Skip header and navigation

Refine By

   MORE

9 records – page 1 of 1.

Anglican bishops struggle with dissent

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official8299
Date
2003 November 3
Source
Anglican News Service
Record Type
Press release
Date
2003 November 3
Source
Anglican News Service
Record Type
Press release
Text
TORONTO, Ont. (Nov. 3, 2003)
Canadian Anglican bishops have voted to strike a task force to study what the church should do to provide spiritual care for members who dissent from church policies.
The bishops spent a good part of their four-day meeting discussing the situation in the diocese of New Westminster which has authorized the blessing of same-sex unions. A group of Anglicans in the diocese have declared that they cannot accept this and have asked another bishop to assume "Episcopal oversight" of their parishes.
Despite a prohibition by New Westminster Bishop Michael Ingham, Terry Buckle, Bishop of the Yukon, has offered the dissenting parishes this oversight. As a result, Archbishop David Crawley, Metropolitan of British Columbia and Yukon, has begun disciplinary proceedings against Bishop Buckle.
Following is the text of two motions adopted by the House of Bishops meeting in Mississauga, Ont., last week.
First Motion:
"That in response to the 'Statement by the Primates of the Anglican Communion' (October 16, 2003) the Primate be asked to establish a task force of the House of Bishops to draw up terms and conditions for 'adequate provision for Episcopal oversight of dissenting minorities' in the Anglican Church of Canada, to consult through the Primate 'with the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the Primates', and to report to the April 2004 meeting of the House of Bishops."
Second Motion:
That this House, to enable the work of the Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities,
1. Request that the Bishop of Yukon refrain from exercising Episcopal ministry in the Diocese of New Westminster;
2. Request that the Metropolitan of British Columbia and Yukon stay proceedings against the Bishop of Yukon;
3. Request that the Bishop of New Westminster seek a stay of proceedings against the priests of his diocese against whom such proceedings have been initiated;
4. That a mediator be appointed by the Task Force to negotiate an interim role for the person exercising Episcopal oversight mutually acceptable to the diocesan Bishop and the dissenting parishes.
- 30 -
For more information, please contact: Michael Thompson, Principal Secretary to the Primate, 416-924-9199 ext. 277, mthompson@national.anglican.ca, OR Vianney (Sam) Carriere, Director of Communications, 416-924-9199 ext. 306; 416-540-3653 (Cell); scarriere@national.anglican.ca
Subjects
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops
Anglican Church of Canada - Bishops
Episcopacy - Anglican Church of Canada
Buckle, Terry (Terrence Owen), 1940-2020
Ingham, Michael (Michael Colin), 1949-
Homosexuality - Religious aspects - Anglican Church of Canada
Same sex unions - Religious aspects - Anglican Church of Canada
Anglican Church of Canada. Diocese of New Westminster
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Adequate/Alternative Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Jurisdiction - Religious aspects - Anglican Church of Canada
Jurisdiction - Religious aspects - Anglican Communion
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Communion
Less detail

