Before I conclude these remarks I must inform you of one further development that has happened this week. One of the tasks of leadership is to make available as best as one is able not only the opportunities but also the challenges, and with both, the risks involved. I have spoken of many of the opportunities we have seized in just the last six months. I turn now to a real challenge and a grievous risk. On Tuesday evening of this week as Allison and I were driving home from Sewanee I received a phone call from a fellow bishop. He said that he and five other bishops had received an email earlier that evening from the Presiding Bishop. She was encouraging each of them to speak with me as “the apparent focus of this diocesan gathering does not bode well for [Mark’s] status as a bishop who has sworn to uphold the doctrine, discipline, and worship of this Church.” Perhaps she has forgotten it has not boded well for my status as a bishop since the first election. But frankly for me it has never been about my status”” since that September morning in 2006 when Bishop Salmon called while I sat in a Board of Examining Chaplains meeting in Fresno, California to tell me I had been elected as the XIV Bishop of South Carolina it has been unswervingly about this diocese. It remains that to this day.
Well upon hearing of her email to these bishops I wrote directly to the Presiding Bishop on Wednesday morning addressing many of my concerns and reminding her of the concerns of this Convention; that she had been informed by certified mail of the resolution which expressed our expectation that she remove the attorney unconstitutionally retained within this diocese. I then wrote that after six months we had still not heard from her. While her email in response failed once again to address this concern, she did write of her fear about the havoc that she believes is likely to ensue if I keep on my present course. What she fails to address or I suppose to understand is the havoc that is likely to ensue if we depart from our present course. Thus while there is no absence of opportunities that come to us they come replete with a church filled with challenges. Several of those bishops who received the email have called me or sent me emails since that email was sent to them. More than a few of them said, “Mark, we need your voice in the house of bishops. We need the voice of South Carolina.” I said, “This is my voice. You need to understand. This is my voice.” So the question is, “Is there a place for a vigorously stated minority opinion in this church?” I believe it is also the voice of many of the people here in this Diocese of South Carolina. If you want our voice, then we’re giving it to you.
Thus, the opportunities come in a church filled with challenge. There is no risk free way forward for us. I leave you this morning with words of a preacher from another era, who wrote: “”¦if it be a man’s ambition to avoid the troubles of life the recipe is perfectly simple. Let him shed his ambitions in every direction, let him cut the wings of every soaring purpose, and let him assiduously cultivate a little life, with the fewest correspondences and relationships. By this means, a whole continent of afflictions will be escaped and remain unknown.” (J. H. Jowett)
And I might dare to add one final thought to this preacher’s words, that along with a whole continent of afflictions that will be escaped and remain unknown there will be an entire universe of opportunities that will be lost and will go unfulfilled. You must weigh, my brothers and sisters, you must weigh these opportunities and challenges along with their risks. You must weigh them on the scale of your heart.
It is indeed a great time to be alive. But it is also a time that tries men’s souls.
But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
Prophetic teaching.
May God bless Bishop Lawrence and his diocese. May God defend them in their mission and in their resistance against the wiles of Her Most Reverendship. May other bishops finally recognize that they are cutting their own throats by continuing to look the other way as HMR continues to grab power at every turn.
Of course there’s no place for his voice. The left has long since drowned in confirmation bias. Those expressing even questions … must be extirpated.
In my 60+ years in the church, and I am a 16th-generation Anglican, I have never encountered such absolute Evil. Ms. Schori and her allies are agents of the Adversary himself.
Kendall+ and Bishop Mark,
Would that I had more to offer than my prayers, but I do offer those. May our Lord continue to guard you and guide you.
TJ
A priest named Dennis Maynard has an interesting new book called “When Sheep Attack”.
It’s important that the faithful laity and clergy of DioSC recognize the tactics that will be (and are being) used by minorities to undermine parish and diocesan leaders.
The PB’s sending an e-mail to 6 bishops, to have them give ungodly advice to the Bishop of SC, is such a tactic. He needs to request a formal meeting with her, in the presence of his Standing Committee and a trustworthy attorney. Any communication he has with her should be under the same circumstances.
For some time, I have doubted whether the PB is acting as if she were made in God’s image, and whether she is a child of God. What she’s been doing, and the deposition of Bp. Cox comes to the forefront of my mind, is not the work of the Holy Spirit.
Many Enlightened Christians seem to question whether human beings can be agents of the devil, and I’ve been taken to task for suggesting that several TEC bishops need exorcisms. I agree completely with #3, for I’ve seen nothing that would make me suspect otherwise.
God shall equip him, the laity, and the clergy for this upcoming battle. Don’t mess with South Carolina!
Bart (#3),
If you can honestly say that in a life that stretches back to the 1940s you have never encountered such “absolute evil” as the Presiding Bishop you must have been oblivious to a great deal. It really detracts from what Bishop Lawrence is attempting to defend to put matters in such terms.
