Am I missing something?

[alixtii]

New York Times: We should point out that you were deposed from ministry of the Episcopal Church by the presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, after you threatened to have your diocesein Pittsburgh secede.
Robert Duncan: That was a year ago, but what’s interesting is that virtually no one in the Anglican world accepted that sentence. Within two weeks of being deposed, I was received at Lambeth Palace in London by the archbishop of Canterbury, who continues to consider me a bishop. (Source)

Of course he's still a bishop. It's disingenuous to imply that ++Schori or anyone else would think anything else. ++Schori stripped him of his position within the Episcopal Church. I don't know of anyone who thinks that she would have the authority to strip him of his position in the historical episcopate, and to imply otherwise strikes me as downright dishonest.

But I don't actually know how ++Schori or anyone else sees things, or how the canons of the church are actually written. (And I don't care enough about canon law to look into it.) So I could be wrong.

Comments

Re: I don't usuall chime in on this sort of stuff...

[essene.livejournal.com]

When a priest or a bishop is "defrocked" which is what happened to him; the marriages, baptisms and other sacraments that he ALREADY perfomed before he was deposed, are still valid.

However, any he has done after his being deposed are NOT. As his consecration HAS been effectively undone permanently within the TEC. (from the point of his deposition on)

The above there is what my pocket priest (who is on the phone with me by matter of coincidence when I opened up your response to my comment) said after I read the post and subsequent exchanges to her--isn't that nice how that worked out.

If you want the actual canon that verifies any of this, I can ask her that later...