This is the first of two articles in which we will address issues arising in South Carolina. We consider below issues of good faith and canonical integrity. In particular:

–TEC’s actions in South Carolina raise troubling questions about the good faith of many church leaders in their dealing with Bishop Lawrence, including the Presiding Bishop, the Disciplinary Board, other TEC bishops
and some diocesan clergy.
–TEC’s position is canonically incoherent; either its actions in South Carolina are in open contempt of its own canons or it has undermined the basis on which it has spent millions of dollars on lawsuits.

In a second post later this week we will consider issues of ecclesiology and pastoral care. We are concerned that: TEC is acting contrary to basic principles of Anglican ecclesiology and ancient norms of the universal church; and it is subordinating the genuine pastoral needs of its members to further doubtful litigation goals.

But we begin with a detailed summary of facts that are not widely known outside South Carolina. It is important that these be placed in the record for the maintenance of public trust. This is neither light nor pleasant reading. Please bear with us.

Read it all.

…it was extremely disturbing to learn that on Wednesday afternoon, November 7, 2012, a majority of the clergy of the Diocese of South Carolina received an email that pretended to be from the Diocese of South Carolina but in fact was not. The sender of the email was not identified beyond an email address registered to an organization in Florida named “Domain Discreet Privacy Service”. The corresponding web page is hosted by a San Francisco organization stating: “This temporary landing page will be replaced when you publish your site.”

The email was an invitation to a “Clergy Day for the Diocese,” to be hosted at Holy Communion, Charleston and presided over by Bishop. Charles von Rosenberg (A retired bishop from Tennessee).

There are several crucial facts that need to be addressed regarding this announcement.

First, this message did not come from the Diocese of South Carolina.

Read it all.

Specifically, the Supreme Court agreed to review the lower court’s ruling that held that the Diocese of Virginia and the Episcopal Church have contractual and proprietary rights in the property of the Falls Church. In addition, the Court declined to hear a cross-appeal which sought to confirm that the Diocese of Virginia and the Episcopal Church also have a trust interest in the property.

Read it all.

Read it all.

[In the 39 Articles of Religion]…Article VII… says, “… Although the Law given from God by Moses, as touching ceremonies and rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called moral.”

In other words, obey God’s law. The most sensitive issue involving the church, of course, was Gene Robinson’s election to bishop in the state of New Hampshire in 2003. Robinson was the first priest in a blessed and openly gay relationship to be ordained bishop in a major denomination believing in the historic episcopate (the collective body of all bishops of a church).

This is such a difficult conundrum, because reasonable people believe that we’re all God’s children, that no one chooses to be gay, and that no one who is gay would be excluded from heaven simply for being such. Although acceptance of this is, or at least should be, a no-brainer, there is evidence in both the Old and New Testaments clearly suggesting that gay relations are in violation of the word. By ignoring this when it comes to promoting individuals to positions of authority, whom are we trying to please: ourselves or God?

Read it all.

This points to the most troubling question of all concerning the disciplinary board’s decision. Among the new Title IV provisions is IV.4.1(f), which requires all clergy to “report to the Intake Officer all matters which may constitute an Offense.” This comes immediately after subparagraph IV.4.1(e) pertaining to property. It appears members of the disciplinary board scrutinized these matters for more than a year and concluded that Bishop Lawrence had violated certain canonical provisions, yet not one thought to comply with the canon requiring them to report this to the Intake Officer so that the normal canonical process could be used.

This is not a technical issue. Had they proceeded as required by canon ”” there is no exception for matters that might also constitute abandonment ”” they might have spared the church the havoc we are now witnessing. Title IV after all is said to be a more pastoral way of dealing with possible canonical violations. If Bishop Lawrence is alleged to have violated subparts (c), (e), and (g) of Canon IV.4.1, why did the disciplinary board not comply with subpart (f)? Why did it not comply with mandatory disciplinary procedures that might have permitted a pastoral response instead of pursuing a process designed solely to remove a bishop summarily from the rolls of the church? Having first concluded that the disputed actions were those of the diocese, not the bishop, the board must have known the consequences “abandonment” would entail.