The Diocese of New Westminster

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official8423
Date
2003 October 27-31
Source
House of Bishops Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 03-10-02
Resolution 03-10-03
Date
2003 October 27-31
Source
House of Bishops Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 03-10-02
Resolution 03-10-03
Mover
Archbishop Finlay
Seconder
Bishop Wallace
Prologue
Moved by: Bishop Burton
Seconded by: Bishop Bruce
"That in light of the Primates' Statement of October 16, 2003, we ask all parties involved in, or seeking, extra-territorial Episcopal oversight to stand down, and that legal proceedings against the bishop and clergy involved be stayed, for an initial period of three months to allow for the ministry of adequate alternative episcopal oversight to be put in place at the initiative of the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the Primates."
Archbishop Hutchison gave notice that he and Archbishop Clarke had prepared a motion, which might be helpful for the conversation. Copies of it were distributed.
Moved by: Archbishop Clarke
Seconded by: Archbishop Hutchison
"That in response to the `Statement by the Primates of the Anglican Communion' (October 16, 2003) the Primate be asked to establish a task force of the House of Bishops
- to draw up terms and conditions for `adequate provision for Episcopal oversight of dissenting minorities' in the Anglican Church of Canada,
- to consult through the Primate `with the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the Primates',
- and to report to the April 2004 meeting of the House of Bishops." (Note: see p. 24, when motion was put to a vote.)
Text
That the motion be considered in a committee of the whole. CARRIED #HB-03-10-02
Notes
The discussion (about Bishop Burton's and Bishop Bruce's proposed motion) continued. Copies of a motion prepared by Archbishop Hutchison and Archbishop Finlay were distributed.
Moved by: Archbishop Hutchison
Seconded by: Archbishop Finlay
"That this House, to enable the work of the Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities,
1. Request that the Bishop of Yukon refrain from exercising episcopal ministry in the Diocese of New Westminster.
2. Request that the Metropolitan of British Columbia and Yukon stay disciplinary proceedings against the Bishop of Yukon.
3. Request that the Bishop of New Westminster seek a stay of disciplinary proceedings against the priests of his diocese
4. Commend the disaffected parishes to the ministry of Bishop William Hockin as Episcopal Visitor."
Moved by: Archbishop Crawley
Seconded by: Bishop Lawrence
"That the House of Bishops rise from the committee of the whole." CARRIED Res. #HB-03-10-03
Subjects
Anglican Church of Canada. Diocese of New Westminster
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Communion
Buckle, Terry (Terrence Owen), 1940-2020
Ingham, Michael (Michael Colin), 1949-
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Adequate/Alternative Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Less detail

The Diocese of New Westminster

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official8425
Date
2003 October 27-31
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 03-10-05
Resolution 03-10-06
Date
2003 October 27-31
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 03-10-05
Resolution 03-10-06
Mover
Archbishop Clarke
Seconder
Archbishop Hutchison
Prologue
The bishops voted to address the motion by Archbishop Hutchison and Archbishop Clarke first.
Moved by: Bishop Wallace
Seconded by: Bishop Ashdown
"That the motion be put to the House." CARRIED #HB-03-10-05
Text
"That in response to the 'Statement by the Primates of the Anglican Communion' (October 16, 2003) the Primate be asked to establish a task force of the House of Bishops
- to draw up terms and conditions for 'adequate provision for Episcopal oversight of dissenting minorities' in the Anglican Church of Canada,
- to consult through the Primate 'with the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the Primates',
- and to report to the April 2004 meeting of the House of Bishops." CARRIED Res. #HB-03-10-06
Subjects
Anglican Church of Canada. Diocese of New Westminster
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Adequate/Alternative Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Less detail

The Diocese of New Westminster

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official8426
Date
2003 October 27-31
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 03-10-07
Date
2003 October 27-31
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 03-10-07
Mover
Archbishop Crawley
Seconder
Archbishop Hutchison
Prologue
The motion moved by Archbishop Hutchison and seconded by Archbishop Finlay about enabling the Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities was put on the floor. There was some discussion about making an amendment to part four of it.
Text
"That the House of Bishops refer the motion (by Archbishops Hutchison and Finlay) and the subject under discussion to a writing group to be named by the chair, which will report back at 7 p.m." CARRIED Res. #HB-03-10-07
Subjects
Anglican Church of Canada. Diocese of New Westminster
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Adequate/Alternative Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Less detail

