Greetings in Christ Jesus, our Shepherd!
 
I come to you as your brother who serves you and is deeply committed to our constitutional mandate: “the Bishop is entrusted to maintain, protect, and defend the continuity of the Gospel and Catholic Tradition and to foster the unity of the Body of Christ. This ministry is built upon the three charisms of: teaching, leading, and sanctifying. Therefore, the role of the Bishop is exercised in personal, collegial, and communal ways to witness to and safeguard the unity and apostolicity of the Church."[i].
And so my service to you is one rooted in the preaching of the Good News, assuring an uninterrupted connection to our Catholic tradition and safeguarding our unity in faith and relationship to one another in Christ.
 
Our Diocese is embarking upon what may first appear to be uncharted waters in a process of discernment and discovery of our future direction in communion with like-minded churches. This is a historical moment as we will select and call forth one from among us along with those to whom we aggregate with locally who will serve as our Bishop.  This historical moment in our Diocese is not uncharted but, in fact, clearly given to us in Sacred Scripture, our Catholic tradition and the current Constitution and Norms of our Diocese.  My desire is to reflect with you the Church’s story in its earliest centuries about the vital participation and voice of each person in the selection of bishops and to strongly encourage you to look to our own Diocese’s moment in its story.  In my ministry to you as bishop, I am concerned that we undertake this process with fidelity to our Catholic tradition and embrace of our Constitution’s letter and spirit.
 
Recognizing its need for leaders, the early Christian community elected them from its members. Thus, by casting lots Matthias was chosen to replace Judas[ii].  The Seven, traditionally regarded as the first deacons, were also elected, though we do not know exactly how[iii].  None of the earliest ministers of the Church was a bishop in the sense that we understand that office today. St. Paul described a variety of ministries that eventually evolved into the offices of priest and bishop. Those terms were used interchangeably in the New Testament to mean those in charge of a particular church. The Pastoral Epistles to Timothy[iv] and Titus[v] dating from the latter part of the first century, set forth qualifications for presbyters and bishops, but used those terms without distinguishing one from the other. Later liturgical and conciliar texts often refer to the Pastoral Epistles as the ideal to which bishops should aspire. Leadership of local churches by groups of presbyters or bishops gradually gave way to the single jurisdictional episcopate that appeared at least in Asia Minor at the end of the first century, as evidenced by the letters of St. Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 107). Anicetus became the first official jurisdictional bishop in 154 C.E.  From there the idea of ministry by one bishop gradually spread throughout the Christian world.
 
Early liturgical texts testify to the election and ordination of bishops. The Didache or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, of the second century, states: “You must, then, elect for yourselves bishops and deacons who are a credit to the Lord, individuals who are gentle, generous, faithful, and well tried.” In the early third century, Hippolytus of Rome, in his Apostolic Tradition, asserted that, “The one who is ordained as a bishop, being chosen by all the people, must be irreproachable.”
 
In the middle of the third century St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage in North Africa (d. 258) emphasized that, by virtue of divine authority, the bishop should be elected by all the faithful and, that the provincial bishops, after consenting to the election, should ordain the one elected[vi]. He added that the people “have the power either of choosing worthy priests and of rejecting unworthy ones” [vii].  Speaking of the election of Cornelius as bishop of Rome, Cyprian remarked: “Cornelius was made bishop by the judgment of God and His Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy, by the vote of the people who were present, and by the college of mature priests and good people” [viii]. The inspiration of the Holy Spirit sometimes prompted a spontaneous election, as in the instance of St. Ambrose who was elected bishop of Milan in 373. Though some elections were contentious, most were probably without incident.  In these early centuries, the nominations and elections of bishops were done solely by a popular vote of all the faithful. St. Cyprian believed elections prevented unworthy persons from becoming bishops. By the middle of the third century, however, evidence shows that women were beginning to be excluded from the voting.
 
