D065 Study Canons on Canonical Residence
Cure and canonical residence are the tools used to determine the membership, rights, and duties of clergy within a given diocese and their relationship with their bishops. The concepts are inconsistently defined within the canons and the canons are inconsistently applied across the Episcopal Church. This leads to confusion and frustration within the culture of a diocese and its governance, as well as the potential mistreatment of clergy accepting a call in a new diocese. For the good order and welfare of the church, review and standardization is needed on these policies and definitions.
This resolution directs the Standing Commission on Structure, Governance, Constitution, and Canons to review the matter and make suggestions for consistency and clarity to the next General Convention. This resolution also requests the House of Bishops reflect on the implicit theology present in the current range of practices.
Background issues
Cure is used in a number of dioceses' canons and policies to determine who is a member of a diocese or eligible to become canonically resident within a diocese. The references to Cure within the canons touch on geography, parishes, and employment, however the relationship between these concepts and the cure of souls is poorly understood. The closest to a definition for cure is indexed as Canon I.13, which describes a scenario of a single cure with congregations in multiple jurisdictions and where the cleric should then be able to vote, based on canonical residence, and the bounds of a Parochial Cure being the limits of a civil division of a geographical area.
This seems an ancient concept, celebrated in the Tyng case of 1869, but not nearly as old of a concept as that memorialized in III.8.7.3, which White & Dykman state goes back to the Council of Chalcedon: the requirement that before being ordained to the priesthood, the person to be so ordained shall be appointed to serve in a Parochial Cure or equivalent, in which they can exercise their ministry.
Is the requirement for having a cure of souls to be in a place? Or is the requirement to be in charge of a place? Either way, cure seems tied to a particular location within a diocese, whereas the alternatives preceding ordination laid out in this canon (missionary, chaplain, etc) are more transitory in nature and perhaps not in a particular place.
Canonical residence both determines eligibility to vote in conventions and also to whom a cleric is under authority for purposes of discipline. Many dioceses make who is a clergy member of their convention or who can vote straightforwardly dependent on canonical residence even though the process for becoming canonically resident may not be clear cut. Others add a dependency on Cure or some sort of active ministry. The references to Canonical Residence predominantly speak to how it is transferred via letters dimissory, for deacons (III.7.6), priests (III.9.4 and III.9.5), and bishops (III.12.9.i and III.12.9.j), or in the case of Federal Chaplains, how it is not transferred (III.9.3.d). This too, is a concept tied to a particular location, a diocese.
Notably, the license to officiate from III.9.7.b.2 is needed for officiating temporarily, but was this intended for use when officiating in a diocese for decades? Further complicating when it comes to treating clergy equally, a cleric newly joining the denomination becomes Canonically Resident immediately as they need to get enrolled in CPG. Presentation and acceptance of letters dimissory is not presented as optional, but some bishops do not follow canonical expectations or add additional stipulations such as only if the cleric is employed or only if in charge of a congregation.
In the scenarios listed in the canons when canonical residence is not to be transferred to match legal residence, it is for reasons of leaving ecclesiastical employment, ecclesiastical employment of a transitory nature as in the above alternatives to Parochial Cure, the cleric having an allegation which would result in disciplinary proceedings made against them within three months, or the cleric having been refused the ordination process in a diocese getting ordained in another and then attempting to return to the diocese which had denied them.
Explanation
Cure and canonical residence are the tools used to determine the membership, rights, and duties of clergy within a given diocese and their relationship with their bishops. The concepts are inconsistently defined within the canons and the canons are inconsistently applied across the Episcopal Church. This leads to confusion and frustration within the culture of a diocese and its governance, as well as the potential mistreatment of clergy accepting a call in a new diocese. For the good order and welfare of the church, review and standardization is needed on these policies and definitions.
This resolution directs the Standing Commission on Structure, Governance, Constitution, and Canons to review the matter and make suggestions for consistency and clarity to the next General Convention. This resolution also requests the House of Bishops reflect on the implicit theology present in the current range of practices.
Background issues
Cure is used in a number of dioceses' canons and policies to determine who is a member of a diocese or eligible to become canonically resident within a diocese. The references to Cure within the canons touch on geography, parishes, and employment, however the relationship between these concepts and the cure of souls is poorly understood. The closest to a definition for cure is indexed as Canon I.13, which describes a scenario of a single cure with congregations in multiple jurisdictions and where the cleric should then be able to vote, based on canonical residence, and the bounds of a Parochial Cure being the limits of a civil division of a geographical area.
This seems an ancient concept, celebrated in the Tyng case of 1869, but not nearly as old of a concept as that memorialized in III.8.7.3, which White & Dykman state goes back to the Council of Chalcedon: the requirement that before being ordained to the priesthood, the person to be so ordained shall be appointed to serve in a Parochial Cure or equivalent, in which they can exercise their ministry.
Is the requirement for having a cure of souls to be in a place? Or is the requirement to be in charge of a place? Either way, cure seems tied to a particular location within a diocese, whereas the alternatives preceding ordination laid out in this canon (missionary, chaplain, etc) are more transitory in nature and perhaps not in a particular place.
Canonical residence both determines eligibility to vote in conventions and also to whom a cleric is under authority for purposes of discipline. Many dioceses make who is a clergy member of their convention or who can vote straightforwardly dependent on canonical residence even though the process for becoming canonically resident may not be clear cut. Others add a dependency on Cure or some sort of active ministry. The references to Canonical Residence predominantly speak to how it is transferred via letters dimissory, for deacons (III.7.6), priests (III.9.4 and III.9.5), and bishops (III.12.9.i and III.12.9.j), or in the case of Federal Chaplains, how it is not transferred (III.9.3.d). This too, is a concept tied to a particular location, a diocese.
Notably, the license to officiate from III.9.7.b.2 is needed for officiating temporarily, but was this intended for use when officiating in a diocese for decades? Further complicating when it comes to treating clergy equally, a cleric newly joining the denomination becomes Canonically Resident immediately as they need to get enrolled in CPG. Presentation and acceptance of letters dimissory is not presented as optional, but some bishops do not follow canonical expectations or add additional stipulations such as only if the cleric is employed or only if in charge of a congregation.
In the scenarios listed in the canons when canonical residence is not to be transferred to match legal residence, it is for reasons of leaving ecclesiastical employment, ecclesiastical employment of a transitory nature as in the above alternatives to Parochial Cure, the cleric having an allegation which would result in disciplinary proceedings made against them within three months, or the cleric having been refused the ordination process in a diocese getting ordained in another and then attempting to return to the diocese which had denied them.