English bishops back Duncan over warning letter

by Pat Ashworth
November 8, 2007

THE BISHOPS of Chester, Chichester, Exeter, and Rochester issued a statement on Tuesday in support of the Rt Revd Robert Duncan, the Bishop of Pittsburgh, after the warning letter sent to him by the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, Dr Katharine Jefferts Schori.

She wrote to Bishop Duncan on Wednesday of last week, asking him to lead his diocese "on a new course that recognises the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes" (see above).

If his course did not change, she wrote, "I shall regrettably be compelled to see that appropriate canonical steps are promptly taken to consider whether you have abandoned the Communion of this Church . . . and whether you have committed canonical offences that warrant disciplinary action."

The English bishops' statement, which was instigated by the Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, read: "We deeply regret the increase in the atmosphere of litigiousness revealed by the Presiding Bishop's letter to Bishop Duncan. At this time, we stand with him and with all who respond positively to the Primates' Dar es Salaam requests. We hope the Archbishop's response to Bishop John Howe of Central Florida will also apply to Bishop Bob Duncan of Pittsburgh."

The Bishop of Chester, Dr Peter Forster, said on Tuesday that the statement gave personal support to Bishop Duncan. He described the Presiding Bishop's letter as "aggressive, inappropriate, and unfortunate". "They are acting as if it is the OK Corral. This is the North American culture: it is a managerial rather than a pastoral approach."

Dr Forster emphasised that issuing the statement did not imply support for decisions taken at the Pittsburgh diocesan convention.

When asked whether the Presiding Bishop was within her rights to act as she had done, Dr Forster said that if a whole diocese voted to realign with another province, that needed to be addressed on its own terms. "I'm not sure simply saying 'It's illegal' is the best way to produce some healing. What's needed is a pastoral, healing approach, which attempts to find a way forward."

Bishop Duncan is "holding out the prospect of those who wish to stay doing so, and promises to be fair and generous in his dealings with them. I think I'm asking for a similar fairness and generosity from the Episcopal Church towards those parishes who do want to leave," said Dr Forster.

He also commented on the Archbishop of Canterbury's response to the Bishop of Central Florida, the Rt Revd John Howe (News, 26 October) - that any diocese compliant with Windsor remained in communion with Canterbury and the mainstream of the Anglican Communion, and that the organ of union with the wider Church was the bishop and the diocese rather than the provincial structure. "Part of the Archbishop's comment is that these are matters for the bishop and the diocese. They are the primary unit.

"That doesn't give a diocese the right to do what it wants willy-nilly, but there has to be a fundamental respect, it seems to me, if a diocese says, 'We wish to align with a different province,'" Dr Forster said.

This article comes from the Church Times
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/

The URL for this story is:
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=47153