The Bishop Gives His Reasons

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on reddit
Share on whatsapp
Share on email

viagra generic prostate 0, viagra buy 0); font-family: ‘times new roman’, times;”>Bishop Laish Boyd explains the decision to remove Archdeacon Ranfurly Brown from his post: 
My Brothers and Sisters,

This missive is for your information only. It is my intention to make a number of changes in 2016 and, in that regard, I have been in discussion with persons affected. The plan is to make the first set of announcements in early to mid-February.

However, in light of recent press speculation, I thought it appropriate to inform the clergy of the following.
On Thursday, 7th January, 2016, I advised The Venerable Ranfurly Brown that I intend to appoint a new Archdeacon of the West Central Archdeaconry, and that I would announce same in early to mid-February.

As with other persons affected by my changes, I wanted to give him the courtesy of due notice. but no one else was privy to my decision with respect to the West Central Archdeaconry.

It is most unfortunate that information about this diocesan administrative matter has hit the public domain prematurely, with the accompanying embellishments and interpretations, that is, stating that the sole reason for my decision was Archdeacon’s failure to apologise to the Prime Minister. Nothing could be further from the truth. For very obvious reasons, I will not address publicly at this time the erroneous perception in the public domain by seeking to explain anything there. However, as Bishop to his clergy, I have an obligation to clarify certain matters to you. 1 trust that you would appreciate that such decisions are not made lightly and without serious thought and prayer. You have a right to know that in this matter your Bishop has not acted capriciously and not solely, or even largely, as a result of deference to the Prime Minister. This issue is far larger than that.

Over the years, the Archdeacon has committed several notable infractions; he has engaged in open disrespect for the office of Bishop, and he has been the source of words and actions that were grossly inappropriate and injudicious. These are all in the public domain and their cumulative effect is untenable. It is not an exaggeration to say that this has brought disrepute to the Church, and hurt to many of the faithful.

None of us is perfect nor do I expect perfection but, as Bishop, I no longer have confidence in him to perform the function of an Archdeacon. 

As Diocesan, I deserve to have persons in my Advisory Council who are supportive, cooperative, whose behavior represents the Office of Bishop well, and in whom I can repose confidence. I have shared my reasons with you and you as clergy may be approached by persons about this matter. While it is unwise for you to mention all of the above, for the good of the Church and its reputation we as clergy would want to advise people that “the Bishop has his reasons for his actions.” This, of course, is in keeping with Anglican polity whereby the Bishop makes certain appointments. And I believe it is true to say that all of us know the veracity of the issues and concerns I have raised.

Let us continue in prayer and in work and, of course, I crave and count on your continued support and prayers.

Yours sincerely,

The Rt. Rev’d. Laish Boyd Sr.