In a statement on Bishop Schofield's inhibition, the Bishop of Fort Worth, Jack Leo Iker said this, "It comes as no surprise that the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church has initiated canonical actions against the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield to remove him from office.

However, the matter is complicated by the fact that Bishop Schofield and the Diocese of San Joaquin, by constitutional action of their Convention, are no longer a part of The Episcopal Church. They now function under the authority of the Province of the Southern Cone. Disciplinary actions cannot be taken by this Province against a Bishop who is a member of another Province of the Anglican Communion."

"As a point of clarification, there is no confusion on the part of the Bishop of San Joaquin or the clergy, people, leadership, and convention of the Diocese of San Joaquin of their status. The claims of the Episcopal Church to have oversight or jurisdiction are not correct. The fact is that neither the Diocese nor Bishop John-David Schofield are part of The Episcopal Church. The Bishop is a member of the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone as of December 8th, 2007. The Diocese is a part of the Southern Cone. Neither the Presiding Bishop nor the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church have any further jurisdiction. Bishop Schofield is no longer a member of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church," said The Rev. Canon Bill Gandenberger, the bishop's Canon to the Ordinary.

The House of Bishops of TEC can indeed prevent Bishop Schofield from functioning as a Bishop in congregations of The Episcopal Church. However, they cannot invalidate his consecration as a Bishop in the Church of God, nor prevent him from functioning as such in congregations that welcome and affirm his ministry as their Bishop.

"The Bishop of San Joaquin has my friendship, my support, and my prayers during this time of turmoil in the life of our church," said Venables.

On January 11, Mrs. Katherine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church formally inhibited Bishop Schofield. In the text of the inhibition, Jefferts Schori wrote: "I hereby inhibit the said Bishop Schofield and order that from and after 5:00 p.m. PST, Friday, January 11, 2008, he cease from exercising the gifts of ordination in the ordained ministry of this Church; and pursuant to Canon IV.15, I order him from and after that time to cease all 'episcopal, ministerial, and canonical acts, except as relate to the administration of the temporal affairs of the Diocese of San Joaquin,' until this Inhibition is terminated pursuant to Canon IV.9(2) or superseded by decision of the House of Bishops."

Jefferts Schori said she acted after the Title IV Review Committee certified that Schofield had abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church.

On January 9, Upper South Carolina Bishop Dorsey Henderson, committee chair, wrote to Jefferts Schori, telling her that the nine-member committee had met that day and that a majority agreed that the documentation provided to them "demonstrated that Bishop Schofield has abandoned the communion of this Church by an open renunciation of the Doctrine, Discipline or Worship of this Church."

Bishop Schofield responded to the announcement saying that The Episcopal Church's assertion that he had abandoned the communion of this Church is an admission that TEC rejects the historical Anglican faith.

"This is why The Diocese of San Joaquin appealed to the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone of South America for emergency and temporary protection. The majority of the other provinces of the Anglican Communion hold to the traditional faith," he said.

It is the primary duty of bishops to guard the faith and Bishop Schofield has been continually discriminated against for having done so while Bishops and Archbishops around the world have affirmed not only his stance but the move to the Southern Cone. Bishop Schofield is currently a member of both the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church and the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone, not prohibited by either house.

Governing documents of TEC do not prohibit relationships between different members of the Anglican Communion, rather they encourage it. TEC's action demonstrates that there is an enormous difference between their church and most of the Anglican Communion. Again, this action is a demonstration that TEC is walking apart from the faith and its expression in morality held by the rest of the Anglican Communion. The Episcopal Church's own identity is dependent upon its relationship with the whole Anglican Communion.

TEC should consider whether it is imperiling that relationship by taking such punitive actions, concluded Schofield.

The Presiding Bishop has appointed Canon Robert Moore as an interim pastoral presence in San Joaquin to rally the remaining few parishes who wish to remain in The Episcopal Church. Bishop Schofield has repeatedly said that parishes are free to go as long as there is no financial encumbrance owing on the properties for which the diocese might be held liable.