The Diocese of New Westminster

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official8429
Date
2003 October 27-31
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 03-10-10
Date
2003 October 27-31
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 03-10-10
Mover
Archbishop Hutchison
Seconder
Archbishop Finlay
Text
"That this House, to enable the work of the Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities,
1. Request that the Bishop of Yukon refrain from exercising Episcopal ministry in the Diocese of New Westminster;
2. Request that the Metropolitan of British Columbia and Yukon stay proceedings against the Bishop of Yukon;
3. Request that the Bishop of New Westminster seek a stay of proceedings against the priests of his diocese against whom such proceedings have been initiated;
4. Request that a mediator be appointed by the Task Force to negotiate an interim role for the person exercising Episcopal oversight mutually acceptable to the diocesan Bishop and the dissenting parishes." CARRIED Res. #HB-03-10-10
Notes
Archbishop Clarke requested that copies of the original version of Archbishop Hutchison's and Archbishop Finlay's motion, as well as the version which the House had carried be appended to the minutes ([Appendix] i). He also asked that the Agenda Committee give some consideration to a different model for the House of Bishops' meetings when there was an issue of particular importance to be dealt with. He commented that often when discussing an important matter, the bishops were rushed at meetings because the item was either not given adequate time on the agenda or was scheduled too late during the meeting. Bishop Morgan responded saying that the Agenda Committee would be happy to consider Archbishop Clarke's recommendation.
Bishop Wallace requested that the full motion (moved by Archbishop Hutchison and seconded by Archbishop Finlay) be faxed to the members of the House of Bishops.
Appendix i
Archbishop Clarke requested that both versions of a motion put before the House of Bishops by Archbishop Hutchison and Archbishop Finlay be appended to the minutes.
Motion as it was proposed initially:
Moved by: Archbishop Hutchison
Seconded by: Archbishop Finlay
"That this House, to enable the work of the Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities,
1. Request that the Bishop of Yukon refrain from exercising episcopal ministry in the Diocese of New Westminster.
2. Request that the Metropolitan of British Columbia and Yukon stay disciplinary proceedings against the Bishop of Yukon.
3. Request that the Bishop of New Westminster seek a stay of disciplinary proceedings against the priests of his diocese
4. Commend the disaffected parishes to the ministry of Bishop William Hockin as Episcopal Visitor."
Motion which was put to a vote and carried:
Moved by: Archbishop Hutchison
1. Request that the Bishop of Yukon refrain from exercising Episcopal ministry in the Diocese of New Westminster;
2. Request that the Metropolitan of British Columbia and Yukon stay proceedings against the Bishop of Yukon;
3. Request that the Bishop of New Westminster seek a stay of proceedings against the priests of his diocese against whom such proceedings have been initiated;
4. Request that a mediator be appointed by the Task Force to negotiate an interim role for the person exercising Episcopal oversight mutually acceptable to the diocesan Bishop and the dissenting parishes." CARRIED Res. #HB-03-10-10
Subjects
Anglican Church of Canada. Diocese of New Westminster
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Adequate/Alternative Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Less detail

