Disciplinary Board for Bishops formed for new Title IV canons
Episcopal News Service. June 30, 2011 [063011-04]
ENS staff
An 18-member Disciplinary Board for Bishops has been established as required by the revised version of the Episcopal Church's canons on clergy discipline, which go into effect July 1.
The board consists of 10 bishops, four clergy and four lay members. Eight of the bishops were elected by the House of Bishops at the group's March meeting; two were later appointed by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori when vacancies occurred, according to a press release from the church's Office of Public Affairs.
The clergy and lay members were appointed by President of the House of Deputies Bonnie Anderson for an interim basis until the House of Deputies can elect regular members at the next meeting of General Convention in 2012.
The members and their dioceses are:
Bishop Ian T. Douglas of Connecticut; Victor Feliberty-Ruberte of Puerto Rico; Bishop Robert Fitzpatrick of Hawaii; Suffragan Bishop Dena Harrison of Texas; Christopher Hayes of California; Retired Bishop Dorsey Henderson of Upper South Carolina; Bishop Herman Hollerith of Southern Virginia; Bishop J. Scott Mayer of Northwest Texas; the Rev. Marjorie Menaul of Central Pennsylvania; Josephine Powell of Michigan; the Rev. Jesus Reyes of El Camino Real; Diane Sammons of Newark; Bishop Thomas Shaw of Massachusetts; the Rev. Canon Angela Shepherd of Maryland; Bishop Prince Singh of Rochester; the Rev. Robert Two Bulls Jr. of Los Angeles; Bishop James Waggoner of Spokane and Bishop Catherine Waynick of Indianapolis.
The board is called for in Canon IV: 17: 3, which says in part that the members will have "original jurisdiction over matters of discipline of bishops" and will "hear bishops' appeals from imposition of restrictions on ministry or placement on administrative leave."
The expiring Title IV canons are here and the revised version is here.
The revised canons have been controversial in some quarters. The leadership of the dioceses of Central Florida, Dallas and South Carolina have questioned whether the revision conforms to the church's constitution, especially as to the authority they give to the presiding bishop in disciplinary cases involving bishops.
In February, three lawyers who were been involved in the nine-year process that led to the revision released a statement defending the new processes outlined in the revision. Duncan Bayne, Diocese of Olympia vice chancellor; Stephen Hutchinson, Diocese of Utah chancellor and Executive Council member; and Joseph Delafield, Diocese of Maine chancellor, said that the church's constitution authorizes the canons to spell out the presiding bishop's duties while the opponents say that the presiding bishop's duties and authority are limited by the constitution.
A paper titled "Title IV Revisions Unmasked," written for the Anglican Communion Institute by C. Alan Runyan, a South Carolina lawyer, and Mark McCall, a member of the New York bar, lays out the opponents' arguments. The two later expanded on their opposition here. The ACI has no official tie with the Anglican Communion Office.
Early in the process that led to the revision of Title IV by the 2009 General Convention, Hutchinson, chair of group that drafted the changes, briefed the Executive Council on the proposal. He said the task force's challenge is "to seek a fair balance" from the comments received during the first attempt to revise Title IV during the 75th General Convention in June 2006 and those made on the current proposed draft. He said the then-proposed revision was rooted in the Baptismal Covenant and the need for accountability and responsibility, as well as healing and reconciliation.