While Bishop Schofield had been clear about his loyalty to Scripture over the authority of the Episcopal Church and has urged his diocese to consider alternative episcopal oversight he has been very clear that it is The Episcopal Church, not him, that has violated Scripture, the Lambeth Conference resolution 1:10 of 1998 and has failed to live up to the requirements of the Windsor Report.

The first section of Title IV, Canon 9 says that a bishop abandons the communion of the Episcopal Church if he or she takes one of the following actions:

* open renunciation of the Doctrine, Discipline, or Worship of the Church...

Response: Bishop Schofield has neither renounced nor abandoned the doctrine, discipline or worship of the church. He has abandoned the Episcopal Church which he believes HAS abandoned the received teaching of the church on faith and morals.

* formal admission into any religious body not in communion with the same...

Response: The Province of the Southern Cone is in formal communion with both the Archbishop of Canterbury and all the Instruments of Unity in the Anglican Communion. He has not been declared persona non grata by Dr. Williams and his invitation has not been withdrawn from the 2008 Lambeth Conference.

* exercising episcopal acts [which include primarily Holy Orders and Confirmation] in and for a religious body other than the Episcopal Church or another Church in communion with the Church so as to extend to such body Holy Orders as this Church holds them, or to administer on behalf of such religious body Confirmation without the express consent and commission of the proper authority in this Church.

Response: As Bishop Schofield is now a constituent member of the Southern Cone, he is well within his ecclesiastical rights to confirm and perform any other ecclesiastical acts at the behest and pleasure of Archbishop Venables. He is no longer under Mrs. Jefferts Schori's or the Episcopal Church's authority.

Recently, 33 Episcopal colleagues from across the Anglican Communion and across the world, saluted Bishop Schofield on the courageous decision of the Diocesan Convention of San Joaquin to take leave of The Episcopal Church and to align with the Province of the Southern Cone. "We know that decision was to a large extent the result of your tenacity and faithful leadership, and for that we give thanks to God. It has been said that you are isolated and alone. We want you and the world to know that in this decision for the faith once delivered to the saints, we stand with you and beside you. May Christ abundantly bless you and your diocese with all the gifts of the Spirit and with joy in believing."

It was the now disgraced Pennsylvania Bishop Charles Bennison who started the discredited strategy of attacking orthodox priests (and now bishops) by asserting that Fr. David Moyer had "abandoned the communion of the church".

Schofield now has two months to recant his position or renounce his orders by way of Title IV, Canon 8, Sec. 2 or Title III, Canon 12, Sec. 7. He can also declare that the Title IV's assertions are false.

Bishop Schofield will not recant his position or renounce his orders as they have been validly accepted by Archbishop Venables. He may, if he chooses, declare that the Title IV's assertions are false. On that point he would be exactly right in doing so.

END

A Statement from the Bishop of Fort Worth on Bishop Schofield's Inhibition

http://www.fwepiscopal.org/news/+schofieldinhibition.html
January 12, 2008

It comes as no surprise that the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church has initiated canonical actions against the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield to remove him from office. However, the matter is complicated by the fact that Bishop Schofield and the Diocese of San Joaquin, by constitutional action of their Convention, are no longer a part of The Episcopal Church. They now function under the authority of the Province of the Southern Cone. Disciplinary actions cannot be taken by this Province against a Bishop who is a member of another Province of the Anglican Communion.

The House of Bishops of TEC can indeed prevent Bishop Schofield from functioning as a Bishop in congregations of The Episcopal Church. However, they cannot invalidate his consecration as a Bishop in the Church of God, nor p revent him from functioning as such in congregations that welcome and affirm his ministry as their Bishop.

The Bishop of San Joaquin has my friendship, my support, and my prayers during this time of turmoil in the life of our church.

The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth

Click here for Letter of Inhibition

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/documents/Schofield_Certification.pdf