"What finally took the day was that if Jesus himself came down and said that everything Charles Bennison did was outstanding, I would have still voted for him to step aside because of the trust issue--I think it's become paralyzing (to the diocese)," Wood said in an interview shortly after the vote.

In response to rumors that such a request for his resignation might be put forth at the Diocesan Convention last November, the bishop said in his address that if the Convention felt he was not leading the diocese effectively and asked him to resign, he would pray about the request, and, if he felt it were God's will, he would do so.

Wood said that the Standing Committee vote was, at least in part, a response to "his suggestion at Convention" regarding prayerful consideration.

"Some people think he's a demon, some think he's a pretty good guy, but no one thinks he can continue in this current situation," Wood said. "Our duty (was) to suggest the best course for the diocese, which is, we believe, for him to step aside."

But in a letter to clergy and lay leaders, on January 26 the bishop said he did not feel that his leaving was in the best interests of the diocese.

"Fundamental to our understanding of what it means to be the Body of Christ, the church, is the conviction that disagreements are not a cause for the dissolution of our relationships with one another established in baptism and ordination," he said.

After it informed him of its action, the bishop called a meeting of the Standing Committee on January 30 and met with the deans on January 31.

It was then decided, with a push from Bennison, to initiate a process of reconciliation calling on Bishop Clayton Matthews, the Presiding Bishop's pastor of bishops who deals in conflict situations. He met with Bennison and the Standing Committee on February 21 in order to establish a year-long process of reconciliation.

Writing in the March issue of the Pennsylvania Episcopalian (the wraparound to Episcopal Life, the national church's official newspaper), Bennison admitted that the divisions in the diocese "are serious", but opined that the division was between Diocesan Convention and Diocesan Council.

"That the Convention did not approve it demonstrates an apparent disagreement between the representatives of the parishes elected to the separate bodies - the lay and clergy deputies at Convention and the lay and clergy representatives on Diocesan Council, all of whom represent their parishes," said Bennison.

The issue is over money.

There is a division between those who believe that the diocese has more than $2.6 million of unrestricted net assets (UNA) available to advance its initiatives in congregational, camping, campus, and cathedral ministries, and those who think that funds already expended were spent contrary to canonically-defined restrictions and must be restored.

Because the bishop is at the center of the church's polity, and because of the serious divisions the bishop was asked to resign.

But another issue surfaced and that was the continued employment of Bill Bullitt as the diocesan chancellor and friend of Charles Bennison. The Standing Committee had repeatedly over three months, (November, December and January) refused to reappoint him and Bennison had not acted to find his replacement.

Bennison argued that Bullitt was "one of the most widely-respected chancellors in the Episcopal Church and had served the diocese on a pro-bono basis for more than 15 years."

Bennison praised Bullitt's legal alacrity, saying that the diocese had spent $320,000 in its legal fight to retain the property of St. James the Less, in East Falls, Philadelphia, forcing the Anglo-Catholic rector Fr. David Ousley and most of the congregation to worship elsewhere.

"Without Bill Bullitt's generous offering of his legal expertise and wisdom, the costs in the case would have multiplied considerably," said Bennison.

But some troubling questions remain.

What does Bennison mean by saying that Bullitt works "pro bono"? (Bullitt is not a trial lawyer or a litigator). And what about the law firm of Drinker Biddle that Bullitt works for. What did that firm charge in the St. James the Less case? Furthermore what has the law firm charged in the two cases still under litigation of Fr. David Moyer? What has the Diocese' paid in legal fees in the case where the Diocese Insurance Company is suing to cancel insurance coverage in the two Moyer cases? And, we must ask, where do these legal fees appear (if at all) in the Diocesan financial statements?

The Diocesan canons say that the Chancellor is the lawyer for both the Bishop and the Standing Committee. How can anyone serve as Chancellor when his (or her) two "clients" have conflicting objectives?

Bullitt doesn't charge for his advice but his law firm charges for the consequences of his advice and while his law firm "won" resulting in a closed school and an empty church in the case of St. James the Less, they have failed, over the course of two years, to dislodge Fr. Moyer from his parish.

In the Bishop's Message under the banner of "The Ministry of Reconciliation", Bennison said his saying "no" to the Standing Committee's request to go was in the best interests of the diocese. "If the Standing Committee members' sense of the diocese's best interests is in contrast to mine, it may be because we have varying visions for our diocese."

Perhaps, but there is one vision that neither side seems to have, and that is for a clear, explicit, nuts-n-bolts understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ, a gospel of transformation not inclusion.

And what truly compounds the tragedy is that at no time were the bishop's heretical and idiotic-like utterances comparing the words of the four Gospels to the words on the Soviet War Memorial in Berlin/suggesting a Visigoth marriage rite/comparing the growth in the African churches to the rise of the Nazi party, etc. etc., utterances that many consider grounds for his dismissal. When Woods was asked by VirtueOnline about Bennison's more bizarre theological pronouncements, such as the church wrote the bible and can therefore rewrite it, that Jesus is "a Christ" but not the Christ; and that Jesus "winked at sin," with Bennison doubting the "historical accuracy" of the four gospels, he replied, "We are not doctrinal watch dogs."

When the year of "reconciliation" is up, the odds are high that Bennison will survive. If he goes, there is always the possibility they might get someone worse - an avowed sodomite perhaps. For the moment he remains a lame duck bishop, and for the handful of remaining orthodox priests that might just be the best news of all.

END