Surrounded

The Protest text

rgeaton — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:01:58 +0000

This text was handed to the person identified as the Secretary of Convention for inclusion in the minutes of the Meeting. The person identified as Parliamentarian (and Chancellor) ruled that it could not be included except by approved Motion from the floor of the Meeting. To be consistent with our position of not acting in any legal fashion at the meeting, we chose not to do so, nor to ask anyone else to do our work for us. We knew that some of the proceedings were being recorded and there would be the potential of some sort of media posting of the protest. We therefore chose to exhibit the complete prepared text of the protest here on Surrounded. In posting, a few grammatical errors have been corrected from the hand-written text used at the microphone, as well as, in two places, a one or two-word edit of a phrase where the meaning was not immediately clear .

Presented as a point of personal priviledge before the Special Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin held Saturday, March 29, 2008 in Lodi, California, at approximately 10 am.

St. John Parish, Tulare – Protest/Objection Statement #1

Read by George Sutton:

We greet you all in the name of Jesus Christ.
We are here at this proceeding by choice to be considered as Episcopalians and a part of this Diocese voluntarily signing our allegiance as Episcopalians.
The signing of the allegiance as Episcopalians prior to any Episcopal Convention is an unwarranted and unprecedented act especially for already certified delegates from an Episcopal Congregation or Diocese.
Nevertheless, we have come to publicly state our place in this Diocese and because we do have a place, we object and protest the canonical legality of this meeting as an official legislative convention of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.

We will not be casting any votes for any measure or resolution presented at this meeting.

By direction of the Canons only the ecclesiastical authority of a diocese can call a special convention if there is no Bishop. That responsibility falls to the Standing Committee as per Title 3, Canon 13. The Standing Committee has not called this special convention. Therefore, it would be our understanding that any decision made today on behalf of the Diocese cannot be implemented because they are null and void.

Read by Gillian Busch:

Beyond the issues we have just raised concerning canonical status of this meeting, we are also very concerned about a precedent of “non-inclusion” set by the Steering Committee. It came to our attention, by un-official notice, that a Steering Committee for the re-organization of the Diocese would be established. In that notice, it was stated that a Steering Committee would be composed of one (1) priest and one (1) lay person from each congregation that chose not to leave the Episcopal Church.
St. John Parish, in Tulare, a Parish in good standing, never having left the Episcopal Church was not included in the Steering Committee process.
As a result, a clear voice for a canonically compliant path for the Diocese was not followed.

George Sutton, Elected Delegate from Parish Annual Meetings (1/07 and 1/08, respectively)
to 2007 Diocesan Convention (held 12/07)
and 2008 Diocesan Convention (canonically scheduled for 10/0
Senior Warden
St. John Parish, Tulare

Gillian P. Busch, Elected Delegate from Parish Annual Meetings (1/07 and 1/08, respectively)
to 2007 Diocesan Convention (held 12/07)
and 2008 Diocesan Convention (canonically scheduled for 10/0
Vestry Member
St. John Parish, Tulare

The Rev. Robert G. Eaton, Clergy Delegate by Canonical Residency
Rector
St. John Parish, Tulare

St. John Parish, Tulare – Protest/Objection Statement #2

Prior to the agenda item of election of Standing Committee members

Regarding the election of Standing Committee members (and similarly of General Convention delegates), I come before you to simply state that I object to and protest the election of any new Standing Committee member who would in effect replace me, a diocesan Standing Committee member (and any Standing Committee member) validly and duly elected at the December 2007 Diocesan Convention (and prior conventions). I have not, nor did I ever leave the (Episcopal) Church, nor have I acted in such a way as to repudiate my place in the Church.

The Rev. Robert G. Eaton, Clergy Delegate by Canonical Residency
Standing Committee Member, elected to 4-year term, December 2007 Diocesan Convention
Rector
St. John Parish, Tulare

Objections were declined by the chair, citing the Presiding Bishop’s earlier explanation regarding such objections

To Beryl, and others

rgeaton — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:39:29 +0000

Beryl,

Why don’t you ask me some questions and I’ll try to respond. I’m posting in this manner right now because I lost a long response to the recesses of “clipboard.”

I will start though with a few comparable matches to what I know about you — I am 52 and the grandfather to 4. I have been the rector of the Episcopal parish in Tulare for 18 1/2 years.

Jesus is my Lord.

