The Bishop of South Carolina, the Rt Revd Mark Lawrence, is cur­rently under investigation by the disciplinary board of the national Church on charges of having “ab­andoned” the Episcopal Church (News, 14 October). He is charged with a variety of omissions and commissions, includ­ing failure to take legal action against a parish in his diocese which had realigned itself…

The Church’s crusade against conservative dis­senters is pointless, wasteful, and self-destructive. And, although Dr Jefferts Schori has defended her actions as necessary to protect the Church’s assets, it is hard to understand what material benefits the Church’s programme could reasonably achieve. If the Episcopal Church retains the properties of departing congregations, it will be stuck with church buildings that the few (if any) remaining loyalists cannot afford to maintain. In the best-case scenario, it may be able to offset the cost of litiga­tion by selling them for use as mosques or saloons.

The Episcopal Church has plunged into a maelstrom of institutional turmoil and litigation, alienating some of its most committed constitu­ents. Representing less than one per cent of the American population, it has not affected the at­titudes of the general public, or benefited gay men and women, who are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. And it has not impressed the secular élite, who are as contemptuous of the Episcopal Church, for all its political correctness, as they are of all Christian groups, whose members they regard as superstitious ignoramuses.

Read it all.

A Louisiana appeals court has opened the legal door for Episcopal churches in the state to quit the national Church and keep their properties.

On 14 September 2011 the First Circuit Court of Appeal in Baton Rouge upheld a lower court decision allowing a Presbyterian congregation to leave its presbytery and keep its property ”“ even though the Presbyterian Church’s constitutional documents claimed an interest in the property.

Relying upon the US Supreme Court’s decision in Jones v Wolfe, the appeals court in the case of Carrollton Presbyterian Church v the Presbytery of Southern Louisiana rejected the argument put forward by the presbytery that the addition of a trust clause in a denomination’s constitution was sufficient to create a valid and enforceable trust on property.

Read it all.

The teachings by Bishop Lebhar and his wife Marcia represented one of the high points of the convention. Conflict in churches, he told the assembly, is “a major problem for American Christians. We go shopping for non-conflict churches ”“ good luck!” We are generally viewed as failures if we’re involved in conflict, and yet sometimes conflict is a necessary part of our spiritual growth. Often the problem is not so much with the information that we gather on a problem but how we interpret it, and it is in the white heat of interpretation that conflict flourishes. In a conflict situation, the default position for those who are afraid is to cling to the familiar rather than to trust in God’s power to preserve us from even the worst of situations. God’s purpose in difficult times is both to humble and to test. Often our preference is to relieve pressures rather than have the inner workings of our hearts revealed. Members of his Diocese were all obliged to go through a process of coming to terms with their lack of control and of learning to forgive their detractors.

Marcia Lebhar later took up the theme of trust with a reflection on the reality of the paucity of water in Canaan as compared with the Israelites’ experience in Egypt. The heart of idolatry is the insistence on a “Plan B” and God has prepared a new Anglican for ACNA that its members must expect on God’s terms. Finally, and at the close of proceedings Bishop Lebhar, introduced the imagery of the challenge posed to Judaism posed by the Romanized culture of Herod the Great’s Caesarea and the warning to the infant Christian Church given by the Epistle of Jude, namely of cultural surrender. “Many Americans,” said, “have become co-dependent on the culture.” His greatest fear for ACNA is that today’s vitality will weaken and acculturation make its way in, for if we acquiesce to the prevailing culture we cannot save those now imprisoned by it.

Read it all.

The Rev. Eric Menees, new bishop of the San Joaquin Anglican Diocese, might feel a little like David facing the giant Goliath.

First there’s the lawsuit seeking ownership of 31 of the diocesan parishes and the diocesan headquarters in Fresno. Then there are nine more lawsuits filed against the independently incorporated parishes that also are part of the diocese. Finally, there are the multimillion-dollar assets of the diocese, which remain frozen pending the outcome of the lawsuits.

