A Response to Mark McCall's "Is the Episcopal Church Hierarchical" from Progressive Episcopalians in Pittsburgh

We have been alerted by a group called "Progressive Episcopalians in Pittsburgh" that they are to post a response to Mr McCall's essay which appeared earlier on the ACI website. We have seen the response of Dr Gundersen, and we understand it is now before the public. It is vital that there be an opportunity for discussion of these important issues. Our comment for now is as follows. "The Anglican Communion Institute is pleased that Mark McCall's serious paper is receiving wide consideration. It should be read carefully by all who are interested in TEC's polity. Unfortunately, Dr. Gundersen has not herself read the paper with the care it requires. McCall's so-called 'fatal flaw' is actually a legal point that he discusses in his paper, the actual language Dr. Gundersen relies on in n. 44 and the legal principle behind this language at pages 9-10. Dr. Gundersen also clearly does not understand the legal meaning of subsidiarity and fails to acknowledge that supremacy was hardly an unknown concept among the Episcopal churches in 1785, the Supremacy Act and the Oath of Supremacy having been part of the law of England for over 200 hundred years. It should be emphasized that McCall's study, as he states on page one, is a legal analysis. Its proper understanding requires recognizing that legal terminology is precise and has meanings well-understood by courts and lawyers. McCall will prepare a response to Dr. Gundersen and we shall post it as soon as it is available." Biographical note: Mr. McCall's legal career was spent practicing law at the firm of Sullivan & Cromwell, a large, international law firm based in New York, where he was a partner. Sullivan & Cromwell is widely regarded as one of the preeminent law firms in the world. He was resident in the firm's New York, Washington and Paris offices and also worked extensively in London and The Hague, specializing in international litigation. He represented numerous clients over many years before the international tribunal (the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal) in The Hague that adjudicated claims arising out of the Iranian revolution and the seizing of the American hostages. He also served for three years as the administrator of an international tribunal in The Hague adjudicating a claim between a Persian Gulf state and a consortium of European companies. For many years, he represented British and European clients in United States and trans-national litigation and also advised private clients and the British government in connection with treaties and other international agreements. He took an early retirement from his firm, and is no longer affiliated with Sullivan & Cromwell.