In the early fifth century Celestine I (422-432) stated emphatically: “no one who is unwanted should be made a bishop; the desire and consent of the clergy and the people and the order is required”[ix]. Not many years later Leo I the Great (440-461) declared: “the one who is to be head over all should be elected by all” [x].  He also stated: “When the election of the chief priest is being considered, the one whom the unanimous consent of the clergy and people proposes should be put forward . . . It is essential to exclude all those unwanted and unasked for, if the people are not to be crossed and end by despising or hating their bishop. If they cannot have the candidate they desire, the people may all turn away from religion unduly”[xi]. These fifth century bishops of Rome, Celestine and Leo condemned any attempt to impose a bishop without popular consent. Yet, there were attempts in this era to prevent the ordinary laymen from voting and restrict it only to the wealthy and powerful.
 
By the end of the sixth century, with the rise of feudal bishops and seeing the Church's flourishing wealth and power, secular rulers desired to influence the selection of bishops.  Participation by the laity and clergy in the selection of bishops began to erode dramatically.
 
The witness and wisdom of the ages is self-evident and indicative for our path together as a Diocese.  Our current Constitution firmly assents to our Catholic tradition and mandates our honor of it: As a consequence of the basic human right of participation in self-governance, all Catholics have the right to a voice in decisions that affect them, including the choosing of their leaders, and a duty to exercise those rights responsibly [xii].

We can be easily distracted from the treasure of our Catholic tradition and its witness by the ways of our North American culture of corporate business.  Corporate process is composed of a number of people who are used to interview candidates for a position.  It is a classic task of a search committee to search through resumes and conduct interviews for the position of executive director or CEO.  In this model three candidates are the result of sifting through all applicants.  Those three candidates are then presented to the board of directors, who chooses one for the job.  This is not our model in the Synodal Catholic Diocese of the Southeast.  We are synodal [xiii], which requires that the three voices of laity, clergy and bishop(s) come to consensus in major decisions, such as the choice of Bishop.  Our Diocesan Norm 67 calls for a wide vote that includes as many of the faithful as possible to elect a bishop.  We need to exercise our right and responsibility to prayerfully discern and name candidates to be considered for the election as our next Bishop.  Without your informed and conscientious participation, any process for such will be flawed because it is not faithful to our synodal life in communion with one another.  Active participation in the process helps to determine the sensus fidelium [xiv] of our Diocese and its communion with others.  Let the people speak!

We are best a Local Church when all three voices of our synodal life are speaking and working together. It is then that the Holy Spirit reveals Herself in all that we need to continue on our journey together in communion.

With gratitude to God for you, I remain faithfully yours, in Christ.

 _______________________
[i] Constitution 2.2.J.iii

[ii] Acts 1:15-26.  Before the election of Matthias "Peter stood in the midst of the believers and spoke to them," and "they proposed two men" (Acts 1:18, and Acts 1:23). 

[iii] Acts 6:1-6.  In regard to the election of Stephen, "The twelve gathered all the disciples together" and instructed them to "choose seven men from among you full of the Spirit and of wisdom." "What they [the twelve] said pleased the whole community..." (Acts 6:2,3,5) 

[iv] 1 Timothy 3:1-7; 5:17-19

[v]  Titus1:5-9

[vi] Epistle 67

[vii] Epistle 67.3

[viii] Epistle 55.8.  Cyprian understood the electoral process to include four dynamic components: the "judicium" (judgment: choice or selection of candidates), the "testimonium" (testimony about the worthiness of candidates), the "suffragium" or election, and the "consensus," or acceptance.  The "judicium Dei" (judgment of God) required both the "judgment of the bishops" and the "judgment of all."  (Fitzgerald, 1998)

[ix] Epistolae 4.5, PL 50:434-35

[x] Epistolae 10.6 PL 54:634

[xi] Epistolae 14.5, PL 54:673

[xii] Constitution 1.12.B.vi

[xiii] Constitution 4

[xiv] “Sense of the faithful,” an understanding of what the Christian people believe, accept, and reject. It is here, the sensus fidelium, wherein resides the promise of Christ to protect us from error with the guidance of the Spirit. Bishops have taught what to believe, accept, and reject, but always with acceptance or a corrective response by theologians and the faithful even from the very beginning. (Acts 15)

“They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship,
to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (Acts 2:42).
 