The giant in this case is the Episcopal Church, which was not happy when Menees’ predecessor, the Rev. John-David Schofield, was the first bishop in the country to lead his diocese away from the national church and its increasingly liberal theology. Schofield and the 40 parishes loyal to him are under the oversight of the theologically conservative Anglican Church in North America, which allowed them to stay with the worldwide Anglican Communion, to which the… [Episcopal] church belongs.

Read it all.

The developing impasse between the diocese and the canonical instruments of General Convention is a tragedy in the making. It is very possible that the result will be the unnecessary loss of dozens of parishes and tens of thousands of Episcopalians. It is a moment to take stock and to recall the purpose of the canon law of the church. The canon law of the church has the peace of the church as its ultimate aim. The course of justice will be perverted if this new and arguably unconstitutional canon is used as an instrument by those of a majority opinion to gain the upper hand over those with whom they disagree. These proceedings threaten to reduce to the vanishing point the ground from which any future reconciliation might grow.

Read it all.

In an ecclesiastical outlook that has recently offered little comfort, the very serious charge of abandonment made against Bishop Mark Lawrence of South Carolina is chilling indeed. The charge is striking, because under his leadership the Diocese of South Carolina has not ”˜abandoned’ the Episcopal Church (as did the dioceses of Fort Worth, Pittsburgh, San Joaquin, and Quincy). What it has done, openly and publicly, is to insulate itself as much as possible from what Lawrence has called the “false gospel” of “indiscriminate inclusivity” advocated by the national church, through a reform of its diocesan laws and constitution. It is precisely this achievement – to remain within the Episcopal Church but not of the Episcopal Church – that has enraged its enemies and spurred these charges.

It is no secret that the national church has been looking for grounds for a legal challenge against South Carolina; yet, we are assured, the information presented against Bishop Lawrence came not from the Presiding Bishop’s office, but from communicants within the diocese – disaffected progressives presumably, following the familiar progressive strategy of using bureaucratic process to advance agendas which otherwise fail to gain support. The Presiding Bishop, however, is not off the hook. One must ask whether her aggressive policy of litigation to quell opposition to her theological agenda has not created the climate and established the precedent for a resort to litigation by other militant progressives. Whether or not they are acting formally in concert, the effect is the same.
The charges will be the first major test of the newly reformed Title IV canons on Discipline. Though these have been criticized for removing due process protections, we have been given assurances that these fears are overblown. Perhaps so: but many eyes will be watching closely to see what justice the Bishop of South Carolina receives under them. A heavy responsibility lies with the Disciplinary Board and its president, Bishop Dorsey Henderson, retired of Upper South Carolina (and recent visitor to St. John’s on behalf of Bishop Benhase), as they investigate these charges, to ensure that these new canons do not become another instrument of coercion. Bishop Henderson and the Board will need your prayers.

To his credit, Bishop Benhase has expressed hope that the charges will be dismissed. Even if they are, the process will be costly in terms of money and morale: a further and needless embitterment of a church already divided and demoralized by unilateral theological change and aggressive litigation. To put it bluntly: the message being sent by these charges (as by the evident hostility of the Presiding Bishop) is that conservative dissent will not be tolerated within the Episcopal Church, and that significant theological differences will be resolved by coercion. One could hardly devise a stronger incentive for conservatives to leave. Militant progressives longing for ideological purity may rejoice at the prospect of getting rid of so much “dead wood” – but those who cherish the Episcopal Church will know that such losses leave it diminished, and not just in numbers or dollars.

This case raises a question for us: given the ascendancy of the agenda of “indiscriminate inclusivity” in the Episcopal Church – will there be a secure place in the Episcopal Church for the conscientious dissent of those who hold to historic Anglican doctrine and worship? That security cannot be taken for granted.

—-The Rev. Gavin Dunbar is rector of Saint John’s, Savannah, Georgia

Eight years of property litigation involving the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh has ended, but most parishes that broke from the Episcopal Church still face negotiations over their buildings.

After the Pennsylvania Supreme Court last week denied an appeal from the Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh, which had argued that it owned the property, the Anglican decided diocese it will not appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, spokesman David Trautman said.

“This whole string of litigation is ended, is done,” he said.

Read it all.

On several occasions, I have suggested that the day when we would begin our new life as a Catholic congregation was in sight, only for there to be another delay. And no doubt many of you share my frustration in seeing other groups board the Barque of Peter ahead of us. But I can assure you that at this point, every indication suggests we do not have much longer to wait. As I announced from the pulpit recently, Mount Calvary is about to enter into mediation with the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland under the guidance of Judge Joseph Kaplan. This very positive development promises to result in a final property settlement in short order.

Another encouraging sign of progress is that those who attend the… [Episcopal] service in our All Souls Chapel at 9 o’clock Sunday mornings have been informed that this service will be coming to an end this month. They will need to find another church home should they wish to remain Episcopalians. Mount Calvary has permitted this service as a gesture of goodwill, but the Diocese of Maryland has determined that it can no longer be justified for the very small number of people who attend. This, I believe, is a tacit acknowledgement that in the near future, only the Catholic Mass will be celebrated at Mount Calvary”¦

Read it all.

(Via email–KSH).

Resolution offered by The Vestry of Christ Church, Greenville
Christ Church City Greenville
An Invitation to Conversation

WHEREAS: God’s very essence and nature is revealed to us in the community of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, “Being of glorious majesty and perfect love as one God in Trinity of persons;” and

WHEREAS: Jesus Christ himself entered into fully human community by calling faithful disciples and by promising he would be with us to the end of the ages, and

WHEREAS: we, as Episcopalians, affirm St. Paul’s teaching in our Baptismal liturgy that “[t]here is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all,” and

WHEREAS: any injury endured or experienced by a member of our community of the church as the Body of Christ affects the whole Body of Christ, and

WHEREAS: the Diocese of South Carolina formerly encompassed the territory and parishes that now comprise the Diocese of Upper South Carolina, such that the communicants of the two dioceses are significantly interrelated and bound by faith, fellowship and family, Therefore be it

RESOLVED: that we, the people of the Diocese of Upper South Carolina, gathered together at the 89th Diocesan Convention in a spirit of unity and reconciliation, invite The Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop and Primate of the Episcopal Church and The Right Reverend Mark Lawrence, Bishop of South Carolina to come together in person at a mutually convenient time and place in order to strengthen the bonds of our community; and be it further

RESOLVED: that The Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori and the Right Reverend Mark Lawrence engage in healing conversation regarding the ongoing tensions between The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of South Carolina; and be it further

RESOLVED: that The Right Reverend Andrew Waldo, Bishop of the Diocese of Upper South Carolina hand deliver a copy of this resolution to The Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori and The Right Reverend Mark Lawrence with our warm regards and collective prayers.

On Sunday, the day after he was enthroned in Fresno as the new Anglican bishop of the San Joaquin Diocese, the Rev. Eric Menees conducted his first services at St. Matthias Anglican Church in Oakdale.

Read it all.

In this post, I want to lay out for all to see the conflicts (in addition to those I have already made manifest) which should disqualify still other members of the Board from proceeding any further in examining the claims made against Bishop Lawrence. Let us start with his colleagues — the bishops who sit on the Board besides its President, the Rt. Rev. Dorsey Henderson.

The Rt. Rev. Ian Douglas, Bishop of Connecticut, is presuming to judge whether, by leading his Diocese to remove its accession to the Canons of General Convention, Bishop Lawrence has thereby “abandoned” communion with ECUSA. Bishop Douglas should accuse himself of that charge, because he now leads a Diocese which has never acceded to the Canons of General Convention, but only to the Church’s Constitution….

Read it all.

In light of this sequence of events and the manifest importance of this matter for the church as a whole, we believe greater transparency is required than has thus far been displayed. In particular, we suggest the following questions are of sufficient importance to require prompt answers:

When was “the Bishop Lawrence information” first brought to the Title IV Review Committee and who initiated this process? When first submitted to that Committee was the information contained in the document entitled “Addendum” that was subsequently provided to Bishop Lawrence? Or was it initially submitted in another form or by other parties?
Why was the Lucka letter of May 25 to the Presiding Bishop, Bonnie Anderson and Executive Council, which prompted the Executive Council’s June action, not provided to the diocese at the time or ever made public? What is the relation between its “Addendum” and the (in part identical) “Addendum” now under review by the Disciplinary Board?
Why was the June “decision” by the Executive Council handled as it was? Why was the diocese not informed for over two months? How has the Executive Council continued “to monitor the actions” of the South Carolina convention?…

Read it all.

Links to South Carolina posts – latest first in each section: (Last Updated January 25th 2012 at 10:00 p.m. Eastern)
IMPORTANT NOTE – SEE LATEST NEWS and BISHOP’S LETTER and PRAYER
FURTHER IMPORTANT NOTE – SEE here and here and here

Videos from MERE ANGLICANISM 2012 are here [NEW]

Materials From the Diocese of SC:

South Carolina Standing Committee Responds to Letter of Province IV Bishops December 12, 2011 at 11:33 am

Bishop Lawrence Writes to the Diocese About Disciplinary Board Decision
November 29, 2011 at 3:28 pm
South Carolina Releases Correspondence Relating to Josephine Hicks, Church Attorney
October 13, 2011

S.C. Bishop and Clergy of the Diocese Meet on “Serious Charges” Made Against Bishop Lawrence
October 12, 2011

A look back to a 2006 Mark Lawrence Address ”“ “Who are these birds that can sing in the dark?”
October 8, 2011

****Urgent Message from the Diocese of South Carolina Bishop and Standing Committee****
Originally posted October 5, 2011 – reposted Oct. 10, 2011

South Carolina Bishop and Standing Committee Respond to Actions of Executive Council
October 3, 2011

Analysis and Commentary

Province IV Bishops Release Statement Concerning Meeting with Bishop Lawrence
December 15, 2011 at 11:15 am

A S.C. Layman who worked as a College President Writes Bishop Daniel and the Province IV Bishops
December 13, 2011 at 11:35 am

Shay Gaillard””Purple Shirts Proof-texting in Public
December 8, 2011 at 9:01 am

Province IV Bishops Seek a Meeting with South Carolina Bp. Lawrence
December 5, 2011 at 4:25 pm

Kendall Harmon Answers Media Questions on the Disciplinary Committee””S.C. Bishop Matter
December 5, 2011 at 7:00 am

Anglican Communion Institute””South Carolina: The Disciplinary Board Decides
December 1, 2011 at 11:16 am

Lent and Beyond offers Thanksgiving for the Report from South Carolina
December 1, 2011 at 7:49 am

A Living Church Editorial on the Mark Lawrence News from the Bishops Disciplinary Board
November 29, 2011 at 11:30 am

(Liv. Ch.) Disciplinary Board of Bishops is Unable to Certify Abandonment Against Mark Lawrence
November 28, 2011 at 5:05 pm

GetReligion Critiques the recent Charleston, S. C., Newspaper piece on the Episcopal Fracas
November 25, 2011

(Living Church) Mark Lawrence: ”˜The Bishop Brings the Crozier’
November 23, 2011 at 3:50 pm

An AP Article on Bishop Mark Lawrence and the Diocese of South Carolina
November 23, 2011 at 11:40 am

Local paper Article: “S.C. Episcopal Diocese releases property claim”
November 21, 2011 at 12:25 pm

(Church Times) Harriet Baber””The Episcopal Church is alienating its own members
November 20, 2011 at 7:15 am

What was announced at the South Carolina Clergy Conference this past Tuesday Evening
November 19, 2011 at 9:00 am

A Serious Prayer request for the South Carolina Clergy Conference This week
November 14, 2011 at 4:55 am

Bishop C. FitzSimons Allison””Shrinking Jesus and Betraying the Faith
November 11, 2011 at 8:19 am

Leander Harding on the Mark Lawrence Investigation””Choose Inclusive Justice
October 27, 2011 at 6:19 am

Gavin Dunbar on the Mark Lawrence Investigation””Southern Discomfort
October 27, 2011 at 6:00 am

Diocese of Upper South Carolina Convention Passes Resolution on the Mark Lawrence Investigation
October 25, 2011

A.S. Haley””Conflicts Galore on the Disciplinary Board for Bishops with regard to the S.C. Matter
October 22, 2011 at 2:00 pm

The Bishop of Tasmania Writes in Support of Bishop Mark Lawrence
October 21, 2011 at 6:00 am

(Anglican Communion Institute) South Carolina: The Church Needs Transparency
October 20, 2011 at 6:07 pm

(The State) The Bishop of Upper South Carolina on the Mark Lawrence Investigation
October 19, 2011 at 5:22 pm

(Mark McCall)””South Carolina: Upholding The Church’s Discipline By Upholding The Constitution
October 18, 2011 at 7:38 am

A.S. Haley on the Further Revelations in the South Carolina Episcopal Investigation
October 17, 2011 at 9:04 pm

(Living Church) Attorney J.B. Burtch Returns to Bishop Mark Lawrence Case
October 17, 2011

Anglican Unscripted Episode 14
October 17, 2011

A.S. Haley Responds to An Embarrassingly Inaccurate Piece by Andrew Gerns on the S.C. Matter
October 17, 2011

CEN””Evangelical bishop under assault in America
October 14, 2011 at 5:36 pm

(Living Church) Episcopal Church Attorney in South Carolina Matter Recuses Herself
October 14, 2011 at 3:35 pm

A.S. Haley on the Disciplinary Board, Their Chosen Lawyer, and the South Carolina Process
October 14, 2011 at 8:21 am

Charles Alley””The Injustice of it All!
October 14, 2011 at 1:31 pm

Living Church””Bishop: Attorney Never on Disciplinary Board
October 13, 2011

Robert Clawson Chimes in on the Disciplinary Proceedings involving Mark Lawrence
October 13, 2011

A.S. Haley on Bishop Henderson’s Statement regarding procedure in the Bishop Mark Lawrence Matter
October 12, 2011

Anglican Communion Institute on the Continuing S.C. Story””Title IV: Abandonment Without Offense?
October 12, 2011

(Living Church) Bishop Henderson Explains His Understanding of the Disciplinary Board’s Duty
October 12, 2011

Anglican Unscripted Episode 13
October 10, 2011

Dale Matson””Rowan Williams And The Deposition Of Bishop Lawrence
October 7, 2011

ACI says Presiding Bishop Had to be Involved in the S.C. Actions if the Canons Were Followed
October 7, 2011

A.S. Haley””Clearing up Misconceptions about the Diocese of South Carolina ‘Charges’
October 6, 2011

A.S. Haley on South Carolina””Episcopal Church Foments Strife and Civil War
October 6, 2011

Living Church””Board Hears Case against Bishop Lawrence
October 5, 2011

(ACI) A Response to the reported Title IV Disciplinary process begun against Bishop Mark Lawrence
October 5, 2011

A.S. Haley””What if the TEC Foundations Were not Designed for the Current Structure?
October 3, 2011

The Dangers of Church Centralization: Some Remarks on the Proposed Changes in the TEC Constitution
October 3, 2011

A.S. Haley””TEC Executive Council Fires on the Diocese of South Carolina
Sept. 30, 2011

Other Resources

South Carolina: Praying for the Diocesan Leadership
October 6, 2011

Prayer Resources for those praying for Bishop Mark Lawrence and South Carolina

Seeing Jesus with Bishop Mark Lawrence
October 16, 2011

Title IV Canons

Press and Other Reports

(ENS) Province IV bishops call meeting with colleague ”˜honest, forthright’
December 15, 2011 at 4:02 pm

(Christian Post) Episcopal Church Clears South Carolina Bishop of Violating Principles
December 2, 2011 at 6:15 am

Reuters Article on Disciplinary Board Decisions vis a vis Bishop Mark Lawrence
November 30, 2011 at 6:00 pm

Local Paper Article on Disciplinary Board Decisions vis a vis Bishop Mark Lawrence
30, 2011 at 3:02 pm

The ENS story on the Disciplinary Board dismissing abandonment complaint against Mark Lawrence
November 29, 2011 at 6:15 am

Nicholas Beasley (Upper South Carolina) Chimes In
October 19, 2011 at 4:45 pm

Another (longish) AP article on The Episcopal Church’s South Carolina Investigation
October 16, 2011

(Times and Democrat) Orangeburg, S.C., Area Episcopal clergy: Probe ”˜not a healthy situation’
October 14, 2011 at 7:45 am

Another AP Story on the South Carolina Clergy Meeting Tuesday
(AP) Diocese of SC clergy discuss allegations against bishop
October 12, 2011

Local Paper””Episcopal Church investigates Bishop Mark Lawrence
October 6, 2011

An ENS Story””S.C. bishop investigated on charges he has abandoned the Episcopal Church
October 5, 2011

An AP Story””S.C. Bishop said to have abandoned Episcopal church
October 5, 2011

After hearing from each side and noting that the 14-page proposed order submitted to him today “is a lot thicker than the one was back in May,” the judge returned to the original three-page document presented on May 19, 2011, which he said had been “sitting in my drawer since then.” He announced that he already had struck out a paragraph requesting “additional security” for the TEC parties and had entered a figure of $5 million as a benchmark of “fair market rental value” of a select dozen churches in the Diocese ”“ a value presented in May by the TEC attorneys. Lead diocesan attorney Shelby Sharpe explained that no rent ever is paid by churches for use of property owned by the Corporation. Nevertheless, said the judge, the property “does have some value.”

Judge Chupp then set the bond at two percent of $5 million, or $100,000, to be paid by Nov. 20, 2011. In addition to the cash amount, the order requires each of the 48 parishes and missions involved in the judgment to present a “monthly summary of the sources, amounts and payees of any and all expenditures …”

Read it all and please follow the links.

Read it all.

I consider Bishop Lawrence a friend and respected fellow-laborer in the vineyards of the Lord. I know him to be a loyal and faithful minister who seeks to raise valid and serious questions as to the theology, polity and structure of the Episcopal Church. Our church has a long history of theological diversity and respect for those with whom we disagree, and we can all benefit from the challenge of addressing these questions openly and in a spirit of mutual charity. Unfortunately, we live in a culture that is too often hostile to disagreement and unwilling to engage in honest dialogue with those who have different views. Our churches are not immune from this, and all who follow a loving God have each to ask God to forgive us for any roles we may have played in that hostility over the years.

I do not intend to prejudge the matters being considered by the review board; however, it is hard for me to see how the actions complained of against Bishop Lawrence rise to the level of an intentional abandonment of the communion of this church, as is charged. I have difficulty understanding why matters that are arguably legislative and constitutional in nature should be dealt with in a disciplinary context. I await the report and yet hope the review board shares my difficulty.

Read it all.

Our denomination, like many others, has wrestled mightily with issues of moral theology and the interpretation of scripture in recent years. This sad episode is related to that struggle. I, and many others, regret it has come to this point. Our divisions do not honor Christ, who prayed we all be one, and we hope for reconciliation.

Read it all.

Read it all (pdf from the court).

One of the allegations now being made against Bishop Lawrence is that the decision by the Diocese of South Carolina to continue to adhere to the prior Title IV canons rather than adopt the controversial new revisions constitutes abandonment by being an open renunciation of the discipline of TEC. Last March Alan Runyan and I published an article that undertook a careful examination of the history of TEC’s Constitution as it relates to clergy discipline. We started at the beginning in 1789, but gave particular attention to those constitutional revisions in 1901 that the drafters of the new Title IV claim “profoundly changed” the constitutional allocation of authority in the church. That article provides conclusive proof that the Constitution as now in effect allocates authority for discipline of priests and deacons exclusively to the dioceses except for appeals.

This issue has been much debated in the history of TEC, and our article contains a detailed examination of that history. But throughout those years of debates, the result was always the same: disciplinary authority remained with the dioceses. Our article provides compelling proof that the revisions to Title IV are unconstitutional. It cannot be a renunciation of the discipline of the church to uphold that discipline as specified in the Constitution by resisting unconstitutional encroachment on the diocese’s exclusive authority….

Read it all (and make sure to go and read the full original article to which it links) [emphasis his].

Thus [we hear from today’s Living Church article that] Bishop Henderson previously worked with Mr. J. B. Burch when Bishop Henderson served on the former “Title IV Review Committee” (of which Bishop Waggoner was the chair). And in that capacity, Bishop Henderson tells us, “he did preliminary work on the Bishop Lawrence information . . .”.

What are we to make of this? It indicates that the so-called allegations of “abandonment” against Bishop Lawrence were on the docket of the former Title IV Review Committee until that body ceased to operate as of July 1, 2011. But if that is the case, they must have been presented with the allegations in June 2011 or earlier — possibly (as I indicated in an earlier post) as long ago as last September.

One wonders why it took so long for Bishop Lawrence to be informed of the allegations made against him, if that chronology is true….

Read it all.

J.B. held the equivalent position with the Review Committee under the previous version of Title IV. As “Lay Assessor” to the Review Committee, he did the same work that the “Church Attorney” now does for the Disciplinary Board. While in that position, he did preliminary work on the Bishop Lawrence information, so he is already more than familiar with that information and the task which is now ours.

Read it all.

Stuff and nonsense, Mr. Gerns. A complaint is made up of allegations. Allegations are charges — claims that what is stated is true. Bishop Lawrence has been charged by persons undisclosed with “abandonment of communion” under Canon IV.16. Had he not been so charged, the Disciplinary Board for Bishops would never have gotten involved. (And by the way, Mr. Gerns: just how does a Bishop go about abandoning his Church by “inaction”? Wouldn’t that happen only if the Church in question first abandoned that particular Bishop, and he did “not act” so as to follow them?)…

More stuff and nonsense. The charges have already been filed — that is how the Board gets to investigate them. (What? — you thought they acted only on rumors, and not charges? Well, actually, the Canon lets them act on anything that comes to their attention. But in this instance, as Bishop Henderson stated, they are acting on complaints brought by persons unknown — to us, but not to the Disciplinary Board — within Bishop Lawrence’s Diocese.)

And the charges will not get “filed” again. Instead, by a simple majority vote of its members, the Board will either certify that “abandonment” has occurred, or it will not. There will be no further investigation. There will be no “attempts at reconciliation.” And there will certainly be no hearing, because the Canon (IV.16) does not provide for one.

Read it all (being sure to follow the link to Mr. Germs piece to which it is responding).

After years of controversy over Episcopal Church policy of ordaining gays and sanctioning same-sex unions, the conservative bishop of one of the oldest dioceses in the United States finds himself the focus of a rare investigation to determine whether he has abandoned the church.

A church disciplinary board is investigating Mark Lawrence, the bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina, based on information passed to the national church from parishioners in the diocese.

Read it all.

The Bishop of South Carolina reports that he is being investigated by a church disciplinary committee for having abandoned the Episcopal Church.

One of the few remaining conservative bishops in the Episcopal Church, Bishop Mark Lawrence has been sharply critical of the Church’s embrace of the gay agenda and the new morality. While removing him from the House of Bishops would silence his voice, it will also provoke a constitutional crisis for the Episcopal Church, canon lawyers tell The Church of England Newspaper.

Read it all.

Sisters and Brothers, today I have accepted the withdrawal of Ms. Josephine Hicks from further participation in the matter before us regarding Bishop Mark Lawrence.

Ms. Hicks has withdrawn from all involvement in the Board’s investigation and/or consideration of the Bishop Lawrence matter because unanticipated circumstances have created the possibility of a conflict arising regarding fiduciary responsibilities for members of her law firm as matters develop. For reasons of professional responsibility, she is not at liberty to disclose any details concerning that possibility.

Read it all.

Regardless of theological allegiances, ideological positions and ecclesiological affiliations, a lack of justice is a lack of justice and unacceptable in the Church that professes to live in obedience to a just God. Anyone who is seeking justice needs to speak up on behalf of justice and the victims of injustice wherever it is found.

Today it is the Diocese of South Carolina and Bishop Lawrence. It is relatively easy to predict the population which will be targeted next. The only question is, when will it be you?

Read it all.

Your Curmudgeon takes pride in his attention to details — and he does not like being misled. He is always happy to correct his mistakes, once they are pointed out to him, because no one should have a vested interest in spreading untruth. Thus when somebody feeds him wrong information, he cannot refrain from asking why they would have done so.

Consider the latest snafu over the “mistaken” listing of Ms. Josephine Hicks, the Church Attorney to the Disciplinary Board of Bishops, on the Official Roster of that Board as published on ECUSA’s Website. She was still shown as a “Member” (i.e., a participant with a vote) as late as October 12, and yet on the previous September 30, she authored a letter to the President of South Carolina’s Standing Committee, which she signed as “Church Attorney to the Board”.

Now the Rt. Rev. Dorsey Henderson, former (resigned) Bishop of Upper South Carolina, is a canon lawyer. He has served on the predecessor to the Disciplinary Board (the former “Title IV Review Committee”). As such, he participated in the proceedings against Bishops Schofield and Duncan for so-called “abandonment of communion”, which resulted in their faux “deposition” by a tiny minority of the full membership of the House of Bishops who are actually entitled to vote under ECUSA’s Constitution, notwithstanding what the vindictive Presiding Bishop or her financially very interested Chancellor chooses to opine. So he is no stranger to the canonical process, especially in so-called cases of “abandonment.”

Read it carefully and read it all.

Nearly 100 clergy from the diocese met Tuesday to pray and discuss the situation surrounding Diocese of South Carolina Bishop Mark Lawrence. Father Jimmy S. Gallant, vicar of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Orangeburg, was at the meeting. He said all of the clergy in attendance were supportive of Lawrence.

“I take a stand because this is all based on the biblical passage that says all who live godly in Christ shall suffer persecution,” Gallant said. “This is persecution by the national church. Bishop Lawrence is godly, and he also has an eye for the poor and minorities….

The other accusation against Lawrence allegedly involves his abandonment of the church. The Dr. Rev. Frank Larisey of the Church of the Redeemer in Orangeburg said that is patently false.

“Neither the bishop nor the diocese has left or abandoned (the Episcopal Church),” Larisey said. “He has done anything but….”

Read it all.

Church Attorney Josephine H. Hicks performs legal work for the Episcopal Church’s Disciplinary Board for Bishops but is not a member of it, the Rt. Rev. Dorsey Henderson said in an interview with The Living Church.

The board is in the early stages of investigating allegations that the Rt. Rev. Mark J. Lawrence, Bishop of South Carolina, has abandoned the Episcopal Church. Unnamed parties within the diocese made the allegations.

A roster on a webpage of Episcopal Church’s General Convention was incorrect in listing Hicks as a member through 2015, Bishop Henderson said. The Rt. Rev. Clayton Matthews, Bishop of the Office of Pastoral Development, also appeared on the roster. That too was mistaken, Henderson said, and the roster was changed Oct. 12.

Read it all.

Anglican Down Under has a post on this.

Read it all (make sure to see all three documents and their dates).