Primate's Task Force on Alternate Episcopal Oversight

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official8897
Date
2004 April 15-19
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 04-04-01
Resolution 04-04-02
Resolution 04-04-03
Resolution 04-04-04
Resolution 04-04-05
Date
2004 April 15-19
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 04-04-01
Resolution 04-04-02
Resolution 04-04-03
Resolution 04-04-04
Resolution 04-04-05
Mover
Bishop Howe
Seconder
Bishop Spence
Prologue
Archbishop Crawley briefly described the format planned for the session about alternate episcopal oversight (AEO). It included:
- Presentation of the Primate's Task Force Report on AEO
- Table group discussions
- Discussion in plenary
- Motion(s) about the report
Archbishop Crawley welcomed Bishop Morgan (retired Bishop of Saskatoon) to the meeting of the House of Bishops. Bishop Matthews reviewed the mandate of the Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight (AEO).
Members of the Task Force included: Bishop Matthews (chair), Bishop Bruce, Bishop Morgan and Bishop Young. The Rev. Dr. Michael Thompson, Principal Secretary to the Primate provided staff support to the Task Force.
Bishop Bruce reviewed the time line of events (nationally and internationally) leading up to the present (- sections 2 and 3 respectively in the report). He explained a bit about the process of consultation undertaken by the Task Force to gather input prior to writing their report.
Three models of alternative episcopal oversight were proposed in the report for the House of Bishops to consider (section 6). Bishop Matthews briefly described each of the models proposed by the Task Force. She described them as:
Model #1 (section 6.2.) -"is an 'in trust' model"
Model #2 (section 6.3) - "AEO when needed for a short period of time only"
Model #3 (section 6.4) - "not strictly an AEO model at all, but an arrangement between two bishops"
Bishop Matthews commented on section 6.6 which she said referred to ways of handling alternative episcopal oversight. She responded to a suggestion made by the Chancellor of the Diocese of New Westminster that there may be a legal impediment to the Task Force's proposals. Bishop Matthews informed the bishops that the Chancellor of General Synod and two other chancellors had had an opportunity to review the report. She said that they didn't think that there would be a legal impediment if one of the proposed models was taken up.
The bishops broke into table groups to respond to two questions.
1. Will one of the models in the Primate's Task Forces on AEO report work in your diocese ?
2. What are the concerns you have ?
The bishops reported back on their table group discussions.
Bishop Matthews gave notice of a motion. (Copies of it were distributed to the bishops.) She responded to the table groups' comments and asked the bishops to keep in mind that the consultation process had included input from laity and clergy (as well as bishops).
The bishops met the next day to continue their discussion.
Archbishop Hutchison gave notice of an amendment to the motion.
Bishop Matthews observed that it was understandable the members of the House would be most interested in model 3 (section 6.4) because it involved an informal arrangement between bishops. However she reiterated her point of the previous day, and asked that they keep in mind that the task force had received and considered input from bishops, clergy and laity. She asked that the bishops keep that in mind particularly when looking at models 1 and 2. She reminded the members of the House of Bishops that the proposed models were not legislative.
Discussion on the content of the Task Force report continued. Several bishops thanked the Task Force for their work.
Archbishop Crawley spoke to the House re taking an action (e.g. receiving a report) and how the action gets interpreted (by others). He said, "we must come up with a decision which will actually involve some 'doing'."
Motion:
Moved by: Archbishop Clarke
Seconded by: Bishop Young
"That this House of Bishops adopt the Report of the Adequate Alternative Episcopal Oversight Task Force, while hoping that alternative episcopal oversight will not be required by the Anglican Church of Canada."
Amendment:
Moved by: Archbishop Hutchison
Seconded by: Bishop Ingham
"That this House receive with thanks the report of the Task Force on the AEO commending model 3 in the report of the task Force on the AEO commending model 3 in the report to the consideration of any diocese in the Anglican Church of Canada that should find it necessary."
Bishop Harvey challenged the validity of the proposed amendment. It was put to a vote and was carried as a valid amendment by the House. Archbishop Crawley declared Archbishop Hutchison's and Bishop Ingham's motion to be a valid amendment.
Proposed amendment to the amendment:
Moved by: Bishop Stavert
Seconded by: Bishop Bedford-Jones
"That this House of Bishops receive with thanks the report of the AEO Task Force, omitting paragraph 6.4.1. and replacing it with paragraph 6.5.3. and omitting in that paragraph 6.4.1. and replacing it with paragraph 6.5.3. and omitting in that paragraph the words 'not AEO' and ending at the word 'ordination' and commending model 3 in the report to the consideration of any diocese in the Anglican church of Canada that should find it necessary."
Archbishop Hutchison and Bishop Ingham accepted thief amendment as friendly.
Moved by: Bishop Matthews
Seconded by: Bishop Johnson
"That the House of Bishops move into a committee of the whole." CARRIED Res. #HB-04-04.01
The debate about the amended amendment continued.
Moved by: Bishop Howe
Seconded by: Bishop Spence
"That the House of Bishops move out of a committee of the whole" CARRIED Res. #HB-04-04-02
The amended amendment was put before the bishops. CARRIED Res. #HB-04-04-03
Motion as amended:
"That this House of Bishops adopt the Report of the Adequate Alternative Episcopal Oversight Task Force, while hoping that alternative episcopal oversight will not be required by the Anglican Church of Canada.
That this House of Bishops receive with thanks the report of the Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight, omitting paragraph 6.4.1., and replacing it with paragraph 6.5.3. omitting in that paragraph the words 'not AEO' and ending at the word 'ordination' and commending model 3 in the report to the consideration of any diocese in the Anglican Church of Canada that should find it necessary." LOST Res. #HB-04-04-04
Text
"That the House of Bishops receive the report of the Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight with thanks, and that further discussion be deferred until a future meeting of the House of Bishops and General Synod." CARRIED Res. #HB-04-04-05
Notes
[The text of the report of the Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight is 50 pages in length and may be found on the Anglican Church of Canada website at: http://www.anglican.ca/primate/tpo/tpo00.html Text NOT included in electronic database.]
Subjects
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Adequate/Alternative Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Episcopacy - Anglican Church of Canada
Episcopacy - Anglican Communion
Shared Episcopal Ministry
Less detail

