Thread by @ArlieColes

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo Good questions; short 🧵incoming. Here is the canon on inhibition of the archbishop. Note two things:
1) The Dean (Bp Ray Sutton) is the one who decides to inhibit; and
2) He would also need the additional consent of 4/5 of the seniormost bishops in the College.

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo Here's the canon regulating all inhibitions (including of the archbishop). A cleric can be inhibited at any time if the inhibiter "believes, on reasonable grounds," that the cleric has committed presentable behavior & that the inhibition is in the best interests of the church. 2/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo An inhibition can come "pending" essentially any element of the disciplinary process; so my read is that, no, whether a Board of Inquiry is going or not is not a blocker to inhibition, if Bp Ray Sutton + 4/5 of the seniormost bishops desired to inhibit Abp Wood. 3/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo Also relevant: Bp Sutton has recused himself from taking any action as Dean in the Wood disciplinary matter, presumably to include inhibition. Instead, ACNA says that he appointed Bp Dobbs to appoint 3 bishops who will collectively act as Dean for him. 4/
anglicanchurch.net/news-and-updat…

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo Now, reading the letter of this text, it speaks only about Sutton's stated recusal from Dean duties relating to "Abp Wood's Board of Inquiry & any subsequent disciplinary process that may result." Sutton may or may not view himself as keeping power to inhibit initially or not. 5/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo But two more things need to be said about this. One: if Sutton views himself as having ceded power to inhibit as Dean to this 3-bishop panel, it is unclear what overlap this 3-bishop panel might have with the 4/5 seniormost bishops whose consent is required. 6/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo The identities of the bishops on the 3-bishop panel isn't known at this time; it's not even clear that they have been selected yet. It is also not clear what ought to happen if there is this overlap. 7/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo Two, and more generally: this recusal chain is extracanonical, meaning it is not provided for in the canons but is rather a series of ad-hoc decisions by the relevant bishops that they may or may not have legal authority to make. 8/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo This leads me back to your second original question about Abp Wood's paid temp leave. This leave is also extracanonical. That does not necessarily mean it is illegal, but it means that the canons do not describe it, and that the decisions are being made ad-hoc by others. 9/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo For this reason, imo, the provincial office has aimed to shore up the question of "by what authority is this done?" by stating that the College of Bishops and the Executive Committee have approved the Abp going on leave and Bps Sutton + Dobbs stepping into his place. 10/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo Still, there is no canon regulating the situation, and likewise there is no canon regulating its end. Could Wood return at any time to the duties that he has stepped away from, on terms not guided by canon by decided on ad-hoc by other provincial arms? 11/

@vermeerlight @AcnaTruth @ACNAtoo With an inhibition, the answer would be (imo) a clear no, by canon. Without one, there is no canonical map to help answer the question, because the initial decisions were made ad-hoc by bodies without explicitly stated authority to make them. 12/