Important note: this article is inaccurate and it is possible that there will be a correction coming in which case I will seek to post it–KSH.
The Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina has for years objected loudly to what it considers liberalizing trends in the Episcopal Church, and now has proposed to begin the process of breaking away from the national church body. It is doing so not only because the Episcopal Church ordained in 2003 an openly gay bishop, the Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, but for a variety of reasons, most of which are theological in nature, many diocese officials repeatedly have said.
In mid-September, the diocese’s standing committee and deans, under the leadership of Bishop Mark Lawrence, published five resolutions to be voted on at a special diocesan convention scheduled for Oct. 24 at Christ Church in Mount Pleasant. The meeting was called in response to the Episcopal Church’s General Convention in Anaheim, Calif., in July, during which bishops and delegates decided overwhelmingly that gays and lesbians in committed relationships were eligible for “any ordained ministry” and that gay unions were not inconsistent with the principles of the church.
Since “the governing bodies of The Episcopal Church have failed to operate within the boundaries of its canons and continued participation in such behavior would make the Diocese of South Carolina complicit in this dysfunction, be it resolved that this Diocese authorize the Bishop and Standing Committee to begin withdrawing from all bodies of The Episcopal Church that have assented to actions contrary to Holy Scripture, the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this Church has received them,” the diocese’s Resolution No. 2 states.
Yes, my mother read this article and I had to explained that it is quite inaccurate when compared to what Bishop Lawrence is actually proposing….I hope a correction is printed immediately.
What must a parish actually DO to leave TEC? Larry
Yes, the vestry and convention discussion group at our little church were very confused by this. I suspect some of them wondered if I had been misled or was being naive. The accompanying letter to the editor in the same edition also contained factual error. I suppose the Episcopal Forum in Dio of SC – from whom Mr. Parker appears to get most of his “facts” – is feeling very anxious. They seem to be feeding each other misinformation which, unfortunately, only has the effect of increasing their anxiety.
Jennie