Primate's Task Force on Alternate Episcopal Oversight:

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official8898
Date
2004 April 15-19
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 04-04-06
Date
2004 April 15-19
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 04-04-06
Mover
Bishop Bedford-Jones
Seconder
Bishop Wallace
Prologue
Archbishop Crawley asked whether it would be possible to have a group of people to work at the report. (He suggested that the group's membership could include a couple of bishops who were retiring; some of the original members of the Task Force on AEO, and one of the candidates nominated for the primacy.)
Text
"That the Acting Primate be asked to name a group from the existing task force and others, to consider a process for what the House of Bishops should do from here on." CARRIED Res. #HB-04-04-06
Subjects
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Episcopacy - Anglican Church of Canada
Shared Episcopal Ministry
Less detail

Same Sex Blessings:

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official8900
Date
2004 April 15-19
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 04-04-08
Date
2004 April 15-19
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 04-04-08
Mover
Bishop Cowan
Seconder
Bishop Phillips
Prologue
Bishop Ashdown shared his feeling that the House of Bishops should be prepared to have some way of offering care to those who needed it following the discussion on blessing same sex unions at General Synod. Some discussion followed. It was generally agreed that the House of Bishops needed to be prepared to respond following the vote at General Synod, particularly to those who found themselves in a state of devastation (no matter which way the vote went).
The Acting Primate suggested that it would be prudent for the House of Bishops to give some consideration towards preparing a finely tuned conscience clause, as well as a pastoral statement prior to the vote at General Synod. Discussion about preparing a pastoral statement continued. Several members shared their feelings that more than one statement needed to be prepared in order to respond appropriately to whatever the outcome of the vote. There was some conversation about the various groups, as well as the content that should be taken into consideration when preparing a pastoral statement.
Bishop Young expressed his feeling that the House of Bishops had "missed the boat" by the way it had responded to the proposals of the Task Force on Alternate Episcopal Oversight. He said that the Canadian constituency was expecting a response from the House following this meeting of the House of Bishops. Once again, he said it would be seen to have done nothing. He concluded by stating that there needed to be a message from the House about alternative episcopal oversight. Later, Bishop Tottenham challenged Bishop Young's comment, saying that she thought that the House had done something by deciding that they didn't want a model of Alternative Episcopal Oversight which involved jurisdiction.
Text
"That the Acting Primate be asked to appoint a group of five members of the House to draft:
A) conscience clause, and
B) pastoral statements,
that could be issued by the House of Bishops following a decision of General Synod." CARRIED Res. #HB-04-04-08
Notes
Bishop Harvey asked about the process for the bishops at the meeting of General Synod following the vote on blessing same sex unions. Archbishop Crawley responded that it was his understanding that the House of Bishops would meet together near the beginning of General Synod. Bishop Hiltz said that it would be necessary for the bishops to also meet together following the vote because their message could be altered by the nature of the debate at General Synod prior to the vote.
Subjects
Same sex unions - Religious aspects - Anglican Church of Canada
Anglican Church of Canada - Pastoral letters and charges
Anglican Church of Canada. General Synod (37th : 2004 : St. Catharines, Ont.) - Resolutions
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops - Rules and practice
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Episcopacy - Anglican Church of Canada
Conscience clause - Anglican Church of Canada
Less detail

