Monday, March 31, 2008

"Schorades in San Joaquin"

Excellent perspective from Chancellor in comments at the Stand Firm posting, The Protest Text from the Episcopal Parish of St. John’s, Tulare, at a Meeting in Lodi, California [boldface mine]:

. . . the acts of this “Convention” are as null and void as were the purported “depositions” of +Schofield and +Cox. In addition to its being convoked without the authority of the Standing Committee, I question how the “Convention” could be said to have a legal quorum with only 43 lay delegates and 21 clergy from 18 out of 47 congregations. Once again, TEC can’t have it both ways: if, according to TEC’s “polity”, no parishes can leave TEC, but only people, then they needed delegates from at least 24 parishes to have a legal quorum. If, on the other hand, they are measuring their “quorum” from just those parishes who are in Remain Episcopal, then they have admitted in law that the other parishes have left the diocese, so that they no longer count towards a quorum.

The fact remains that a fully legal quorum of properly convoked convention delegates voted to change the DSJ Constitution and Canons. No rump minority has the legal authority to convene afterward and declare itself a legal “quorum” to undo these changes. What we are seeing, at last, is the emptiness behind the supposed legal strategy of 815: this will not fly. This will not even survive a demurrer under California law. (Note: a demurrer is where the defendant says: “So what if everything the plaintiff accurately says is true? There is no case made out where a court needs to step in and provide relief.” And here the operative word is “accurately”. The plaintiff, for example, cannot file a suit alleging that he is the lawful heir of Napoleon and so is entitled to be the current ruler of France. No court is required to accept such allegations as true, and no court is required to accept the Schorades in San Joaquin as lawful acts of a duly constituted Diocese.)

Check it out.

No comments: