PROGRESSIVE EPISCOPALIANS OF PITTSBURGH
6393 Penn Avenue, PMB 207
Pittsburgh, PA 15206-4010
Contact:
Joan R. Gundersen, President
Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh
Telephone: +1 (412) 799-0440
E-mail: jrgunder@hotmail.com
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Pittsburgh Convention Concludes: Deputies Duck Accountability, Other Matters
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania — November 5, 2007 — The second day of the
annual convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh concluded with an
early afternoon Holy Eucharist at which the previous night’s banquet speaker,
deposed Virginia priest and now Ugandan bishop, John Guernsey, was the
preacher. It was a fitting end to a convention that began the day before with
declarations of commitment, whatever the cost, to an “orthodox” vision of the
Gospel, while, in practice, the assembled deputies sought to avoid
accountability for their own votes at conventions.
Saturday was dominated by long discussion of more than two dozen changes to
the diocese’s canons and a non-controversial amendment to its constitution. The
changes combined a general updating with purging of any direct mention of The
Episcopal Church (TEC), its leaders, or its governance from the canons. A
number of changes proposed were sent back to committee for redrafting. The most
contentious debate was over a rule of order designed to avoid roll-call votes
in convention.
In past conventions, roll-call votes could be forced by petition of ten clergy
and ten lay deputies. Robert’s Rules of Order observes that the purpose
of a roll-call vote is “to force the majority to go on record,” and this
mechanism had been used in recent conventions by TEC faithful to identify
supporters of “realignment.” Among the many changes to the constitution,
canons, and rules of order proposed by committee was a rule change to require
majority acquiescence to requiring a roll-call vote. Debate on this proposal
was lengthy and heated, and an attempt to amend it was defeated. Dramatically,
Bishop Duncan temporarily relinquished the chair in order to speak against the
measure, but the bishop’s supporters rejected his advice. After emotional pleas
that declaring one’s vote publically might result in exposure to church
discipline or to lawsuits—Calvary Church’s lawsuit figured prominently in the
arguments—the change was approved.
Because the Friday balloting for General Convention deputies had succeeded in
electing only one of four clergy deputies and three of four lay deputies, the
convention continued balloting for the remaining spots throughout the Saturday
morning session. A fourth lay deputy was elected on the first ballot Saturday,
but it took three additional ballots to complete the clergy deputation. The
convention concluded before counting of ballots was completed to determine the
four clergy alternates. Judging by the printed candidate statements and by
candidate participation in floor debates, those elected are not likely to be
members of TEC in 2009. The Rev. James Simons, a long-time deputy who has been
a vigorous critic of TEC but who opposed the accession changes to the
constitution, lost a two-way vote for the last deputy slot, but he was elected
as an alternate. He and Gladys Hunt Mason, a lay alternate, are the only two
members of the entire deputation likely still to be members of The Episcopal
Church in 2009.
One report presented to convention was of more than casual interest. Mrs. Nancy
Bolden, chair of the Commission on Racism, presented statistics suggesting that
many parish leaders have avoided anti-racism training. One third of the
parishes have sent no one to training in the last several years. Boulden
commended the parishes that led in number of participants, namely, St.
Stephen’s, McKeesport, St. Andrew’s, Highland Park, Church of the Redeemer (her
own parish), and Holy Cross, the only traditionally African-American parish in
the diocese. None of the four is among the largest parishes in the diocese. All
are likely to remain in The Episcopal Church Bolden also acknowledged Trinity
Episcopal School for Ministry’s participation. Notably absent from the list
were the parishes most strongly advocating a split from TEC, despite strong
support for the Commission’s programs by the bishops of the diocese.
Overall, the convention held few surprises, although the Presiding Bishop’s
letter to Bishop Duncan provided additional opportunities for criticizing TEC.
As expected, Bishop Duncan was neither timid in expressing his views nor
apologetic for them. This was in notable contrast to the attitude of many
deputies who, despite similar rhetoric, seemed unwilling to take responsibility
for their own actions. Bishop Duncan has worked hard to encourage his
supporters, however, by putting forth novel theories of why the diocese can
pursue its schismatic path, emphasizing that nothing is changed by the first
vote on accession, and arguing, incredibly, we think, that parishes need do
nothing to depart TEC, whereas loyal Episcopal parishes will have to petition
to “leave” the diocese to return to their church.
Informal discussions with diocesan leaders since convention have elicited
revealing speculation about how events might play out in the diocese. For
example, the possibility of having a single diocese with some parishes
affiliated with TEC and others associated with a different province has been
suggested. It has also been suggested that, should Bishop Duncan be inhibited
or deposed, he could affiliate with a foreign Anglican Communion province and
be hired by the Pittsburgh Standing Committee to provide episcopal services to
the diocese. These bizarre scenarios can now be added to one Bishop Duncan
offered on Friday. Apparently concerned that he will not be able to claim all
the diocesan property free and clear, he suggested that certain assets might be
shared among those of his flock and those wishing to remain in TEC. “Such
claims on the property by those separating from The Episcopal Church are
contrary to the canons of The Episcopal Church, contrary to the agreement
signed in 2005 by Bishop Duncan as part of the settlement of the lawsuit
brought against diocesan leaders by Calvary Episcopal Church, and contrary to
the rulings on Episcopal Church property by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court,”
observed attorney and PEP vice president Kenneth Stiles.
Contact:
Joan R. Gundersen, President
Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh
Telephone: +1 (412) 799-0440
E-mail: jrgunder@hotmail.com
On the Web:
This document:
http://progressiveepiscopalians.org/html/2007-11-05duck.html
Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh:
http://progressiveepiscopalians.org
The Episcopal Church:
http://episcopalchurch.org
Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh:
http://www.pgh.anglican.org
Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh is an organization of clergy and
laypeople committed to the unity and diversity of The Episcopal Church, and of
the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh. It is a member of the Via Media USA
alliance.
# # #