Barring a tidal wave of negative letters being sent to the task force charged with rewriting The Episcopal Church’s “misconduct canons,” clergy and lay leaders may have to stop and ask themselves whether anyone might be offended before publishing a critical opinion piece or posting an edgy blog entry on the internet.
 
That’s because among the changes being proposed by the “Title IV Task Force II” are those that would expand the definition of conduct unbecoming a member of the clergy to include virtually any public criticism of the church and its policies, and others permitting misconduct complaints to be filed “in any manner and in any form.” The task force recently released a draft of its work. Public comment on the 40-page document concludes June 30. The task force’s final report will be submitted for consideration to the 76th General Convention in 2009.
 
In an interview with Episcopal News Service, Steve Hutchinson of Utah, chairman of the task force, said the group sought to move away from a criminal justice model. He said the group recognized “that a reconciliation model is more consistent with our theology,” and that it should consider other professional-misconduct models, such as the American Medical Association’s code. There is “an emphasis on pastoral resolution” at all stages, Mr. Hutchinson told ENS, yet there is also a requirement that any pastoral resolution between a bishop and priest or deacon be reviewed and approved “so that there’s not the appearance of fair or unfair allegations or sweetheart deals.”
 
The draft is also to be commended for explicit language that requires impartiality of all court officers and for requiring trials to be held expeditiously. It also strengthens the appeal process. These and other positive attributes are overshadowed by the court’s insistence on having the last word.
 
“Proceedings under this title are neither civil nor criminal but ecclesiastical in nature,” states a section titled General Provision. “These proceedings represent the responsibility of this church to determine who shall service as members of the clergy of this church, reflecting the polity and order of this hierarchical church. Members of the Clergy have voluntarily sought and accepted positions in this church and have thereby given their consent to subject themselves to the discipline of this church. They may not claim proceedings under this title constitutional guarantees otherwise associated with secular court proceedings.”
 
In other words, by accepting clerical orders in The Episcopal Church or by accepting a volunteer lay leadership position one is assumed to have waived all constitutional rights not specifically granted.
 
The revisons are likely to continue a concentration of authority in the primate at the expense of diocesan autonomy. Previously, diocesan courts handled complaints against parochial clergy. Under the new proposal, appellate courts from the church’s nine regional provinces would have greater authority to overrule diocesan decisions.
 
Consent of Senior Bishops
The draft explicitly permits some canonically gray actions which Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori recently undertook. For instance, in the present canons, the consent of the three senior bishops with jurisdiction was required before a bishop could be inhibited and tried for abandonment of communion. Bishop Jefferts Schori was unable to obtain the consent needed to inhibit Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, but she vowed to hold a hearing in the House of Bishops all the same. Under this proposal, all that would be necessary for a vote would be the consent of the review committee. The proposed revised canons also clarify the reasons for which lay volunteers can be removed and the process by which that is accomplished.
 
The biggest flaw in both the current and revised disciplinary code is its vulnerability to making decisions based on majority will rather than the rule of law. For more than 10 years priests and bishops have flagrantly violated the canons by inviting the unbaptized to partake of communion. Since the majority of Episcopalians are either indifferent or willing to tolerate the violation as permissible experimentation, discipline is rare to non-existent. Infractions against other canons, particularly those with respect to property and the transfer of canonical licenses to other Anglican churches, are enforced to the letter of the law.
 
Steve Waring, news editor
 
This guest column appeared in the March 9, 2008, edition of The Living Church magazine. To find more news, feature articles, and commentary about the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion not available online, read The Living Church each week.  Click here  to start your subscription.
 
We invite your response to this article through a Letter to the Editor. Email your letter to tlc@livingchurch.org. Please include your name, city and state.