How have Bishop Lawrence’s theological opponents reacted to these developments? One prominent assertion has been that the automatic response of the diocese triggered by the disciplinary board’s action proves that Bishop Lawrence “lied” and intended to leave all along. But this claim fails both the tests of logic and simple chronology.

Read it all.

We are grieved, however, by the attitude and actions of the leadership of The Episcopal Church and their efforts to demand canonical obedience through unjust means to their ungodly agenda. As we have made clear in the Jerusalem Declaration we reject their authority and call on them to repent and return to the Lord.

Please know that we continue to recognize you as a faithful Anglican bishop and the Diocese of South Carolina as part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Read it all.

…we know from the experience of recent years roughly how the scenario will play out: the Presiding Bishop will convene an extraordinary “convention” of “loyal Episcopalians” from within the diocese, which will announce that it is the legitimate continuing Diocese of South Carolina, and choose a Provisional Bishop. Then that bishop and diocese, along with attorneys representing the Presiding Bishop, will spend millions of dollars suing in secular courts to recover control of church buildings and financial assets. To this point, the reorganized dioceses and the Presiding Bishop have been generally successful in their legal efforts (though important cases in Texas and California remain undecided). However, there is already a history in South Carolina that heavily favors those who will continue to actually occupy those properties.

This is a very serious, and a very disturbing, turn of events. Bishop Lawrence is a longtime personal friend, and a man whose intellect, love for our Lord, and passion for the gospel is without peer. While I am not fully on board with the some of the positions taken and decisions made by the conventions of the Diocese of South Carolina, and while I could find reasons to criticize the tone of much of the rhetoric coming from their direction, I am in essential theological sympathy with the witness made by that diocese as it has attempted to remain faithful to historic Anglican”“which is to say, historic Episcopalian”“faith and practice in a time when the majority in our church appear to be turning away from that tradition. More to the point, it strains every notion of common sense to apply the charge of “abandonment” in this case. This is a provision that is in canons to make it expeditious to deal with a priest or bishop who has openly decamped to another ecclesial body, or none; a cleric who stops showing up for meetings, stops worshiping as an Episcopalian, and disavows any association with the Episcopal Church. By contrast, since I became a bishop in March of last year, Mark Lawrence has attended every meeting of the House of Bishops except one, which a great many bishops also missed because it was held in Ecuador. He was present at General Convention. He has continued to lead a diocese that uses the Episcopal Church’s Book of Common Prayer in its worship. He has abandoned nothing, and to accuse him of doing so is ludicrous on its face.

Read it all.

(Via email):

Broken bottles broken plates, Broken switches broken gates
Broken dishes broken parts, Streets are filled with broken hearts
Broken words never meant to be spoken, Everything is broken – Bob Dylan

I was saddened when I heard that the Disciplinary Board for Bishops charged the Bishop of South Carolina, Mark Lawrence, with abandoning The Episcopal Church “by an open renunciation of the Discipline of the Church.” They made that determination under Canon IV.16(A). You can read the details of this on the Episcopal News Service website and read reactions from the Diocese of South Carolina on their website. I commend both websites so you may better understand what is transpiring.

Bishop Lawrence is my friend. He has been and continues to be a good colleague of mine. I respect him as a person and as a disciple of Jesus. Our relationship has always been marked by candor, mutual support, and affection. We always have great discussions, with only occasional disagreements, on the challenges facing the Church as we engage in God’s mission. Our disagreements have only been “occasional,” because we’re united in our commitment to spread God’s Kingdom on earth and make disciples for Jesus while making a difference in God’s world.
I have prayed that the ongoing tension between Bishop Lawrence (and leaders of his Diocese) and The Episcopal Church would be resolved by other means and would come from our Anglican ethos of comprehensiveness and a generosity with those with whom we disagree. I regret that the Disciplinary Board for Bishops felt they had to act in such a way at this time. I’m not judging them harshly for I don’t know all of what they know nor was I privy to their deliberations. I simply believe that the pastoral work of grace is sometimes impeded by the application of the letter of the law.

