Fort Worth 7 indicted on charges of failure to inform on other bishops

8 violations of the canons alleged

November 13, 2012
By George Conger

The episcopal defendants in the Fort Worth 7 case have been charged with fraud, financial misconduct and failing to inform on their fellow bishops who held opinions on church order contrary to those advocated by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.

In an email dated 2 Oct 2012 seen by Anglican Ink the Fort Worth 7 were informed of the specific canonical violations they had committed by filing an amicus brief in the Fort Worth case before the Texas Supreme Court.

The intake officer for the House of Bishops, the Rt. Rev. F. Clayton Matthews told the seven:

"The complaints were filed by the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Fort Worth and Mr. Paul Ambos, a member in good standing of Christ Church, New Brunswick, New Jersey and a Deputy to the 77th General Convention from the Diocese of New Jersey. They allege you violated Canons IV.3.1, and Canons IV.4.Sec1(c),(e),(g),(f),(h)(6),(h)(8), and possibly IV.4.Sec.1(h)(2).” the rest

...On 19 Oct 2012, Bishop Matthews increased the list of defendants by two, adding two bishops to the defendants’ list for having signed an affidavit used by the breakaway diocese of Quincy. The ten defendants: The Rt Rev. Peter H. Beckwith, the Rt Rev Maurice M. Benitez, the Rt Rev John W. Howe, the Rt Rev Paul E. Lambert, the Rt Rev William H. Love, the Rt Rev D. Bruce MacPherson, the Rt Rev Daniel H. Martins, the Rt. Rev. Edward L. Salmon, Jr, and the Rt Rev James M. Stanton were told that the “Reference Panel unanimously decided according to IV. 6.sec.8 that the complaint will proceed” with “Conciliation pursuant to Canon IV.10.”

One of the accused told Anglican Ink that it was “intriguing that one party to a dispute (Katharine Jefferts Schori) should be able to determine that the other party (the Seven Bishops) has committed an offense by disagreeing with her.”

Canon lawyer Allan Haley has noted the procedures used to investigate and try the bishops violate natural justice and U.S. legal procedures. He argued that it was axiomatic that an investigator not be a judge of his case or for a complainant be the judge of her own cause...