Shared Episcopal Ministry

http://archives.anglican.ca/en/permalink/official9049
Date
2004 October 31 - November 4
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 04-10-02
Date
2004 October 31 - November 4
Source
House of Bishops. Minutes
Record Type
Resolution 04-10-02
Mover
Bishop Hiltz
Seconder
Bishop Howe
Prologue
Bishop Johnson lead the first session on Shared Episcopal Ministry. He informed the bishops that he was presenting the report, "Shared Episcopal Ministry, Addendum to the Primate's Task Force report on AEO" for clarification and not for discussion.) He then reviewed the report, which proposed a model for shared episcopal ministry (where a diocesan bishop would share episcopal oversight with another bishop). The report also recommended that consideration be given by the diocesan synods to having a motion re Shared Episcopal Ministry when considering whether or not to allow same sex blessings in their dioceses.
The Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight was made up of: Bishop Hiltz (chair), Bishop Bruce, Bishop Howe and Bishop Johnson. Archdeacon Feheley provided staff support to the task force.
Bishop Johnson reminded the bishops of the discussion they had had at their meeting in April [2004]. At that time they had agreed that the situation was serious, but could not come up with a proposal for how to continue. Bishop Johnson noted that the report he was presenting was an addendum report to the original report from the Task Force on AEO. He pointed out that the task force had decided to use the term "shared episcopal ministry" rather than "adequate episcopal oversight".
Archbishop Hutchison invited questions and comments for clarification (not debate).
Bishop Hiltz and Bishop George facilitated the second session about Shared Episcopal [Ministry].
Bishop Hiltz put three questions to the bishops for discussion in their table groups. They were asked to record their conversations for the task force.
Questions:
1. What can I affirm in the addendum ?
2. Is there anything in the addendum that causes me concern ?
3. If I had a suggestion for strengthening the addendum, it would be ...
The groups reported back in plenary.
Bishop George lead the House through some revisions to the proposal made by the task force based on the bishops' comments during their first session on the addendum report.
Text
"Be it resolved that in accordance with the Windsor Report (para 153), this House of Bishops at its meeting of November 3rd 2004, adopt the Addendum to the Report of its Task Force on Shared Episcopal Ministry, and in the interest of our commitment to unity and reconciliation commend it to all dioceses in the Anglican Church of Canada." CARRIED Res. #HB-04-10-02
Notes
[Text of the report "Shared Episcopal Ministry, Addendum to the Primate's Task Force report on AEO" is available electronically on the Anglican Church of Canada website at: http://www.anglican.ca/primate/files/2010/11/SEM.pdf . Text also available in full below.]
Shared Episcopal Ministry
This model recognizes the reality that one Canadian diocesan synod has and that in the future others may also deal with the question of whether to allow the blessing of same sex relationships to take place within the parishes of their dioceses. In the event of a diocesan synod and bishop agreeing to such blessings we believe that it is important that a binding conscience clause for parishes and clergy be available. Regardless of the outcome of those Synods some parishes may feel disenfranchised and vulnerable, and therefore desire to seek Shared Episcopal Ministry, where the diocesan bishop would share his/her episcopal oversight with another bishop. When a diocese is considering the question of blessings, we believe that the same synod should consider a motion that would allow Shared Episcopal Ministry in their diocese. Such a resolution should include the provisions outlined at para 3) and 4) below.
The Process of Shared Episcopal Ministry
1. The Metropolitan of each Province would be responsible for assembling a list of current and retired bishops in good standing in the Canadian Church and who would be willing to participate in providing Shared Episcopal Ministry within the province. The provincial house of bishops must approve the list. The Metropolitan will not be included on the list for his/her Province. It would be important to have a number of bishops from different theological perspectives so that all parishes requesting Shared Episcopal Ministry might be served. A bishop from another province of the Communion would be eligible to be on the Metropolitan's list with the assurance that he/she would participate under the terms of these arrangements as outlined. The bishop would be designated as an episcopal assistant to the Metropolitan.