I also regret the actions that Bishop Lawrence and other leaders in the Diocese of South Carolina have taken. Their actions have been and continue to be provocative and have not been marked by self-restraint and our Anglican ethos. The escalation of this conflict mirrors other conflicts we have all seen in human history where two sides are unwilling to back down. Both are acting out of fear that the other side will get the upper hand, so they escalate their defenses, begin demonizing the other side, and the drum beat for more drastic action continues unabated. Bishop Lawrence, like some of those in disagreement with him, has in my judgment participated in this escalation.

I hope we will find a way forward together. It would be a painful loss to lose members of the Diocese of South Carolina from our Church. It is, however, way too early to make any sort of conjecture about what will or will not happen next. Pray for our sisters and brothers in South Carolina. Pray also for our Church that together we will live out God’s will on earth as it already is lived out in heaven. Dylan’s lament that “everything is broken,” however true, is never the last word for Christians. We believe everything will be mended through the merits and mediation of our Lord & Savior Jesus Christ.

–(The Rt. Rev.) Scott A. Benhase is Bishop of Georgia

From here:

As you probably already know, or as you can read below, on Monday the 15th of October the storm/battle we’ve been expecting finally arrived. Late yesterday (Wed) afternoon we learned that the actions taken by the Presiding Bishop triggered automatic corporate resolutions that have now taken the Diocese out of The Episcopal Church….What this means for us down the road is not yet totally clear. What is clear is that we will continue to proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ. And in partnership with our brothers and sisters in Christ throughout the Diocese we will stand for the truth of His Word.

For me personally, I find this all very, very sad. I’m what we call a “cradle” Episcopalian, i.e. [it has been true of me] all of my life. My parents, grandparents, great grandparents etc. etc. were also. My sisters both teach in Episcopal schools, My grandmother started an Episcopal pre-school. And I could go on and on. I’ve come to understand though what St. Paul wrote to the Philippians in chapter 3. After he laid out his Jewish credentials he said, “But whatever gain I had I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord.” I certainly am feeling a sense of loss, but I declare with Paul, I “count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ.”

South Carolina’s diocesan constitution and canons do not recognize the authority of the disciplinary canons inaugurated by the national Church in 2009, and it is unlikely the bishop will make a formal response to the charges ”” thereby recognizing their jurisdiction over him.

However, the diocesan convention has adopted defence measures against the contingency of a theologically motivated attack by liberal clique currently controlling the Church’s offices in New York and adopted resolutions to protect its independence.

The diocese is also protected by South Carolina law. The state’s Supreme Court has struck down the national Church’s property rules, the “Dennis Canon”, holding they have no legal effect in the state. While the national Church has set aside a $3million war chest to fund litigation, canon law experts tell The Church of England Newspaper it is unlikely to prevail in a fight to seize church property.

Read it all.

In an 19 Oct 2012 email Bishop Matthews wrote:

“The Reference Panel unanimously decided according to IV. 6.sec.8 that the complaint will proceed with option (c), Conciliation pursuant to Canon IV.10.”

Under the Title IV disciplinary canons, if the intake officer finds that if a prima facie case can be made against the accused ”“ if the charges if proven true would constitute an offense ”“ the proceedings are passed on to a Reference Panel for action….

the panel proposed…option b, conciliation.

Read it all.

“I think the Episcopal Church has really shot itself in the foot by doing this,” …IRD spokesman [Jeff Walton] comments. “They’re losing one of their larger, more vibrant dioceses. Indeed this diocese is one of the few that’s posted growth in recent years, and there is just nothing that the liberal leadership of the Episcopal Church is really gaining by effectively forcing this diocese out the door.”

Walton does not believe the national office wants to tolerate the type of public dissent displayed by South Carolina.

Read it all.

The Episcopal Church (TEC) has made an attack against our Bishop and Diocese, in the midst of efforts for a negotiated settlement, which has fundamentally changed our common life. You may have heard or read about this over the last week but it is vital today that we all understand what has occurred and what it means as clearly as possible.
For many years the diocese of South Carolina has opposed the primary theological direction of the national Episcopal Church (TEC). As TEC leadership has moved away from the claim of Jesus’ uniqueness, the authority of Holy Scripture, the meaning of marriage and the nature of what it means to be human, we have had to be more steadfast in our defense of these truths, and more vocal and strong in our opposition to TEC’s disavowal of them.

In the past few years this conflict has escalated to the point where in 2011 charges were brought against Bishop Lawrence (and later voted down in Committee), and where the 2012 General Convention placed an unbiblical doctrine of humanity into the Canons of the Church. The doctrine, discipline and worship of TEC were all fundamentally changed in a fashion most of our clergy cannot and will not comply with. Bishop Lawrence and a majority of our deputation left the Convention before it concluded as a result.

Read it all.

Example #1 in point: Bishop M. Thomas Shaw of Massachusetts has himself “abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church (USA)”, by an “open renunciation of the Discipline of the Church” — exactly as the DBB, on which he sits, has proclaimed that +Mark Lawrence has done. Bishop Shaw, as we know, defied both the marriage canons and the Book of Common Prayer rubrics by interpreting Resolution C056 (“Liturgies for Blessings”) adopted by General Convention in 2009 to allow him to authorize clergy in his Diocese to perform same-sex marriages, and then performed such a ceremony himself. According to Bishop Shaw, he and his suffragan bishops are the final authority on what the Canons and Resolutions of General Convention mean in their Diocese. So why is not Bishop Lawrence just as final an authority on the meaning of those same Canons in his Diocese, as well? And how can Bishop Shaw, having made that assertion (which in fact, is entirely correct), now seek to hold Bishop Lawrence liable for the latter’s own judgment of the meaning they are to have in his Diocese?

Talk about hypocrisy — but the members of the DBB (as well as David Booth Beers himself) are immersed in it up to their necks, day in and day out….

Read it all.

The Rev. Gregory Kronz of St. Luke’s Church on Hilton Head Island supports Lawrence. He said the bishop did not push the church away; rather the church has strayed from its own laws.

“There’s continual fast-and-loose playing with canons with the national church,” Kronz said. “In my mind, if anyone has changed, it’s the Episcopal Church.”

The media focus on policies regarding transgender or homosexual people, but the issue is the national church has adopted changes that violate biblical laws, according to the Rev. Jeff Miller of the Parish Church of St. Helena in Beaufort.

Read it all.

The US Episcopal Church’s disciplinary board for bishops has ruled that the Bishop of South Carolina, the Rt Revd Mark Lawrence, has “abandoned the Episcopal Church”.

The ruling means that Bishop Lawrence – who has been engaged in a long-running battle with the Episcopal Church in the US, particularly over the issue of openly gay clergy – is “not permitted to perform any acts as an ordained person”, an official statement said.

The diocese of South Carolina said in response that the ruling had “triggered” a resolution which “disaffiliated” it from the Episcopal Church….

Read it all.

“The Episcopal Church took unnecessary and illegitimate action against us which triggered our own previously agreed upon actions and caused us to withdraw to protect ourselves and our Gospel witness,” said [Kendall] Harmon.

The Rev. Canon Jim Lewis, spokesman for the diocese, explained to The Christian Post that there “is no explicitly described process in the national canons of the Church” regarding the process of dismissal for a diocese.

“Our Diocesan canons give the Bishop the absolute authority to interpret the canons. At the express written request of the Standing Committee, our bishop was asked to answer that question,” said Lewis. “His determination ruled that the Board of Directors of the Diocese does indeed have the authority to make that decision on behalf of the Diocese.”

Read it all.

Anglicans have been worshiping in South Carolina since its establishment as a British Colony. From the beginning, they have defended and upheld the doctrine, discipline and worship of the faithful generations who came before them. That freedom is now under direct assault.

As a founding Diocese of the Episcopal Church, we have taken steps in recent years to defend our freedom of worship and order of gathering. On Monday of this week (October 15), the Rt. Rev. Mark J. Lawrence (14th Bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina) was informed by the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church that a disciplinary board had certified that he was guilty of abandonment of the communion of the church ”“ that he had, in effect, by his words and actions, left the church. We believe that these actions of the Episcopal Church are both invalid under the Constitution of the Episcopal Church of this Diocese and violations of rights and freedoms which all Americans hold dear. We emphatically reject them, as well as the attempted restriction upon the ministry of our Bishop.

Read it all and the copy is here.

The certification of abandonment by ECUSA’s new Disciplinary Board for Bishops, communicated to Bishop Mark Lawrence by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori on October 15, 2012, raises some very troubling questions. It also evidences a new degree of repression operative in ECUSA that seems designed to curb the free speech and other First Amendment rights of its clergy….

Bishop Lawrence has 60 days in which to answer the charges, but he will not do so, as he could not enter into their rigged game without waiving his position that the new Title IV has no force or effect in South Carolina. Moreover, his diocese is no longer even a member of ECUSA, and so the Church’s organs and agents have no jurisdiction whatsoever over him. They will still have to go through the motions of “deposing” him, but that is the Church’s fault — it refuses to allow its bishops or other clergy to leave peacefully, and can get them off its books only by charging “abandonment” or “renunciation.”

Indeed, any communication Mark Lawrence makes in public about the charges or his diocese now runs the risk that the Presiding Bishop will treat it as she did in the case of Bishop Iker, and declare that it constitutes a “voluntary renunciation of orders” so that she can shorten the process of his removal, and not have to bother with a meeting of the House of Bishops. And in fact, now that I think about it, mark my words — watch for that very thing to happen.

Read it all (emphasis mine).

The 12 lay communicants include: Robert R. Black, Margaret A. Carpenter, Charles G. Carpenter, Frances L. Elmore, Eleanor Horres, John Kwist, Margaret S. Kwist, Barbara G. Mann, David W. Mann, Warren M. Mersereau, Dolores J. Miller, Robert B. Pinkerton, M. Jaquelin Simons, Mrs. Benjamin Bosworth Smith, John L. Wilder and Virginia C. Wilder. The clergy who were named are the Rev. Colton M. Smith and the Rev. Roger W. Smith.

This was disclosed yesterday and is posted here for people’s awareness as well as for people’s prayers–KSH.

Dear St. Jude’s Parish Family,

On Monday, October 15, 2012, Bishop Mark J. Lawrence, the 14th Bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina, was notified by the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, that on September 18, 2012 the Disciplinary Board for Bishops had certified Bishop Lawrence’s abandonment of The Episcopal Church. The charges against Bishop Lawrence were initiated by twelve laypersons and two clergy within the Diocese whose identity remains unknown to the Bishop. [Careful blog readers will know that these names are now public but they were not when this was written–KSH]

Bishop Lawrence was notified of these actions taken by the Episcopal Church between two meetings, one held on October 3 and one to be held on October 22, which Bishop Andrew Waldo of the Upper Diocese of South Carolina and Bishop Lawrence had set up with the Presiding Bishop to find a peaceful alternative to the growing issues between The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of South Carolina. The meetings were to explore “creative solutions” for resolving these issues to avoid further turmoil in the Diocese and in The Episcopal Church.

This action by The Episcopal Church triggered two pre-existing corporate resolutions of the Diocese, which simultaneously disaffiliated the Diocese of South Carolina from The Episcopal Church and called a Special Diocesan Convention. That Diocesan Convention will be held at St. Philip’s Church, Charleston, on Saturday, November 17, 2012. St. Jude’s’ convention delegates and I will attend the Special Convention.
St. Jude’s held a Parish Meeting on August 1, 2012 where we discussed the real possbibility that The Episcopal Church would initiate disciplinary action against Bishop Lawrence and that, in respone, the Diocese of South Carolina would disaffiliate from the Episcopal Church. That scenario has now come to pass.

Tomorrow, (Friday, October 19, 2012) I will attend a meeting of the clergy at St. Paul’s, Summerville, where the impact of these actions on St. Jude’s and all the churches in the Diocese will be discussed. I will then meet with the Vestry on Monday evening.

These events will continue to unfold in the days ahead and the Vestry and I will keep you informed as they do.

Bishop Lawrence is the finest, godliest man I have ever had the privilege to serve under. I am sad that The Episcopal Church has chosen to act against our Diocese and Bishop Lawrence during a good faith attempt to resolve differences in a peaceful way. But, I am also hopeful and confident that the Lord will provide for St. Jude’s and the Diocese as we move forward.

Yours in Christ,

–(The Rev.) Bob Horowitz is rector of Saint Jude’s Church, Walterboro, South Carolina

October 17, 2012

Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

On Monday, October 15, 2012, Bishop Lawrence was notified by the Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, that on September 18, 2012 the Disciplinary Board for Bishops had certified his abandonment of The Episcopal Church. This action triggered two pre-existing corporate resolutions of the Diocese made on November 1, 2011 and October 2, 2012, which simultaneously disaffiliated the Diocese from The Episcopal Church and called a Special Convention. That Convention will be held at St. Philip’s Church, Charleston, on Saturday, November 17, 2012.

The clergy of the Diocese are consequently called to gather for a special Clergy Day this Friday, October 19th at St. Paul’s, Summerville. Our meeting will begin at 10:30 a.m. and conclude by 4:00 p.m. The clergy of the Diocese are asked to RSVP electronically…

Our time will be spent discussing the significance of the actions taken by the Episcopal Church, our response as a Diocese and the plans for the immediate future. You may read related documents [on the diocesan website].

In Christ,

–(The Rev. Canon) Jim Lewis, Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina

But what it [the National decision to move against the Bishop and Diocese] obviously is, I think, is foolish. Wiser people would have let the bishop and diocese well enough alone, in the hope of holding on to them (and whatever money they give) and in the hope of saving a huge amount of money in legal fees which are unlikely to be recouped. And perhaps in the charitable assumption that the body’s work will still be advanced even with the institutional anomalies. But there is something in the progressive mind that cannot tolerate dissent ”” how dare they resist the dawn of the New Day? ”” and something in the mind of most bureaucrats of whatever position that cannot tolerate others not following the rules.

People often refer to a certain kind of person rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. That’s not the problem here. The problem is that the Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop and her fellows have rushed to the bridge and seized the wheel, and are yelling “Mine! Mine!” and decking anyone who comes close, even though fish are swimming past the windows. But at least they’ve forced the bishop and his diocese to get into the lifeboats.

Read it all.

Read it all.

Read it all.

The Diocese of South Carolina’s standing committee has, in turn, announced its decision to withdraw the diocese from the Episcopal Church. The diocese has called a special convention for Nov. 17 to vote on changes to its Constitution and Canons to reflect this withdrawal from the Episcopal Church. Those who disagree with the withdrawal will have the opportunity to propose reaffiliation with the Episcopal Church.

Read it all.

Read it all.

On Monday, October 15, 2012, Bishop Mark J. Lawrence, the 14th Bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina was notified by the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, that on September 18, 2012 the Disciplinary Board for Bishops had certified his abandonment of The Episcopal Church. This action by The Episcopal Church triggered two pre-existing corporate resolutions of the Diocese, which simultaneously disaffiliated the Diocese from The Episcopal Church and called a Special Convention. That Convention will be held at St. Philip’s Church, Charleston, on Saturday, November 17, 2012.

Read it all.

This last point brings us to the crux of our disagreement with Bishop Whalon: does TEC’s Constitution create a “metropolitical authority” superior to the diocesan bishop? Bishop Whalon thinks it does. Without citing or alluding to a single provision of the Constitution, he merely asserts: “the metropolitical authority”¦ resides in the General Convention”¦.The General Convention is at the top of our hierarchy.” We disagree. And it is important to emphasize that our disagreement with this conclusion is based fundamentally on an undeniable legal fact: nowhere does TEC’s Constitution state what Bishop Whalon asserts.

“Metropolitical authority” is a very precise and technical ecclesiological term. “Top of the hierarchy” is a very colloquial allusion to a legal concept that is widely used and readily identified in constitutions and legal documents. The legal term most often used to express this concept is “supremacy,” as in the English Act of Supremacy by which the Church of England separated from Rome and the oath of supremacy that all Church of England bishops continue to swear to this day. There are also other terms that are recognized legally as expressing this concept, but none of them is used in TEC’s Constitution. If there were any constitutional article stating that the General Convention is the supreme or highest or metropolitical authority in the church, we can be quite confident that Bishop Whalon would have quoted it rather than relying on mere colloquial assertion.

Again it is important to stress the context of this debate: a legal brief to a civil court. Given the constraints of the First Amendment, secular courts of law can draw conclusions about church polity only when those conclusions are stated plainly in recognizable legal language in the church’s governing instruments””in other words “on the face of it.”

Read it all.