What is in Kelvin's Head?

I respectfully disagree…

02/07/2022

I respectfully disagree with the latest College of Bishops statement on Aberdeen and Orkney and I do so in two respects.

Firstly, there is no mention of a mediation process in Canon 53. If the College of Bishops wishes to use Canon 53 section 11 and subsequent sections, then they should follow the procedure laid down there and name the bishop who is hearing the dispute. The bishop in question should publish the terms under which they are going to determine the dispute and the date on which the hearing will take place. Canon 53 does not allow for the resolution of such disputes to be outsourced to other individuals or organisations. (Sections before section 11 do not apply to disputes within a diocese). The procedure outlined in Canon 53 Section 11 and the following sections is clearly a decision making process and not a process of mediation. (In any case, my personal view is that mediation processes are seldom appropriate in cases where bullying is alleged and where there are discrepancies of power between the parties involved).

Secondly, anyone making a claim of bullying against a serving bishop or any serving bishop wishing to make a claim that they have themselves been bullied by anyone subject to the Code of Canons, should be explicitly invited by the College to make a complaint under Canon 54.

Canon 54 can only be initiated by someone who is a member of the church. My view is that the College should make public appropriate arrangements for the bringing of a complaint by anyone who has subsequently left the church – specifically that the complaint would be passed to a (communicant) diocesan registrar or the clerk to the Episcopal Synod to be initiated formally.

Making vague references to the “Disciplinary Canonical process” of the church in a press release is unhelpful. Canon 54 is what the process is and the College of Bishops should long ago have insisted that people use it to bring allegations.

This is not the first statement by the College of Bishops with regard to these matters that has given me cause for concern. In a statement last December the College asserted that neither the Primus nor the College of Bishops had the power to suspend a bishop. The Code of Canons is very clear that bishops can be suspended and that only the Primus can do so and that this can only be upheld or not by the Episcopal Synod (which is the same body of people as the College of Bishops). The due processes governing how these things can come about are found in Canon 54 (Of Offences and Trials) and Canon 6 (Of Diocesan Bishops and their Jurisdiction and of Bishops’ Commissaries).

For the last few years I’ve been a member of a review group which has been carefully considering whether the disciplinary canonical processes of the church need to be updated. In time, I hope that they are. However, the canons that we currently have remain in force. Bishops require clergy to take oaths to uphold the Canons. Bishops themselves take oaths that they in turn will uphold the canons of the church.

I regard members of the College of Bishops as colleagues and friends and remain willing to discuss these matters with any of them or indeed with any member of the church. A number of the members of the College of Bishops have heard me say privately what I now assert here, that for the good of the whole church, the College of Bishops needs to return to the Canonical norms of the Scottish Episcopal Church.

I will not be discussing this matter with any journalists. The opinions expressed in this post are explicitly with regard to the College of Bishops and do not constitute a comment on anything that may or may not have happened in the Diocese of Aberdeen and Orkney, about which I have little knowledge.

The Code of Canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church can be found here: https://www.scotland.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/Code-of-Canons-2020.pdf

8 responses to “We love you, American Episcopalians!”

June Butler

14/11/2014

The dear Scottish bishops who consecrated Samuel Seabury have my gratitude forever, and our Prayer Book is greatly enriched by the inclusion of the Epiclesis from the Scottish Rite.

Reply
Bro David

14/11/2014

And the heritage was passed on as my home church, the la Iglasia Anglicana de Mexico, being a daughter of TEC basically uses the Spanish language TEC prayerbook (with epiclesis), apropriately modified, as our church’s liturgy.

I think that the US church was not trying to be THE Episcopal Church, but, the generic Episcopal Church in the short name, as opposed to the Protestant Episocopal Church of the United States of America, which is the legal title. And TEC was trying to represent the church’s full constituency, which is not as a national Anglican church, as is the Anglican Church of Canada, or a regional Anglican church, as is la Iglesia Anglicana de la Region Central de America, but a multinational church with dioceses in many countries. I’m sure that you would squirm a bit to be called the Scotland-based Episcopal Church. It’s not cool or comfortable to say.

Are there Scottish Episcopal churches that aren’t technically part of Scotland geo-politically?

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  14/11/2014
  
  There are no Scottish Episcopal Churches that are not in Scotland. (Though I’d dearly love to invade a well known local provincial neighbour).
  
  It may be a bit squirmy to refer to it as the US-based Episcopal Church but it is quite hard to simply use The Episcopal Church on a blog read in Scotland. That name just doesn’t make any sense here as it is what many people here would call the Scottish Episcopal Church.
  
  Unfortunately, the Protestant Episcopal Church’s renaming of itself which was for good reason to avoid being seen as US-centric and imperial reads rather badly over here.
  
  Reply
  1. Bro David
    
    14/11/2014
    
    Since I don’t much understand the relationship of all the tiny islands around Great Britain and Ireland I wasn’t sure.
    
    Too bad we aren’t in the day when it was just the Church.
    
    Reply
Father Ron Smith

14/11/2014

Thank you, Father Kelvin, for this reminder of an historic event of some special note. In the present climate of unrest in the Anglican world, it is good to note that Scotland and the U.S.A. have a precious link through their shared episcopal provenance that is not directly originated (by their own default) by the mother Church of England. This spirit of independence emphasizes the infinite variety of our shared Anglican reformed catholicity. A Unity in Diversity!

Reply
AnnaMarie Hoos

15/11/2014

Thank you, Kelvin, for remembering us. May the bonds of affection always flow both ways.

Those reading this thread might enjoy seeing the full de Rosen mural from which Kelvin took the detail above, which is on the north wall of the Nave in Grace Cathedral, San Francisco:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/brycewgarner/8964371666/

Y’all come visit.

Reply
Ann Fontaine

15/11/2014

Thank you Thank you. That point in the Eucharist is the most important for me as a priest – I feel like I am standing in the center of time — all before and all after flowing through those of us gathered at that moment.

Reply
Eamonn

15/11/2014

The Scottish Episcopal Church did not invent the epiclesis, but adopted it from various ancient Eastern rites. So both the Scottish and American Churches could be said to be more in touch with the liturgical roots of eucharistic worship than those churches who use variants of the Reformation prayer-books.

Reply