Appropriate for the selection of a Bishop in San Joaquin

rgeaton — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:15:09 +0000

It was said on another weblog recently regarding the diocese of Northwest Texas, that a rumor was floating that the Nominating Committee/Standing Committee only wanted “liberal” nominees heading into what was to be their May Electing Convention. The background of the thread Post itself was that only 2 nominees had been selected for an intended slate of 3 to 5. So the Electing Convention has been postponed a month to give the Nominating Committee more time to get at least a third nominee on board.

Teaching and encouraging and leading others through the election process has been one of my deep concerns over many years, now, including the same conversation with members of my own family who are spread abroad TEC and have been faced with episcopal elections in their own dioceses. The following, as a result, did not take long to type out, and I am reprinting it here, since San Joaquin is faced with (as some have publicized it) the “election” of a bishop with provisional authority (which is not how the canons describe such approval), and in the long term as a now very small diocese the election of an Ordinary.
RGEaton

“I would want to hear that rumor from the Standing Committee/Nominating Committee itself before believing it (searching only for “liberal” candidates).

“The problem of not having enough candidates is not a new problem!
“So you folks in NWT should not feel alone. This problem has been made known by readers of StandFirm and TitusOneNine and in other venues for probably 3 to 5 years. And it is not just a matter of not finding “qualified” candidates (whatever thay might mean these days). There are simply a lot of clergy (across the spectrum) who are gun shy of “the process”, or are hedging their bets still on TEC, or don’t want to be caught in a small-ish or small diocese with membership decreases (one of the consequences being ongoing funding of the episcopate - the job).
“It would seem the Search Comm is calling out for involvement in the process. Like [a commenter] mentioned re: Eau Claire on that thread, the reasserter folks in NWT have an amazing, yet very small, window that has opened up to them. Find the Ackerman, the Lillibridge, the Adams, the M.Smith; find the Love. : )
They are out there. Fast and pray for a day or two regarding who they might be and how you might make contact with them. Take the direction given in your prayer time, get in touch with them, ask them to do the same prayer and fasting, and get back to you. Make as many contacts as names you have been led to consider. Then get that nomination form to them, and get the info to the Search Comm. Pronto.

“BTW, when I say ‘…as names you have been led to consider’, I am not limiting to priests who might be a nominee. A “name” might be your TEC cousin in some other diocese who is not ordained, and the Lord might be leading you to have a conversation with them because THEY know of someone (even the cousin hadn’t thought about it yet). Or the name of someone you have never met, but you know of them, and THEY have a contact that should be asked to be a nominee.

“Which leads me to my final thought on this. The members of the Search Committees of smaller dioceses must give a great deal of time to the matter of specific, Holy Spirit calling and inspiration. Not that large dioceses must (in my opinion) also. But beware the priest willing to suffer the lower stipend in a smaller diocese in order to be consecrated a bishop, only to find a better paying bishop job in some other larger diocese, and resign. Those bishops exist. Those dioceses exist (”just find someone”, or “who would look best under our mitre”). Granted, this may have been unforseen consequence, as one recent example suggests.

“It is better to keep postponing the election in order to find 3 or more clergy who are convinced in their own deep discernment, and for the Search Comm to be convinced in their own deep discernment of each of their nominees, that it is the Lord’s Will for each nominee to certain of their place in that election, than to simply find someone who seems to fit the profile.

“How can a Search Committee (and a potential nominee) be sure? Well, to assist those in discernment (searching for God’s Will, leading and direction), it is important to identify and receive the ministry of Spirit-gifted prophets, and those with the gift of words of knowledge. It is important to set aside retreat times, making use of a gifted facilitator in Spirit discernment. It is important to be open to the possibility of a nominee who doesn’t fit the profile, but whose name is strongly present through the Spirit’s leading. Practicing the presence of God in this way may be something you’ve never really done before — but now you have to step up. Be led by prayer and scripture. Understand how the Holy Spirit moves. Keep your eyes upon Jesus.

“All of this cannot happen without intercession. I can only hope that any diocese in preparation for an electing convention would have at least 10% of each congregation committeed and engaged in intercessory prayer.”

Good Friday in the San Joaquin

rgeaton — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:57:04 +0000

One way or the other, we’ll all find out what the Lord of all Truth, Jesus Christ, reveals about what was right and what was wrong, at the great Day.