Dear Sisters and Brothers in Christ,
 
The Local Church has been historically understood as comprising the bishop, laity, and clergy of a specific geographical area, in accord with the ancient Catholic tradition – an understanding of the Church which is embraced by our Synodal Catholic Diocese of the Southeast. The Local Church is constituted whole, full and complete with these three elements – yet remains part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church (marked as such, which is rightly called a “communion.”) “There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.” (Ephesians 4:5-6)
 
Local Churches are “in communion” with one another.  With the bishop and laity the local Church is fully constituted – and in relation to other fully constituted local Churches becomes what has been historically called an “eparchy” (in Greek) – or the familiar term, diocese. So a diocese is correctly called “the Church,” for it is comprised of all the elements of “the Church.” No local faith community is complete without its bishop – the successor of the apostles, elected by the people of that diocese and ordained to that holy order of bishop by other bishops who share in the historic collegial apostolic succession of the Church.  Also, no bishop is complete without the gathering in of faith communities around him/her.
 
It is important to note here that, in our Diocesan Constitution and Norms, a bishop serves a term when elected to be the bishop of the diocese. However, her/his sacramental holy order as bishop is permanent, even after she/he is no longer the bishop (ordinary) of the diocese – just as a priest remains a priest even after her/his term ends as the pastor of a parish. For Catholics, the sacrament of holy orders is permanent.
 
In the diocese, faith communities (parishes, religious orders, and ministries) experience the presence of the Risen Christ among us in the proclamation of the Word of the Gospel – especially at the Eucharist – and in the celebration of the sacred Mysteries (the Sacraments). In the diocese, the faithful gather as a Holy Synod to discern the call of the Spirit. In the diocese, we find the people of God, the baptized laity – from whom are called those ordained to minister in the specific holy orders of deacon, presbyter and subsequently, bishop. These are all constitutive elements of the fullness of the Catholic Church in a given locality or region.
 
We have experienced remarkable growth. In the face of such growth, this understanding of the ancient Catholic structure and polity is being examined and tested in the very existence of our Diocese. It is our intention to share with you our understanding of our continuing development.
 
So much of the history of the Church chronicles its splintering and division into denominations that do not share the same ecclesiology – that is, the same theological understanding of “Church.” In the early centuries, the Church showed a sense of inclusivity in its structure, as the laity and clergy elected their bishops, and were consulted in the decisions of their bishops. This is affirmed in the teaching of Pope Leo I (d. 461 CE), who stated that “the one who is to govern all should be chosen by all.” This inclusive posture is demonstrated even earlier by Saint Cyprian (d. 258 CE), who wrote “I have made it a rule, ever since the beginning of my episcopate, to make no decision merely on the strength of my own personal opinion without consulting you [the priests and deacons] and without the approbation of the people.”
 
As the centuries continued, the Church was influenced by the political forces of civil government, until the point of its abandonment of this early formula of the consultation of the people in the decisions of their bishop. This unfortunate development was further complicated in Western Christianity as an imperial bureaucracy developed that continued to acquire power and centralize the administration of the Church in Rome.
 
Previous to this rise of the centralized control of the Western Church, the bishop of Rome enjoyed the position of being the first among equals among the bishops of the Western Church. As the Patriarch of the West, the bishop of Rome was seen as the spokesperson of the Western Churches, and even as the spokesperson and senior bishop of the universal Church. Rome became the yardstick of faith, by which the orthodoxy of other Churches was measured. Rome was the court of appeal to which other Churches appealed in disputed issues.
 
Yet many of the bishops of Rome sought an even more powerful role, as was shown in the administration of medieval popes – such as the bureaucracy established by Gregory VII in the eleventh century. This moved the bishop of Rome from the role as arbiter of the Catholic tradition to that of administrator for the entire Western Church. Rome took upon itself the appointment of the diocesan bishops for all the Roman Catholic dioceses of the world with one exception.

