[Episcopal News Service] Two complaints apparently have been filed about the involvement of five active bishops and four retired bishops in property litigation in two Episcopal Church dioceses.
Word of the complaints surfaced on various blogs and e-mail lists on June 30. No information about either complaint was released by the Episcopal Church, including the name or names of the complainants.Read the entire article at ENS.
According to the reports, including an extensive one here, Bishop Clayton Mathews e-mailed two groups of bishops to tell them that he had received complaints against them and that “in the next few weeks” he would begin the disciplinary process as called for in Title IV.6.3-4 of the canons of the Episcopal Church.
It is highly unusual for the existence of a complaint to become public knowledge at this point in the process, regardless the order of the person against whom the complaint is filed.
“As cited in Title IV, disciplinary matters are confidential at this stage,” Episcopal Church Public Affairs Officer Neva Rae Fox told Episcopal News Service July 2. “We are honoring that confidentiality.” (My emphasis)
In one instance, the complaint apparently concerns the fact that seven bishops endorsed an amicus curiae or “friend of the court” brief prepared by the Anglican Communion Institute, Inc. in the pending appeal of a court ruling involving the Diocese of Fort Worth and the bishop, clergy and laity who broke away from that diocese in November 2008.
The brief objects to the trial court’s ruling that told the dissidents to return “all property, as well as control of the diocesan corporation” to the Episcopal leaders of the diocese.
....
Those named in the Fort Worth complaint are retired Diocese of Texas Bishop Maurice M. Benitez, retired Diocese of Central Florida Bishop John W. Howe, Diocese of Dallas Bishop Suffragan Paul E. Lambert, Diocese of Albany Bishop William H. Love, Diocese of Western Louisiana Bishop D. Bruce MacPherson, Diocese of Springfield Bishop Daniel H. Martins, and Diocese of Dallas Bishop James M. Stanton.
MacPherson is also named in the other complaint, along with retired Diocese of South Carolina Bishop Edward L. Salmon, Jr. and retired Diocese of Springfield Bishop Peter H. Beckwith. Matthews e-mailed them to say that a complaint has been received against them because they signed affidavits opposing to a motion for summary judgment made by representatives of the Diocese of Quincy and the Episcopal Church in the fall of 2011 to secure diocesan financial assets from a group that broke from the diocese in November 2008.
At least we now know that the persons who handle complaints in the Episcopal Church did not make the information public. I had not previously written about the complaint against the bishops about the affidavits in the Diocese of Quincy because...well, because I have a one-track mind, and I am only one person and can't cover everything. Now you know.
H/T to Ann Fontaine at The Lead.
Unless formal charges are brought against any or all of the bishops - and I don't for one second believe that they will be (consider the recent dismissal of the seemingly far more serious charges against Mark Lawrence) - this is, as the items you have linked on this and your previous post make abundantly clear, a tempest in a teapot. The leak and subsequent publicizing of the information is a red meat to the right-wingers thing, pure and simple. If you doubt it, check the abundance of links and the virulence of the comments at the usual, teabaggers-at-prayer, sites. No doubt in their minds that the fingers of good v. evil war clock are firmly on midnight.
ReplyDeleteI visited the comments section at Anglican Curmudgeon and reminded the folks that no one had been charged. A commenter there told me that in church lingo, complaints and charges are the same, so not to worry. The language is colorful: Wormwood, Screwtape, agents of Satan - referring to KJS and the others at 815.
ReplyDeleteA recent TA Matt Kennedy post, entitled New Blog Rule begins "DO NOT comment at all if you think the “right way” to handle Christian disagreement is to make an appointment and chat over coffee first".
ReplyDeleteMatt said that at Thinking Anglicans?
ReplyDeleteYup. Go look. Post, as I said, entitled New Blog Rule. It's his proposal for a new rule, not one that has so far been adopted.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry. SF, not TA. Me and acronyms!
ReplyDeleteIf the comments at SF are not vicious, they are boring. Sometimes they are both vicious and boring. I presume I'm still banned for quoting the Gospel.
ReplyDeleteMaybe they don't like your habit of chatting over coffee. There was an interesting, hour-long NPR program this morning on "This land is your land". It included an excerpt from Guthrie's "Jesus Christ", with which I was unfamiliar.
ReplyDelete