South Carolina Bishop Distances Diocese from Episcopal Church

[Mark] Lawrence was elected bishop in 2006, but a majority of dioceses rejected his election amid fears that he would lead the conservative-leaning diocese to secede. In 2007, Lawrence was elected a second time and gained approval after offering assurances that he would try to keep the diocese in the denomination.

The bishop walked a fine line in his address to clergy Thursday, proposing that the diocese clearly distance itself from the Episcopal Church, but not advocating a full break with the denomination at this time.

“While I have no immediate solutions to the challenges we face, it is certainly neither a hasty departure nor a paralyzed passivity I counsel,” Lawrence said. “Either of these, I believe … would be for us a false peace and fatal security.”

Lawrence proposed several resolutions to be debated at a special diocesan convention Oct. 24. One would alter the ordination ceremonies of incoming priests to include a dissent with the recent pro-gay actions. The other would lead the diocese to withdraw from “all bodies of governance” in the Episcopal Church that have assented to the pro-gay moves “until such bodies show a willingness to repent of such actions.”

Read it all.

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * South Carolina, Episcopal Church (TEC), General Convention, Same-sex blessings, Sexuality Debate (in Anglican Communion), TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts

13 comments on “South Carolina Bishop Distances Diocese from Episcopal Church

  1. Stefano says:

    Is there a method whereby the fairly Orthodox Diceses like SC could strenghthen their bonds with each other? In adddition to distancing from TEC the drawing together of the creedaly connected wuld provide support. Some suggestions:

    Pulpit swaps and guest speakers.

    Mutual Mission projects.

    Canon Theologian swaps( I know KSH goes to Albany on vacation)

    Licensing clergy for each others diocese(symbolic to be sure)

    Multi diocesan retreats.

    Intentional presence at conventions.

  2. palmettopastor says:

    “Lawrence was elected bishop in 2006, but a majority of dioceses rejected his election amid fears that he would lead the conservative-leaning diocese to secede. In 2007, Lawrence was elected a second time and gained approval after offering assurances that he would try to keep the diocese in the denomination.”

    uh…that’s not what happened…. who is this writer?

  3. CanaAnglican says:

    “…lead the diocese to withdraw from “all bodies of governance” in the Episcopal Church that have assented to the pro-gay moves…”

    Perhaps not symbolically, but cedrtainly functionally, this will remove DioSC from TEC. TEC has no bodies of governance that have not assented to the pro-gay moves.

    By the way, Palmettopastor, what really did happen? On the surface and in a thumbnail sketch, the writer seems not to have missed the mark too far. How would you summarize, for us outsiders, the event in 50 words, or less? I really am interested in what actually happened. I am an admirer of +Mark and pray the best for him and the DioSC. I hope the diocese will continue to share bonds of affection and communion with those of us in CANA.

  4. Words Matter says:

    Isn’t the purpose of the American Anglican Council to do what #1 proposes?

  5. Richard Hoover says:

    “We face a multitude of false teachings, which like an intrusive vine is threatening the Episcopal Church as we have inherited it and received it from our ancestors.”

    Cananglican requests of Palmettopastor a summary of what happened in 50 words or less. How about ten? (courtesy of a Virginia friend who remains in TEC): “Looks like the bishop is spraying Roundup on the Kudzu.”

  6. Stefano says:

    Well….sorta. The AAC work is unity within the the Communion but not necessarily in TEC. I’m suggesting making concretely evident the fellowship and unity of the creedal orthodox that remain in TEC.Sorta of like the thousands that have not kneeled to the Ba-als

  7. palmettopastor says:

    Cananglican…. the majority of diocese did not reject him… certain votes were deemed irregular because they were emailed in. I believe…and I may be mistaken, but had they been mailed in Bishop Lawrence would have been in office a year earlier. That’s how I remember it… there are plenty of people who read this blog who can concur or disagree with authority.

  8. montanan says:

    [blockquote]Harmon likened the situation to a domestic dispute.

    “This is the moment when the wife moves to the bedroom down the hall because the husband was engaged in some infidelity,” he said.[/blockquote]

    The analogy is good, but needs refining. I would say, “this is the moment when the wife moves to the bedroom down the hall because the husband engaged in infidelity and says he’ll continue to do so, as it is good for the marriage.”

  9. CanaAnglican says:

    Palmettopastor, Thanks. You helped me remember it was more a case of HQ playing hardball over some careless voting procedures. The sort of thing HQ had winked at for more liberal nominees. I am glad for SC that they eventually “got their man”.

  10. Creighton+ says:

    Back at #9,

    Yes, the PB was playing hardball and a similar issues happened in Va but the same policy was not followed.

    Also, we need to get it correct….Bishop Lawrence indicated he would not lead SC out of the EC and that he would work as hard at remaining in the EC as the EC worked to remain in the AC.

    What he actually said leaves plenty of room for the leaders of the Diocese to lead. Plus, if the EC is unfaithful in its efforts to remain in the AC, then the gentleman’s agreement is off.

    Of course, Bishop Lawrence is a man of honor and is working hard to find a way to remain but differentiate the diocese from the unbiblical decisions of GC and the rest of the leadership of the EC that support these decisions.

    Plus, if the PB wants to come after him and the diocese, so be it. But he will honor his word and continue to be faithful to the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    Yes, it is a tough road to hoe as they say…but the easy road is usually not the best. Contrary to David Virtue, I believe the clergy and the laity are supportive and not confused by Bishop Lawrence’s leadership…

  11. Kendall Harmon says:

    #8 I would refine your refinement by noting that the husband continues the misbehavior and then commits himself again and then again to doing so.

  12. Kendall Harmon says:

    Most committees and bishops who vote against an Episcopal election do not list their reason(s) for doing so in the public domain. The reasons for voting no on Mark Lawrence ran the gamut, but a number voted no because of Mark’s stance in opposition to TEC’s heretical theology and practice in the area of marriage and family.

  13. CanaAnglican says:

    #10. Creighton+, Thanks for the further clarification. We are praying that God’s grace will be in mighty evidence for all those in DioSC. They are blessed with a wise and honorable bishop.