In the year 1145, Eugene III granted the See of Utrecht the right of election of its own bishops. The Fourth Council of the Lateran confirmed this grant in 1215. In 1520, Pope Leo X in the decree, Debitum Pastoralis, granted to the See of Utrecht the right of adjudication of its own affairs without reference to the tribunals of Rome. The theological faculties of Paris and the Louvain, in 1717, verified this privilege, known as the Leonine Privilege.  The difficulties resulting from the subsequent activities of the counter-reformers caused the Ancient Catholic Church of the Netherlands to become an autonomous part of the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.
 
This bureaucracy outside of the See of Utrecht further distanced the people from their participation in the processes of the Local Church, as the bishop of Rome gained more authority over the workings of local dioceses, as well as the internal workings of religious orders, religious schools and other Catholic institutions. Of course, such structures of Church authority mirrored the imperial structures of civil government, as European kings and emperors consolidated their power.
 
Prior to this rise of the papacy, provincial synods met with regularity, bishops consulted with the local “chapters” of the clergy, and the people had some voice (even if only by acclamation) in the choice of the bishop. This accumulation of power by the Roman Church culminated in the sixteenth century with the bishop of Rome – and the curial bureaucracy of the Roman Church – supplanting the authority of even an ecumenical council, so that after the Council of Trent there were no more ecumenical councils for three hundred years.

Now our own beloved Diocese is engaged in its own growth, and is seeking to revive the polity and culture of the ancient Catholic Church as part and parcel of our identity, an identity that has always been ours as a Diocese. We are learning the lesson that the efforts of self-determination must be affirmed, while carefully maintaining the unity of the apostolic faith, the sacramental life, and the structures and practices of the Catholic Church developed in the early part of the first millennium.

We place ourselves at the feet of the Lord, seeking the wisdom and light of the Holy Spirit, as we discern and seek communion with the Old Catholic Church, Province of the United States.  They are sisters and brothers of like mind and heart in their understanding and practice of being Church together.  The Old Catholic tradition has always upheld the ancient understanding of episcopal ministry within the Local Church, a tradition that we have always maintained from the establishment of our own Diocese.  Pause can be given to any fear otherwise.

Currently, I exercise pastoral leadership among you as the one you chose in 2010 and consecrated as  Diocesan Bishop, for the proper exercise of the episcopal ministry as defined by our Constitution and Norms,  and as informed by the ancient Catholic tradition.  It is my firm conviction that the enthusiasm for the work of the Church is nurtured when the Diocese is cultivated as the basic structure of the Church – with its own synodal structure, and its own ministries, that respond to its own needs.  The autonomy of each diocese, and the collaboration of dioceses in regional efforts gave a good balance to the efforts of the early Church. This, I believe, is our primary model as a Diocese.
 
May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all.

Greetings of God's peace!

Over the past year I have great privilege to work alongside a steering committee of three other bishops of various churches.  Our goal together has been to call forth the "Catholic Bishops' Forum" (CBF), an association of various Catholic Churches who identify themselves as independent Catholic or Old Catholic.  In our work, we labored to understand what kind of churches we were calling forth for the Forum.  While, we wanted to be be the "good guys" and invite everyone, but we knew that was not a healthy or reasonable approach.  After numerous conversations together, the steering committee arrived upon a way to think about unity across the churches as a backdrop to our invitations for other bishops to join in this venture with us.   Our chair, Bishop Francis Krebs (Ecumenical Catholic Communion) put our thoughts to paper in this brief statement which follows:

"In Essentials, Unity; in Doubtful Matters, Liberty; in All Things, Charity."
John XXIII's first encyclical, Ad Petri Cathedram of 1959 included this famous quote but did not attribute it to anyone in particular.  “But the common saying, expressed in various ways and attributed to various authors, must be recalled with approval: in essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity.” (paragraph 72)

