Loading ...History suggests DIO-BETHLEHEM will be transparent
flockwoodThe Diocese of Bethlehem has a solid track record when it comes to transparency when it comes to the bishop consent process.
They’re scheduled to meet today to vote on the bishop-elect of Northern Michigan, and if the past is any indicator, look for them to make their decision public and to offer a nuanced explanation for their vote.
On December 6, 2007, the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Bethlehem unanimously rejected the bishop-elect of South Carolina, the Rev. Mark Lawrence. Soon thereafter, they sent out an open letter announcing their vote and giving an in-depth explanation for why they felt compelled to reject Lawrence’s bid. A better copy is located here.
The standing committee’s rationale for releasing the statement was clearly stated: “Because our diocesan community elected us to exercise this authority, we want you to know why we did not consent.”
Fast forward 18 months. Another bishop is facing a close vote. This time it’s the Rev. Kevin G. Thew Forrester, bishop of Northern Michigan. The bishop of Bethlehem, the Right Rev. Paul Marshall, was one of the first bishops to reveal his position on Thew Forrester’s election and to offer an in-depth explanation for his decision.
The new and popular website, IAmEpiscopalian.org, states: Our controversies and conversations have been public. Our governance is transparent. That ideal has been reflected in the Diocese of Bethlehem.
This particular vote will be worth watching. Right now, 55 standing committees have withheld consent and 29 have given consent. Only 27 remain. Assuming these 59 don’t waver, the bishop-elect of Northern Michigan must receive all 27 remaining votes (including seven from international dioceses) in order to receive consent. A ‘no’ vote will mean that a majority of the church’s standing committees have decided to withhold consent.