On this Day, however, it would seem extremely appropriate for all parties to remember that we are all crucified with Christ. Jesus did all in fulfillment of the scriptures, even knowing of His divine work of demise on the cursed tree; He did all He was supposed to do. But the World, in complete denial of His identity and saving work for them, and the Enemy, deluded into believing this was the last barrier to complete rebellion, still judged Jesus worthy of death. And so did we all. “We”, said the crucified criminal to the other also crucified, yet spewing verbal bile , “are receiving our just reward. This man, however, has done nothing wrong. Jesus, take me with you……” The human demanded death for reasons of the Flesh; if we had only recognized the demand of God in His death, we would have cried, “No! Here is my cross instead. I am the offender. Take me. Take us.”

The World, long laying in sin and error pining, demands such a witness and confirmation of the incarnation from the members of the Body of Christ. In every instance, we must do as Christ demanded to show we are His disciples. We submit to the Work He alone could do for us all, and then in humility, together, to constantly, in every situation, pick up our own cross and follow Him. All.

And the World will be amazed, and, through the convicting power of the Holy Spirit, say not only with the Centurion, “Truly this man was the Son of God”, but also, “See how, as they gaze upon Him, they love one another.” And they will come.

Answers from the Standing Committee: What are you “doing”?

rgeaton — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:53:26 +0000

The Standing Committee has received questions from acquaintances, friends, intercessors, and other members of this Church, all concerned about the Canonical or non-canonical morass that has been created for the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, which could be summarized as, “Why aren’t you doing something?”

The January letter to the Presiding Bishop, sent after her letter to each of the Standing Committee members, both of which were posted across the internet (and are available here on Surrounded), lays out the problem.

The Standing Committee, within a couple of weeks after the December election, were made aware through a variety of channels of communication that there were congregations and clergy who would not be going along to the Southern Cone Province, AND there were congregations and there were clergy who were already or who would be “in discernment” about the matter. If you are going to take action and include all players, plans cannot nor should not be made until everyone who is on board gets on board.

Look at the Surrounded posts “And on the same day..” and the one re: Ecclesiastes, “Axe vs Wisdom”. We did not nor do not consider ourselves subservient to the tyranny of the urgent. We believed the bishop would eventually resign, and it would be a matter of simply acknowleding his resignation, as the Standing Committee and accepting the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Diocese.

The Presiding Bishop, rather than approach the mess from a canonical basis and ask the question, “Who’s left to carry on?”, she rather only listened to and heard “There’s no one left - they’ve all betrayed us.” She has since allowed for her hasty pronouncement — which came despite having that January phone conversation with her which was somewhat affirming of our presence, which tells me “somebody” else got their two cents in —- and now seems intransigent. This includes the spin from the failed deposition vote.

But that brings us to where the Standing Committee was all along. We had to wait. That’s because — according to TEC Canons, which we have been following diligently — the Standing Committee does not become the Ecclesiastical Authority until the office of Bishop is vacant. If the HOB vote for deposition had not failed, the See would indeed now be vacant.

Now we are one week closer to March 29, and there are layers of non-canonical actions being taken and planned for in order to push TEC DSJ ahead without the Standing Committee.

Let us be clear, as our letter already stated, we are ready to legally act when TEC lawfully & canonically deposes Bishop Schofield. The Presiding Bishop and her advisers chose to use this as their strategy for dealing with Bp Schofield. That is thus the current canonical mess which now must be cleaned up.

Accordingly, until then, Bp. Schofield, as per the C&C of TEC and the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin is still the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Diocese. We, the duly elected and canonically recognized Standing Committee of the Diocese have pointed out, and now say it again, that the PB does not have any canonical authority to dismiss (”not recognize”) the elected Standing Committee nor to call a special meeting of the convention of DSJ. The announced meeting to be held in Lodi at the end of March cannot by canonical requirements be a diocesan convention and any actions purported to be taken have no force or effect in the Diocese of San Joaquin.

We have not “done anything” because we did not yet have the authority, as per the Canons. The Presiding Bishop has given permission, financial support and encouragement to (basically) Remain Episcopal folks in DSJ to “do something”, because she has facilitated a canonical coup in the making, all prepared to begin with the deposition of Bp Schofield.

One of the consequences that is very sad for us on the Standing Committee to watch is this irony: the sharp and biting complaint of so many within the Remain Episcopal camp, that they have been autocratically removed from any authoritative, collegial process in DSJ under Bp Schofield, is very close to being replaced by the same kind of autocratic “squeeze out”, and by their own enthusiasm.

Prayer, and a willingness to operate within the borders that are necessary for our common life together, is what we need right now from all, if for nothing else, the sake of the rest of this Church to have hope that we have groundrules that work, even in uncharted waters.