Differentiated Consensus
The following is excerpted from The Church and Ecclesial Communion, Report of the International Roman Catholic-Old Catholic Dialogue Commission (12/5/2009).  It explains how the above ancient maxim can be applied practically in dialogue. 
6.1 On the method of differentiated consensus
(34) The wide-ranging consensus in the understanding and confession of the traditional catholic faith established here (cf. 26 above) was worked through methodologically according to the more recent principles of ecumenical hermeneutics. These principles are founded on the recognition that the sought-for unity in the faith does not mean uniformity, but rather a diversity in which any remaining differences beyond the fundamental consensus are not accorded church-dividing force. Accordingly the goal of dialogue is not doctrinal consensus in the form of congruence, but a differentiated consensus consisting of two components which are to be differentiated from one another:

• A clear statement on the consensus reached in the fundamental and essential content of a previously controversial doctrine.
• A declaration that and why the remaining doctrinal differences, which are also to be clearly named, can be considered admissible and thus do not call into question the consensus in the fundamentals and essentials.

The Chicago Lambeth Quadrilateral is a statement of the four Anglican essentials for a reunited Christian Church. It concerns:

1. the Scriptures,
2. Creeds,
3. Sacraments,
4. and the historic Episcopate. 

“The Five Hinges on the Door”[i]
This is a term our CBF steering committee came up with to single out essential features of being Catholic mentioned in the document Uppsala and Utrecht which paved the way to full communion between the Union of Utrecht and the Church of Sweden in 2013.  While these features do not exhaust the profound Old Catholic sense of “Catholicity,” these features do show a remarkable similarity of the Quadrilateral with the addition of the conciliar nature of the Church.

1. The Sacred Scriptures
2. The Creeds
3. The Sacraments and liturgical worship
4. The threefold Apostolic Ministry: bishop, presbyter, and deacon
5. Synodality 

With these ways of thinking about unity, in perhaps a new way as Church, we were pleased that sixteen bishops of eight jurisdictions of various independent or Old Catholic churches were able to come together in October 2018 to deepen our friendships with one another, to share our fears and dreams of coming together, and to begin to collaborate on areas of mutual concern.  What a marvelous gift of the Holy Spirit!  When we rely upon the gift of the tradition of our common Faith we can do great and wonderful things together and know God's peace deep within.  These same "hinges" are very much our own identity as Diocese.  These affirm and empower our Catholic identity as well as strengthen our confidence before others who question "What kind of Catholic are you?"  Let the door swing wide open to include all God's children as we proclaim the Holy Gospel in a world called to be divinized in Christ.

God be your strength and joy in your journey of faith in community!

[i] “As the Roman Catholic Church still determines the image of Catholic Christianity in the public consciousness, the use of the term “catholic” requires explanation. When the word is used without further qualification, it is here a phenomenological description referring to a number of aspects of theology and life which are shared by a number of churches, for example a desire to be in continuity with the church through the ages, the role of sacraments and liturgical worship, the presence of episcopal ministry etc.” [emphasis mine] Source: Utrecht and Uppsala on the Way to Communion, report from the official dialogue between the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht and the Church of Sweden, 2013, p. 6

“Episcopacy is part of the threefold apostolic ministry: bishop, presbyter (usually called priest) and deacon. This internal differentiation of the one (ordained) ministry is the outcome of developments in the first two or three centuries of the church. Though Old Catholics acknowledge the fact that this ministry underwent great fluctuations in the course of history, it is considered to be as binding as the canon of Holy Scripture, the creeds of the ancient church (ie.the Niceno-Constantinopolitan as well as the Apostolic) and the nascent conciliar system of common witness and decision-making of the church” [referred to often as synodality]. 

For nearly a year, I have had the great privilege to work alongside three other bishops to form the Catholic Bishops' Forum, a collaborative association of Independent Catholic and Old Catholic bishops.  It has been a joy to meet together, to learn more about each other and our churches, to deepen relationships, and to discover how much more we have in common with we each other than any of us might first understand.

