Support the Café

Search our Site

Joint Nominating Committee for Next Presiding Bishop update

Joint Nominating Committee for Next Presiding Bishop update

The Joint Nominating Committee for the Election of the Next Presiding Bishop has issued a report of their work to date onEpiscopal News Service:

The co-chairs of The Episcopal Church Joint Nominating Committee for the Election of the Presiding Bishop (JNCPB) have issued an update on the group’s work and progress.

The JNCPB Committee continues to meet in sub-groups as we focus on the work of preparing for the nomination of the next Presiding Bishop. The committee members are faithfully focused on the charge given them to establish the nomination process for Presiding Bishop leading up to General Convention 2015 in Salt Lake City. Further updates, including timelines and facilitation of the process, will be announced prior to Ash Wednesday.

JNCPB also wishes to thank all who completed the survey issued by the committee which invited broad-based feedback on the desired qualities and gifts of the next Presiding Bishop. The data collected has provided the committee with an overview and understanding of the wishes of the Church.

We ask that you continue to keep JNCPB in your prayers as we continue our important discernment.

Sally Johnson, Diocese of Minnesota

Bishop Ed Konieczny, Diocese of Oklahoma

Many in the church are asking if the Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori will be one of the nominees since she is within the age range for re-election. No presiding bishop has held 2 terms though terms used to be 12 years instead of 9 years. One scenario discussed around the church is for the current PB to serve a 3 year term to lead the Task Force for Reimagining the Episcopal Church (TREC) process. Will the committee be answering these questions as they offer a timeline and ideas about the process?

The members of the JNCPB are listed here.


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

With all due respect, selecting a massive committee to mull over this office over an extended period of time seems to be an invitation for inaction and sclerosis. Perhaps having the admirable goal of ensuring that all voices are heard leads to the size, but it seems that at some point having a committee of a multitude is counter productive.

And, perhaps I’ve not been paying attention, but what and where and with whom has this Task Force for Reimagining the Episcopal Church been doing its work? I would bet that 99% of Episcopalians have never heard of it and have no idea of what it is trying to accomplish.

With respect to the term of office, why would the current PB need to be the PB to spearhead that process? While she has many admirers, I don’t think she has been very successful at engaging the Episcopal Church as a whole or terribly effictive in leading the church through its currnet challneges, and would not be in favor of extending her term for another 9 years.

Paul Talbot

@Peter, I don’t demand immediate results, I just don’t have a ton of faith that keeping the same leadership that has fought to centralize power in the church in 815 will lead to the kind of re-imagining of the church that the convention called for and that the church broadly seems to be demanding.

When a rector leaves a parish, the parish doesn’t (usually) do the discernment for their new rector while the old one is still there. It stifles discussion and doesn’t allow for appropriate self-examination about where change and growth is needed. If we want to elect a three year place-holder Provisional Presiding Bishop, I think that’s great, but we will never be able to make the appropriate changes with all of the old leadership from the old model sticking around and deciding what the new one should look like.

Daniel Stroud

Peter Pearson

Sometimes it seems that we have no heart for process but merely for immediate results. For my part, I would not mind seeing our current Presiding Bishop stay on a bit longer if it will help the re-imaging process to move forward. The “if” is the important question because this is such an important question that faces us. We can no longer default to the mode of the 1950’s and survive.

I was under the impression that the point behind the “Task Force” was to bring in new ideas, and new structures for leadership rather than stick with the same leadership and structures from which we have dearly needed to move on for some time.

How does keeping the current center of power not only in the same building, but in the same person further that goal?

Daniel Stroud (added by editor)

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café