Wisdom vs. the Dull Axe

rgeaton — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:34:35 +0000

Regarding the manner of dealing with San Joaquin:

“If the axe is dull, and one does not sharpen the edge, then he must use more strength.

But wisdom brings success.”

Ecclesiastes 10:10

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary :

“10. iron . blunt-in “cleaving wood” (Ec 10:9), answering to the “fool set in dignity” (Ec 10:6), who wants sharpness. More force has then to be used in both cases; but “force” without judgment “endangers” one’s self. Translate, “If one hath blunted his iron” [Maurer]. The preference of rash to judicious counsellors, which entailed the pushing of matters by force, proved to be the “hurt” of Rehoboam (1Ki 12:1-33).

wisdom is profitable to direct-to a prosperous issue. Instead of forcing matters by main “strength” to one’s own hurt (Ec 9:16, 18). “

Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary :

“10:4-10 Solomon appears to caution men not to seek redress in a hasty manner, nor to yield to pride and revenge. Do not, in a passion, quit thy post of duty; wait awhile, and thou wilt find that yielding pacifies great offences. Men are not preferred according to their merit. And those are often most forward to offer help, who are least aware of the difficulties, or the consequences. The same remark is applied to the church, or the body of Christ, that all the members should have the same care one for another.”

the Rev. Dr. Leander Harding :

“I think that the decision making process that has taken hold in our church has often been a non-consultative process which relies on finesse and fait de compli and is lacking in the patience required if the church is to know its own mind. This is a critique that I would apply to both sides of the aisle, so to speak.”

from a comment following his weblog post “Godly Bishops.”

And on the same day….

rgeaton — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 09:00:24 +0000

Two operating principles for the wise in Christ, both (amazingly) from the BCP lectionary for the Monday in the week of the Last Sunday after Epiphany:

Proverbs 27:12 Be cautious and hide when you see danger–
don’t be stupid and walk right into trouble. (CEV)

Or from the NASB, if you prefer:

27:12 A prudent man sees evil and hides himself,
The naive proceed and pay the penalty.

And then this from Philippians 2:1-13 :

“If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. 4Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.
5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

6Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

12 Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.” (NIV)

The Standing Committee requests your prayers for all things to bring glory to the Father, in the Name of, and pleading the Saving Blood of Jesus Christ, in the power of the Holy Spirit.

Will you join us in prayer?

From the Standing Committee of the Diocese of San Joaquin

rgeaton — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 21:16:54 +0000

As sent and posted to the Presiding Bishop’s email address earlier this morning, 02/01/08. The letter sent from the Presiding Bishop is in the next post down.

The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
Office of the Presiding Bishop
The Episcopal Church Center
New York City, New York pboffice@episcopalchurch.org

Friday, February 01, 2008

We have received your letter dated January 25 in which you state that you do not recognize us individually as members of the Standing Committee of the Diocese of San Joaquin. We find your statements, published by ENS on the internet and read in Hanford prior to most of us receiving the actual letter, to be unhelpful. While you may hold any personal opinion you wish as an individual, the office of Presiding Bishop does not have the legal, canonical or moral authority to proclaim for the Episcopal Church non-recognition of duly elected members of a diocesan Standing Committee. Without having any canonical or constitutional authority to refuse to recognize us, we cannot accept your opinion as changing our status as the canonical Standing Committee of the Diocese.

We regret that you have based your “understanding” on conjecture and misinformation. Since you do not provide any evidence of specific acts of the Standing Committee, nor proof of any wrong doing, we are unable to comment in detail on acts or events you may have relied upon to form your “understanding”. We regret you didn’t attempt to confirm your understanding with the President of our Standing Committee when you called him on January 9^th, or on any other occasion.

You cite Canon I.17.8 as setting a standard of duty for anyone in elected position in The Episcopal Church, however neither this canon nor any other canon gives the office of Presiding Bishop [or any other person] sole privilege to interpret what constitutes a failure to “well and faithfully perform the duties” of any office. If the interpretation of failure to “well and faithfully perform the duties” of office is open to anyone, a cursory look at your performance in office would be cause for a great number of Episcopalians to find that you “have been and are unable to well and faithfully fulfill your duties as” Presiding Bishop. To name just a few of your canonical violations:

