Bishops seek equality and flexibility in Title IV

The House of Bishops adopted another set of resolutions on June 26 to amend the canons regarding the discipline of clergy, including a resolution aimed at preventing conflicts of interest when receiving complaints.

The bishops approved an amended version of Resolution A053, which requires each diocese to have at least one intake officer who is not directly employed or otherwise compensated by the diocese where the case is pending.

Under Title IV of the Church’s canons, intake officers serve as a complainant’s first point of contact with the Title IV process. How intake officers handle this first step is considered critical when hearing a complainant, and their report serves as the basis for the decision to proceed with the process or recommend dismissing the case.

The amendment to A053 – which requires at least one non-employee intake officer per diocese – was seen as a middle ground compared to the original Title IV Disciplinary Canons Commission resolution, which sought to prohibit anyone employed by the diocese from serve. as an intake employee.

The Right Reverend Robert Fitzpatrick, Bishop of Hawaii and a member of the committee, spoke in favor of the resolution in its original form, saying it is “the ideal” for avoiding perceived or real bias in the intake process.

“The hope is to demonstrate that there is no conflict of interest and no insider trading,” Fitzpatrick said.

Others questioned the feasibility of the requirement, especially for smaller dioceses with fewer resources.

“Our dioceses in this denomination do not have the same capacity to fully implement Title IV in its most idealized form,” said the Rt. Rev. Nicholas Knisely of Rhode Island.

The Rt. The Rev. Frank Logue, bishop of Georgia, proposed the amendment to give dioceses more flexibility.

“It is important … that we honor what our church expects of us and that we can create a critical distance so that we can be seen as fair,” Logue said. “It is also important that we conduct this process in a professional manner and in a timely manner, and I believe this middle ground will allow us to do that.”

The bishops also approved Resolution A052, which amends the canons to offer a restoration covenant as a possible outcome of mediation in the Title IV process.

Fitzpatrick said the goal is to provide more opportunities for a pastoral response without escalating a case to a hearing or mediation.

“We often hear that the difficulty is that under Title IV it seems like everything that is presented immediately becomes something that almost requires a process,” he said. “This is the opportunity for bishops to have other ways to respond pastorally with another language so that we can respond to… those complaints that do not rise to the level of ‘inappropriate behavior’.”

Bishops also passed D053, which requires vacancies on church disciplinary boards to be filled within 60 days. The Rt. The Rev. Susan Haynes, chair of the Title IV Disciplinary Canons Commission, said the resolution aims to address the problem of vacancies that last for months or even years.

Bishops also passed A057, which brings an order or agreement regarding the suspension of a bishop more in line with that of priests and deacons, making termination of the pastoral relationship the standard in both cases. Other resolutions passed on June 26 seek to address delays and communication issues in the Title IV process.

In addition, the bishops approved A147, which calls for an investigation into how to address lay elected officials who face credible allegations of misconduct. It asks the committee to make recommendations for possible canonical changes to allow for the suspension or dismissal of officials in such situations.

Article X

The House of Bishops also approved Resolution A226, a first reading of an amendment that aims to clarify portions of Article .

The Rt. Reverend Dr. Justin Holcomb, Bishop of Central Florida, said the resolution was “the culmination of the work” that began at the 2018 General Convention on the issue of commemorating the Book of Common Prayer.

“We have a term that has been quite fluid and flexible that now has a definition,” Holcomb said. “That term needed a practical and clear definition, and so until this resolution ‘commemoration’ remained undefined for me and for those in my deputation. And now we have ‘authorized for use on any service’. That is wonderfully clear.”