[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

Consents at GC 2000



The canons require promptness in notification of the results of the
votes to consent to the election of a bishop: "The Presiding Bishop
shall, without delay, notify the Standing Committee of the Diocese
electing and the Bishop-Elect of the consent" III.22.3.D.  Similar
expeditiousness was manifested in the early action on consents at GC
2000. The new bishops received their consents on the second day of
convention, and the House of Bishops tried to rush it even more:

Sections C and D describe the consent process going first to
Deputies and then to Bishops, yet in 2000, the House of Bishops took
action on the very first day, without having heard from the House of
Deputies. (Only bishops with jurisdiction can vote).

The bishops treated six bishops-elect as a group, Taiwan, Eastern
Oregon, Spokane, Lexington, Connecticut (two bishops suffragan). they
passed B019 from the House of Bishops Committee on the Consecration of
Bishops, report #1:

"Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, That the provisions of
Canon III.22.3, having been complied with, this General Convention
consent to the election of..."  Motion carried.  Resolution adopted.
Communicated to the House of Deputies in HB Message #2

          -- from Page 88 of the 2000 Journal of General Convention

In the same session, the bishops separately consented to the election
of Leo Frade as Bishop of SE Florida (Resolution B020) and sent the
consent to the House of Deputies as HB Message #4 (see page 89 of the
Journal).  Presumably they treated Bishop Frade separately because he
was already a bishop (Honduras).

Meanwhile, in the House of Deputies, which is supposed to take up the
consents first, Dispatch of Business at the beginning of the second
day moved a Special Order of Business to suspend the Rules of Order
and take the Consecration of Bishops as the first item of business.
The House of Deputies then consented to the election of all seven
elections (D043).  See pages 414-415 of the JOURNAL.

Later that same day, bishops with jurisdiction revisited the matter
and consented to the action of the House of Deputies.  A motion was
made to reconsider B020 and the motion carried.  Then the House of
Bishops Committee on Consecration moved to concur with the action of
the House of Deputies on HD Message #24 on Resolution D043 (Consents
to Elections) which includes and can substitute for Resolution B020
(Consents to Elections>.  The House concurred and communicated to the
House of Deputies in HB Message #23.  The Final Text of Resolution
D043:

"Resolved, That the provisions of Canon III.22.3, having been complied
with, this General Convention consent to the election of....."  [this
time they included Frade with the rest of them]

     [from page 124 of the Journal]

In the end, in 2000 it was the resolution originating in Deputies that
won.  It included all 7 new bishops as a batch.  It gave as the only
reason for consent the fact that the elections has complied with the
provisions of Canon III.22.3.


L., L2 Newark, Member of Executive Council

                 You always prepare a table for me in the
                 presence of my enemies.  My cup runs over.

                 What a shepherd!









Please sign my guestbook and view it.


My site has been accessed times since February 14, 1996.

Statistics courtesy of WebCounter.