In our work together, we sought to understand how we might call each other and others to the table for the sake of the reign of God.  How do we invite?  Whom do we invite?  A very daunting and perhaps overwhelming tasks given the sheer number in this nation of bishops, clergy, and communities who self identify as Independent Catholic or Old Catholic.  We naturally were drawn to some very sensible and welcoming principles that helped us to a living invitation to better unity with one another.  Our organizer, Bp. Francis Krebs of the Ecumenical Catholic Communion, brought our discussion to words, "Ways to Think About Unity Across Churches," which follow.

"In Essentials, Unity; in Doubtful Matters, Liberty; in All Things, Charity"
John XXIII's first encyclical, Ad Petri Cathedram of 1959 included this famous quote but did not attribute it to anyone in particular.  “But the common saying, expressed in various ways and attributed to various authors, must be recalled with approval: in essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity.” (paragraph 72)

Differentiated Consensus
The following is excerpted from The Church and Ecclesial Communion, Report of the International Roman Catholic-Old Catholic Dialogue Commission (12/5/2009).  It explains how the above ancient maxim can be applied practically in dialogue:

The wide-ranging consensus in the understanding and confession of the traditional catholic faith established here (cf. 26 above) was worked through methodologically according to the more recent principles of ecumenical hermeneutics. These principles are founded on the recognition that the sought-for unity in the faith does not mean uniformity, but rather a diversity in which any remaining differences beyond the fundamental consensus are not accorded church-dividing force. Accordingly the goal of dialogue is not doctrinal consensus in the form of congruence, but a differentiated consensus consisting of two components which are to be differentiated from one another:

• A clear statement on the consensus reached in the fundamental and essential content of a previously controversial doctrine.
• A declaration that and why the remaining doctrinal differences, which are also to be clearly named, can be considered admissible and thus do not call into question the consensus in the fundamentals and essentials.

The Chicago Lambeth Quadrilateral
The Statement of the four Anglican essentials for a reunited Christian Church. It concerns:

1. the Scriptures,
   
2. Creeds,
   
3. Sacraments,
   
4. and the historic episcopate.  
   

“The Five Hinges on the Door”[i]
This is a term our steering committee, my fellow bishops, came up with to single out essential features of being Catholic mentioned in the document Uppsala and Utrecht which paved the way to full communion between the Union of Utrecht and the Church of Sweden in 2013.  While these features do not exhaust the profound Old Catholic sense of “Catholicity,” these features do show a remarkable similarity of the Quadrilateral with the addition of the conciliar nature of the Church.

1. The Sacred Scriptures
   
2. The Creeds
3. The Sacraments and liturgical worship
   
4. The threefold Apostolic Ministry: bishop, presbyter, and deacon
   
5. Synodality."
   

These "hinges" open wide the path before us as we work to fulfill the prayer of Jesus for unity (John 17:20-23).  We are able to recognize and celebrate differences for they weave a rich fabric of diversity made strong by the hinge threads of Faith.  We need not fear any longer, but trust and walk forward with the confidence given us in Christ.  We "are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God's people and also members of his household" (Ephesians 2:19).  May we embrace the path of unity in Christ, becoming the living invitations, persevering in the way of love. 

God's peace and every blessing, in Christ!

[i] “As the Roman Catholic Church still determines the image of catholic Christianity in the public consciousness, the use of the term “catholic” requires explanation. When the word is used without further qualification, it is here a phenomenological description referring to a number of aspects of theology and life which are shared by a number of churches, for example a desire to be in continuity with the church through the ages, the role of sacraments and liturgical worship, the presence of episcopal ministry etc.”  Source: Utrecht and Uppsala on the Way to Communion, report from the official dialogue between the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht and the Church of Sweden, 2013, p. 6

“Episcopacy is part of the threefold apostolic ministry: bishop, presbyter (usually called priest) and deacon. This internal differentiation of the one (ordained) ministry is the outcome of developments in the first two or three centuries of the church. Though Old Catholics acknowledge the fact that this ministry underwent great fluctuations in the course of history, it is considered to be as binding as the canon of Holy Scripture, the creeds of the ancient church (ie.the Niceno-Constantinopolitan as well as the Apostolic) and the nascent conciliar system of common witness and decision-making of the church” [referred to often as synodality].