Center Aisle is an opinion journal offered by the Diocese of Virginia as a gift to General Convention. We offer analysis and opinions from a variety of sources that reflect the transformational center of our church.

Center Aisle home

In the federal judicial system, judges take two oaths, one to uphold the federal Constitution, and the second, to do equal right between rich and poor. The second oath is biblical (Deut. 1:17). Chief Justice John Roberts expressed the ideal at his confirmation hearings, when he insisted that a judge sworn to uphold the law must act very differently than a politician.

This ideal matters most in turbulent times, when minority views are despised. The law insists that even in such times, punishing someone for an offense requires strict compliance with procedural protections: rules of evidence, burdens of proof, statutes of limitation, and advance definition of the proscribed conduct. History is littered with injustices occurring when these protections were short circuited and false accusations made. Think of Our Lord's trial; think of Joseph, falsely accused by Potiphar's wife.

Our church is in great turbulence. There are clergy in most dioceses whose views on controversial issues are far out of step with their bishops. On the HODB list, ordained clergy and commissioned lay leaders often hurl vicious charges and question each other's psychological health.

Yet in the proposed Title IV disciplinary canon revision, we would reduce the burden of proof to sustain disciplinary charges from "clear and convincing" to "preponderance of evidence." We would allow the admission of hearsay evidence more easily than we do now. Among other changes, we would define new offenses such as "exerting undue influence on or taking unfair advantage of any person," or failing to report impairment, including one's own. The net effect of the proposal would be to ease the removal of clergy.

We are now met to try to reconcile passionate factions; this is a very bad time to make it easier to bring poorly supported disciplinary charges. And as an attorney with 26 years experience, including four clergy disciplinary cases, and as a former Standing Committee president, I am convinced the proposed changes make the chances of a mistaken finding of misconduct too high, given the ruinous consequences of such a finding. These proposed disciplinary canonical changes should be defeated.