Is the motivation simply about money?No. The Task Force is motivated by the charge given it by the resolutionpassed at last convention. That resolution cites the change in Provincialstructure [Constitution and Canons] and the encouragement of Bishop Schofield
to “prayer and conversation regarding a collective vision for the future of theDiocese.” Money is a factor, of course. But not the only factor. The current
structure of the diocese is a result of decades of working under the constitutionand canons of TEC. We are not under that system any longer but are under theconstitution & canons of ACNA.. The motivation is to do the best we can for thisdiocese under the new reality of being part of ACNA.Have you [or you should] consult with Episcopal leadership within ACNA?We did consult with bishops in ACNA as well as TEC to get background for thefirst report. We talked to other diocesan leaders as well as members of theACNA staff. One respondent provided a list of names of ACNA bishops andmany of the bishops we contacted are on that list.
The use of “TEC model” is misleading and prejudicial.
We are sorry if the term “TEC model” is assumed as prejudicial. There is no at-
tempt on the part of the Task Force to be misleading. What we were describingis the reality of experience in this diocese [and other dioceses] in the last coupleof decades or so while those dioceses were in TEC. Other denominations mayuse similar structures, however most all of us in this diocese have experiencedthis type of structure while being a member of TEC. Some suggestions were
made to call it “traditional”, or “contemporary”, or even ”universal or orthodox”
model. It seemed that it would be difficult to have one thing be both traditionaland contemporary or that it be universal but not. Possibly it could have been
named “TWWH” that which we had. But even that would not be accurate. In
moving forward we understand the tenderness there seems to be about theterm TEC and we will hold its use to a minimum.The Catholic faith demands central authority.This, or something like it, was mentioned a couple of times. There is a sentence
in one of the sections that say something like: “how to transition to a less cen-tralized model of ministry.” These words clearly reflect the ACNA canon [Title I,
Canon 6.1] stating the congregation as the fundamental agency for mission.We are speaking here of mission, not authority. Thank you for raising a concernabout Authority. It showed us where we were not as clear as we had hoped.We in no way wish to decentralize the authority of the Bishop. No, we are not abunch of Congregationalists. Yes, we understand scripture and tradition back tothe apostles suggests a church gathered around bishops. We are in no waysuggesting a reduction in the authority of the Bishop of the diocese. We arelooking at ways to free up the bishop to spend the maximum time exercising theduties of his office, not managing administrative details. We are focused onhaving administrative tasks performed at the level closest to the need, not allministry decisions. We are sorry for this confusion and take our share of theresponsibility for it. You will notice it is addressed in further documents.