2. When a diocese has agreed to Shared Episcopal Ministry through a synod resolution the costs of that ministry, like all episcopal ministry is deemed to be an expense of the diocese. A suitable budget must also be agreed to between the individual parish and the diocese for the provision of Shared Episcopal Ministry.
3. If the incumbent and members of the parish believe that they cannot work with their bishop in the light of the current disagreements on issues of human sexuality , the rector and the canonically designated lay leadership shall meet with the bishop in a spirit of openness to seek reconciliation. After such a meeting, it is hoped that a mutually agreeable way forward can be found. If it is not a parish may elect the option of Shared Episcopal Ministry by a resolution passing with a 2/3 majority of those present and voting at a duly constituted parish meeting [1]. The incumbent must also concur with the decision.
4. In order for the parish resolution to become effective the following provisions are to be followed:
- a. The parish and the diocesan bishop would choose a suitable bishop from the provincial list to provide Shared Episcopal Ministry taking into account such things as theological perspective and proximity to the parish. Their decision will be conveyed to the Metropolitan who may be asked to assist with the process.
- b. The parish would retain its voice and vote at synod and would be free to participate in the councils of the Church at all levels.
- c. The parish must maintain its current and future financial commitments to the diocese.
- d. The parish would be free to undertake new Church developments subject to diocesan procedures.
- e. Both the parish and the diocesan bishop would review the decision every three years or earlier if desired.
5. The duties of the bishop involved in Shared Episcopal Ministry takes as its point of origin the example of dioceses where there is/are suffragan bishop(s). He or she would not have jurisdiction but would be part of the process on appointments, episcopal visits, confirmations, pastoral care of clergy, advice on potential ordinands and participate in ordinations. This model would honour the process of appointment that each diocese currently follows. The diocese would insure that wide ranges of theological perspectives were represented on the committee dealing with postulants for ordination.
6. In the event that the parish seeking Shared Episcopal Ministry is in the diocese of the Metropolitan the senior bishop by date of consecration would fulfill the role given to the Metropolitan.
The model described above is designed to deal with the circumstances in which all sides acknowledge that there is a level of dissent between a parish and their diocesan bishop, however negotiated oversight is feasible Shared Episcopal Ministry as defined can provide a means of episcopal pastoral care and direction for the parish.
A Process in Circumstances requiring Conciliation
What follows is designed to deal with the circumstances in which all sides acknowledge that there is such a level of dissent and /or distrust between a parish and their diocesan bishop that negotiated oversight is not feasible To overcome the obstacle posed by such a high level of dissent, some means must be identified to provide Shared Episcopal Ministry from outside of the diocesan structure. The parish or the diocesan bishop may appeal to the Metropolitan using the following process.
1. The Metropolitan of each province would be responsible for assembling a list of current and retired bishops in good standing in the Canadian Church and who would be willing to participate in providing Shared Episcopal Ministry within the province. The provincial house of bishops must approve the list. The Metropolitan will not be included on the list for his/her Province. It would be important to have a number of bishops from different theological perspectives so that all parishes requesting Shared Episcopal Ministry might be served. A bishop from another province of the Communion would be eligible to be on The Metropolitan's list with the assurance that he/she would participate under the terms of these arrangements as outlined. The bishop would be designated as an episcopal assistant to the Metropolitan.
2. If the incumbent and members of the parish or the diocesan bishop believe that they cannot work together in the light of the current disagreements on issues of human sexuality , the rector and the canonically designated lay leadership shall meet with the bishop in a spirit of openness to seek reconciliation. After such a meeting, it is hoped that a mutually agreeable way forward can be found. If it is not, a parish may elect the option of Shared Episcopal Ministry by a resolution passing with a 2/3 majority of those present and voting at a duly constituted parish meeting [2]. The incumbent must also concur with the decision.
3. The diocesan bishop would seek the consent of his/her diocesan council (or equivalent) to implement Shared Episcopal Ministry. The parish or the diocesan bishop would advise the other party that they were petitioning the Metropolitan to appoint a bishop to provide Shared Episcopal Ministry.
4. The Metropolitan shall meet with all involved to endeavour to resolve the outstanding issues. The Metropolitan may request two others who are acceptable to both parties to join him/her to review the situation, to consider the appeal, and to make recommendations to all parties.
5. Prior to implementation the Metropolitan will have ensured that there is an agreement between the Parish and the diocese on how all costs related to Shared Episcopal Ministry will be borne, including diocesan assessment.
6. With the consent of the Diocesan Bishop and of the parish, the Metropolitan will appoint a bishop to provide Shared Episcopal Ministry from the list approved by the provincial house of bishops. The Metropolitan would take into account the question of reasonable proximity to the parish and diocese and the theological position of the parish .
7. The parish would retain its voice and vote at synod and would be free to participate in the councils of the Church at all levels.
8. The parish would be free to undertake new Church developments subject to diocesan procedures.
9. Both the parish and the diocesan bishop will review the decision every three years or earlier if desired.
10. The Duties of the bishop involved in Shared Episcopal Ministry takes as its point of origin the example of dioceses where there is/are suffragan bishop(s). He or she would not have jurisdiction but would be part of the process on appointments, episcopal visits, confirmations, pastoral care of clergy, advice on potential ordinands and participate in ordinations. This model would honour the process of appointment that each diocese currently follows. The diocese would insure that wide ranges of theological perspectives were represented on the committee dealing with postulants for ordination.
11. In the event that the parish seeking Shared Episcopal Ministry is in the diocese of the Metropolitan the senior bishop by date of consecration would fulfill the role given to the Metropolitan.
Conclusion
Shared Episcopal Ministry provided under either circumstance is based on a spirit of reconciliation, co-operation and goodwill. In order not to institutionalize schism it is always to be understood as a temporary arrangement directed toward reconciliation between the parties. . Changes in parish or diocesan leadership are appropriate times for renewed efforts towards the ultimate goal of full restoration of the relationship between the parish and its bishop.
Endnote
The document says that
“The Duties of the bishop involved in Shared Episcopal Ministry takes as its point of origin the example of dioceses where there is/are suffragan bishop(s). He or she would not have jurisdiction but would be part of the process on appointments, episcopal visits, confirmations, pastoral care of clergy, advice on potential ordinands and participate in ordinations. This model would honour the process of appointment that each diocese currently follows”.
In reference to Suffragan bishops and appointments there are a variety of models that are followed across the Canadian Church
- In Huron the suffragan appoints and the diocesan signs the license
- In Nova Scotia and PEI the diocesan appoints and signs the license
- In Toronto the Area (or suffragan) signs the appointment letter and co-signs the license with the diocesan.
We would recommend that the diocesan bishop and the bishop involved with Shared Episcopal Ministry clarify the process they will use prior to the bishop beginning his/her ministry in a parish.
[1] Whenever the term parish meeting is used in this document it refers to the full members of the parish that have the right to be present and to vote at its annual meeting as defined by the canons of the diocese
[2] Whenever the term parish meeting is used in this document it refers to the full members of the parish that have the right to be present and to vote at its annual meeting as defined by the canons of the diocese
Subjects
Anglican Church of Canada. House of Bishops. Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Anglican Church of Canada. Primate's Task Force on Alternative Episcopal Oversight
Shared Episcopal Ministry
Alternative episcopal oversight - Anglican Church of Canada
Episcopacy - Anglican Church of Canada
Windsor Report
Less detail

9 records – page 1 of 1.