The Lead

And, more news from the House of Bishops' meeting:

Diocese of Central Ecuador leadership to resign
Presiding bishop appoints Victor Scantlebury interim bishop
From Episcopal News Service

For the "sake of the diocese" the leadership of the Episcopal Diocese of Central Ecuador – including members of the Standing Committee, Bishop Luis Fernando Ruiz, the chancellor, its legal representative and all other diocesan leaders – have agreed to resign by Oct. 1.
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori Sept. 20 convened a meeting of the leadership, along with Bishop Victor Scantlebury and Bishop Clay Matthews, the Episcopal Church's bishop for pastoral development, at the Hilton Colón Hotel in Quito, where the agreement was reached.

By resigning their positions, the leadership yields its authority to the presiding bishop; she appointed Scantlebury, who had served as an assisting bishop in the Diocese of Chicago until he retired July 1 to serve as interim bishop.

The announcement was made to the House of Bishops, which has been holding its fall meeting Sept. 15-20 in Quito, during its business session. Jefferts Schori, Scantlebury and Matthews have been holding meetings with the Central Ecuador leadership throughout the six-day meeting.

"They have been advising me to think about my resignation," said Ruiz in Spanish through an interpreter. "This is something that really hurts me … but as I have been saying, if this will contribute to calm in the diocese, and I can get my life back in order.

"I came here thinking the Lord had a plan for me, but now I don't know. I am worried about what I will do afterward."

Comments (3)

I don't understand this paragraph:

"By resigning their positions, the leadership yields its authority to the presiding bishop; she appointed Scantlebury, who had served as an assisting bishop in the Diocese of Chicago until he retired July 1 to serve as interim bishop."

I think we needed to find a way to fix a difficult situation, and I like Bishop Scantlebury, but can someone explain to me how a diocese goes about "yielding" its authority to the presiding bishop. I am not an expert in canons, but I don't think dioceses are able to decide to whom they "yield" authority.

I am happy to be corrected on this, but I would hate to see us manufacturing principles that grant more central authority to the office of the PB because we needed a one time fix.

Posted by Jim Naughton | September 21, 2011 9:35 AM

There is a Canon that allows for this.
Canon III.13.2.

The question remains - did the Standing Committee invite Bishop Scantlebury or did the PB make this decision? There must have been some prior plan to have it happen so quickly

Posted by Ann Fontaine | September 21, 2011 10:47 AM

I have no idea what actually happened, and I have no problem with the PB strongly urging an action on the diocese. This was a difficult situation and I am glad it seems to have been resolved.

What I am concerned about is the notion that dioceses can yield or cede authority to the office of the Presiding Bishop in a case like this. I would not like that to become a common understanding of how our polity works because I don't believe it is accurate.

Posted by Jim Naughton | September 21, 2011 12:37 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

Organizations