tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post7505003088693902565..comments2024-02-19T07:24:42.397-08:00Comments on Anglican Curmudgeon: Breaking: Hearing in Fort Worth Continued to Next WeekA. S. Haleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05108498446058643166noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-42528483123168366712009-09-16T14:48:49.326-07:002009-09-16T14:48:49.326-07:00D, the individual Standing Committee members in th...D, the individual Standing Committee members in the Diocese of Pittsburgh were named by the plaintiff Calvary Church, because its lawsuit sought to keep them from giving their consent to allow any individual parishes to leave the Church with their property. In the other diocesan lawsuits, to my knowledge, the members of the Standing Committees were not joined as parties.A. S. Haleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05108498446058643166noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-72678890831978089562009-09-16T12:28:33.660-07:002009-09-16T12:28:33.660-07:00A.S.,
I believe I read that in some cases indivi...A.S.,<br /> I believe I read that in some cases individual members of a Standing Committee are also being sued. What can a plaintiff possibly get from an individual member of the Standing Committee (or the entire committee)? Surely they aren't being sued for money. What then are they being sued for? Thank you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-55728791691804119582009-09-15T09:33:14.848-07:002009-09-15T09:33:14.848-07:00Dear Mr. Haley,
It is never a pleasant task to be...Dear Mr. Haley,<br /><br />It is never a pleasant task to be the naysayer, but please allow me to point out an implicit assumption in your reply to D. You wrote "Courts cannot reward lawlessness forever, or they would be out of business."<br /><br />While true, this statement is also a truism. It is as true as a statement that a democracy in which the electorate realizes that they may vote themselves richer at the expense of their fellow citizens will fall into tyranny.<br /><br />It is for that reason that I do not find much solace in your reassurance. I have come to the conclusion that the nation which I served for twenty years is, with alarming rapidity, moving toward tyranny by abandoning the classical understanding of the <i>Rule of Law</i>. And if the country is "going out of business" (at least as we have understood that term), then there is no necessary reason to believe that the courts will not be in the crowd, if not always at the forefront.<br /><br />Please pray that my sense of what is happening is due more to my pessimism than to what is certainly the ultimate fate of our nation and our society.<br /><br />Pax et bonum,<br />Keith TöpferMartial Artisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11679584221923893460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-4972076123186216952009-09-10T19:59:25.082-07:002009-09-10T19:59:25.082-07:00D, thank you for leaving your comment. You are rig...D, thank you for leaving your comment. You are right that many hours of legal preparation and research went into the Diocese's and Bishop Iker's moves. The Presiding Bishop, as I have documented in many posts on this site, is receiving advice from a law firm which gains financially from each new suit that is brought, and which has devised a legal strategy based on the fiction that a Diocese can never leave the Church -- which contradicts the fundamental structure of ECUSA as a <i>voluntary</i> association of Dioceses.<br /><br />Sooner or later -- and perhaps in Fort Worth -- a judge is going to see the fatal flaw in that contradiction, and make the ruling that if it is a voluntary association, with no express restrictions on leaving in its governing instruments, ECUSA has no basis on which to argue that a Diocese may not withdraw.<br /><br />I am as confident as you are in the legal resources assisting your bishop and his diocese. The idea that there can be two "Dioceses of Fort Worth" without the necessity of complying with <b>all</b> of ECUSA's and the Diocese's constitutional and canonical provisions is doomed to fail eventually. The only question is whether it will happen now or later. Courts cannot reward lawlessness forever, or they would be out of business.A. S. Haleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05108498446058643166noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-15810885690743342352009-09-10T17:58:31.839-07:002009-09-10T17:58:31.839-07:00I'm not a law scholar, just a lay person in Ft...I'm not a law scholar, just a lay person in Ft. Worth. I see it this way - I do not think that any of our Bishops (Iker, Wantland, Duncan, etc) would have made any of these serious decisions if they were not fully aware of consequences. I do not think they would have made any move with months of studying Canon Law and having others do many hours & days of research. It seems to me the PB is always behind the eight ball as they say; she's always doing things after the fact. Does she not realize that these Bishops have a lot more experience than she does? Our Bishops wouldn't have done anything if they thought for one minute that their actions/decisions didn't have a leg to stand on. I am sure that they and their staff know Canon Law and are using it accordingly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com