long as both sides, yours and the Southern Cone, remain in the Anglican Communion it's a quagmire but this makes more sense than Bishop Schofield's earlier claim that he and his diocese were in the Southern Cone only temporarily.

Posted by John Beeler | March 6, 2008 2:30 PM

Very good comments over at

http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/002957.html#comments

Posted by John B. Chilton | March 6, 2008 9:14 PM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

CATEGORIES

Bibles

Feeds

SEARCH