Four bishops with jurisdiction in the state of California have asked a disciplinary panel to approve an expedited deposition of the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, Bishop of San Joaquin.
In a letter to the organizing chair of the Title IV [Ecclesiastical Discipline] Review Committee, the Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno, Bishop of Los Angeles; the Rt. Rev. Jerry M. Lamb, Bishop of Northern California; the Rt. Rev. James R. Mathes, Bishop of San Diego; and the Rt. Rev. William E. Swing, Bishop of California, are concerned that Bishop Schofield intends to “abandon the communion of this Church.” As one of the primary pieces of their evidence the four cite recent changes that qualify subordination under the diocesan canons to the Constitution and Canons of the General Convention.
At its annual meeting last October, delegates to San Joaquin’s convention approved the second reading of a change to Article II of its constitution to state that it “accedes to” the Canons and Constitution of the General Convention “to the extent that such terms and provisions” are “not inconsistent with the terms and provisions of the Constitution and Canons of the Diocese of San Joaquin.” The four believe this fact alone is sufficient to remove Bishop Schofield from office without trial.
If Bishop Schofield and other diocesan leadership were to leave The Episcopal Church and apply that clause of the diocesan constitution to the so-called Dennis Canon, there is concern by the four bishops that the California state courts might rule in San Joaquin’s favor and permit that diocese to retain possession of the property. Title I, canon 7.4 states that “all real and personal property held by or for the benefit of any parish, mission or congregation is held in trust for this Church and the diocese thereof in which such parish, mission or congregation is located,” although it has never been applied to an entire diocese.
In a July 11 interview with The Living Church, Bishop Swing said he and the other three California bishops with jurisdiction at the time the letter was sent are concerned that in several recent church property dispute cases California courts have awarded title to the congregation, applying a “neutral principles of law” rather than deferring to the denomination’s bylaws. Bishop Swing, who was chair of the House of Bishops’ task force on church property disputes until his July 22 retirement, said it was “unfathomable” that someone would try to retain property after having left The Episcopal Church. “It was given to us and we want to pass it on to the next generation,” he said.
This is believed to be the first time that questions of abandonment have been raised about a bishop of The Episcopal Church. In the past five years abandonment rulings have been issued against an increasing number of priests and deacons often after the accused has claimed to have transferred to another province of the Anglican Communion. The abandonment process is much more expeditious than other disciplinary procedures which are adjudicated through an ecclesiastical trial process and under abandonment there is no presumption of innocence.
If the review panel were to “certify by majority vote that the facts are true, Title IV Canon 9.1 states that the Presiding Bishop consults with the three senior bishops having jurisdiction. The Rt. Rev. Leo Frade, Bishop of Southeast Florida, the Rt. Rev. Peter J. Lee, Bishop of Virginia, and the Rt. Rev. Don A. Wimberly, Bishop of Texas, have the longest tenure in the House of Bishops. If the three consent unanimously, the matter is taken to the next House of Bishops’ meeting for a decision. This could conceivably be completed before the Nov. 4 investiture of Presiding Bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori.
Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold made a number of new appointments to the review committee and the complete roster has not been published, but it will not contain any retired bishops this triennium. The review panel will likely meet and consider the complaint against Bishop Schofield no later than mid-September. On July 21, an announcement from the Diocese of San Joaquin said the chancellor for the diocese had already responded to the review committee by challenging the appropriateness of the specific canon being used.
“In short, these allegations are neither relevant nor justified,” the statement asserted.
Steve Waring
The URL for this story is:
http://www.livingchurch.org/publishertlc/viewarticle.asp?ID=2255
Maintainer: Ted McMichael
Send Comments or Questions to:
Administrator.ChurchOfTheWord@verizon.net