Ordination of the Bishop of Virginia without the specific written consents from a majority of Standing Committees as required in Canon III.11.4.b;
Your intentional withholding [from May ’07 to January ‘08] of notification and failure to bring before the House of Bishop’s meeting in September 2007 the abandonment of communion finding of the Title IV review committee against Bishop Cox as required in Canon IV.9.2;
Your stated intent to delay consideration of the abandonment of communion finding of the Title IV review committee against Bishop Duncan past the March 2008 meeting of the House of Bishop’s [including your intentional withholding of notification from December 16, ’07 to January 15, ‘08] again in violation of the requirements of Canon IV.9.2.
Establishing a missionary congregation in Bakersfield and appointing a priest who is not canonically resident to be under the supervision of Canon Moore and under your authority in violation of Canon I.13.2b and Canon III.9.6

With this evidence of your willful disobedience to the requirements of Canon, many Episcopalians could, using your own words, state they “do not recognize you as” the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church. And of course, in the spirit of reconciliation, we would encourage you to be aware a “future declaration of adherence to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church and a reaffirmation of the Declaration of Conformity, will once again make you eligible for election to office in the Episcopal Church.”

We regret the decisions you have made to misuse the Canons of The Episcopal Church. We acknowledge your personal opinion of our status as members of the Standing Committee for the Diocese of San Joaquin. In accordance with the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church, we ARE the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Diocese of San Joaquin in the event the House of Bishops should choose to depose Bishop John-David Schofield. Any attempt on your part, or on the part of any other person, to circumvent or replace the Standing Committee as the Ecclesiastical Authority will be a violation of the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church.

J. Snell
M. McClenaghan
R. Eaton
K. Robinson
T. Wright
R. James

The Letter from the Presiding Bishop

rgeaton — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 21:15:53 +0000

The following is the letter sent to the elected members of the Standing Committee of San Joaquin, but without the addresses of each member (which were amazingly included in the original as posted to Episcopal News Service).

January 25, 2008

The Very Rev. Canon James L. Snell
The Rev. Richard I. James
Ms. Kim Robinson
Mr. Ted Yumoto
The Rev. Michael E. McClenaghan
The Rev. Robert G. Eaton
Mr. Tom Wright
Mr. Stevie Oates

Dear Sirs and Madam,

I am writing to you because I have been informed that you constituted the Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin prior to and/or during the most recent Convention of the Diocese in December 2007. It has come to my attention that in the past several months you have taken actions in support of an attempt to take the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin out of the Episcopal Church and into affiliation with the Province of the Southern Cone. I understand that these have included voting to amend the Diocese’s Constitution and canons and attempting to organize as the Standing Committee of an entity that identifies itself as an Anglican Diocese of the Province of the Southern Cone. These actions directly conflict with the Constitution and canons of the Episcopal Church.

Canon I.17.8 of the Episcopal Church provides that “[a]ny person accepting any office in this Church shall well and faithfully perform the duties of that office in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of this Church and of the Diocese in which the office is being exercised.” In the light of your recent actions, I find that you have been and are unable to well and faithfully fulfill your duties as members of the Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin under Canon I.17.8. Accordingly, with this letter I inform you that I do not recognize you as the Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.

I regret the decisions that you have made to attempt to take the Diocese out of The Episcopal Church and the necessary consequences of these actions. I want you to be fully aware that a future declaration of adherence to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church, and, for clergy, a reaffirmation of the Declaration of Conformity, will once again make you eligible for election to office in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. I give thanks for your service in the past, and pray that it may once again be a blessing to this Diocese.

I remain

Your servant in Christ,

Katharine Jefferts Schori

Prayer for the Diocese from anglicanprayer.wordpress.com

rgeaton — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 05:24:40 +0000

The following was posted on Lent & Beyond recently. Appropriate for us all to see, and know that others are praying for us.

The diocese of San Joaquin is undergoing a great transition. I think it good to lift them up in prayer regularly. A previous post is here.O God,

You have spoken to Your people at many times and in many ways. We ask for this blessing for Your servants in San Joaquin–the blessing of receiving and believing Your word. Stir in them a hunger for Holy Scripture.

You have spoken to Your people by Your Son, through whom You made the universe. We ask for this blessing for Your servants in San Joaquin–the blessing of receiving and believing the Word Incarnate. Stir in them a hunger for prayer.

He has provided the final sacrifice for our sins and is seated at Your right hand, O God. We ask this blessing for Your servants in San Joaquin–the blessing of receiving and believing the Body and Blood of the Lamb. Stir in them a hunger for Holy Communion.

Your Son is the radiance of Your glory and the exact representation of Your being. As they receive Him through Holy Scripture, prayer, and Holy Communion, may they believe and be sustained in His name. Amen.

Hebrews 1:1-3

Lent & Beyond