It’s also extremely dangerous to confuse the conflict of Error and Truth with the conflict of Darkness and Light; they can overlap, but frequently they’re far from synonymous.
[url=http://catholicandreformed.blogspot.com]Catholic and Reformed[/url]
The truth is, there is nothing very surprising in this. Is anyone really surprised that Schori would undertake a gambit of this sort? I’m certainly not. I’m not much worried about the devil being the cause; I like to think he is a little brighter than this, a little cleverer. I would offer that Schori’s character and agenda alone are quite sufficient as a cause. Larry
I am reminded of how Dietrich Bonhoffer’s friends urged him to leave Nazi Germany; instead, he chose to be a voice of truth in that cesspool. The Holocaust claimed his body, but not his soul. Bishop Lawrence has that same integrity.
Jeremy, it is the confluence of both error [i]and[/i] darkness that is uniquely evil in the current PB. Her scorched-earth policy bears no resemblance to the approach one would expect from a follower of Christ.
If the PB is not an agent of the adversary, she certainly is his cat’s paw. She has centralized power that is not constitutional, and her inhibition of several clergy circumvent the established procedures. If hers is not a lawless regime, then neither is Obama’s, or that of Hugo Chavez. It is evident that she is bent on silencing any dissent.
I believe we need to consider seriously whether she and her minions have consciously or subconsciously adopted a strategy of teaching liberals and moderates in TEC to hate conservatives. Once that hatred is in place, those who are hated are bullied, bashed, and then sent away (if not destroyed).
It’s an age-old way for people to deal with each other. (Remember how hate infected an entire nation, and church, in WWII.)
Such practices are of course contrary to the teaching of Holy Scripture, but the revisionists have already tossed Scripture out the window in order to “ordain” and “marry” persons living in unholy extramarital sexual relationships.
Over the years, some bloggers have posted excerpts from the HOB/D list. Does one see a lot of Christian love there?
While we must pray for the TEC leadership (just as Pius XII once prayed for the leader of Germany), we must also recognize what’s happening for what it apparently is. (The devil’s only real power is that of deception.)
The bishops of TEC and the Anglican Communion must not allow continued legitimization of the PB’s ascent to unconstitutional levels of authority and power.
Please if the comments could focus on the content of Bishop Lawrence’s address.
Is it mere coincidence that the PB uses the term havoc? The following comes immediately to mind concerning her actions:
[blockquote]And Caesar’s spirit, raging for revenge,
With Ate by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch’s voice
Cry “Havoc!” and let slip the dogs of war,
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial.[/blockquote]
The diocese of SC has chosen a Godly, principled road, but surely one that will be a very hard road. Prayers for all concerned.
Bishop Lawrence’s address and actions make me now officially admit to regretting my vote on our standing committee to approve his selection as Bishop. He promised one thing, and here, two or three years later, he’s proving that he just said what was necessary to get approved. Sad, but I suppose the joke’s on me for taking him at his word.
Of course, Mr. Johnson, your comment assumes that the clergy and laity of the Church in South Carolina are witless dupes who blow in the direction of any purple cassock. Mark Lawrence did not invent the problems at hand. He, for one, is just being honest enough to stop treating the people of the Church like House of Bishops’ little mushrooms: “they grow best by being kept in the dark”.
Marvelous, courageous words from +Lawrence. I especially love the allusion to Joshua’s famous words at the end of his life, “[i]But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD[/i]” (Josh. 24:15).
That biblical allusion is very apt, for Joshua too was challenging the people he led to recommit themselves to remaining faithful to the God who had redeemed them and to resist all forms of syncretism. And just as Joshua led the people of Israel at Shechem in pledging anew their exclusive allegiance to Yahweh, so this courageous bishop is leading his diocese to renew their pledge to serve Christ faithfully and without compromise, no matter what the cost.
Now that’s true leadership. That’s acting like a successor of the apostles.
I have no doubts that the Bishop of Albany is equally courageous and orthodox, but +Love (and I say this as a former priest of Albany) doesn’t seem to have the same incredible qualities of being a visionary leader who can communicate a bold vision so compellingly that he takes almost the whole diocese with him. That is what makes +Lawrence so unique in the current HoB, and such a threat to the PB and her ideological ilk.
Thanks be to God for such a man!
David Handy+
Despite Kendall’s caution in #12, I will venture one brief comment about the PB’s ominous racheting up of her threats and pressure. To me, this is a clear sign that she is spinning further out of control.
This resembles addictive behavior, in my eyes. Whether she is addicted to power, or merely to her own all-important political agenda that she is willing to sacrifice everything else for, in the end it doesn’t matter. Like any addict in the throes of acting out, she is getting worse and worse.
And like any addict, I believe she is probably incapable of stopping the addictive cycle. Only outside intervention can do that, and who is there who can intervene and stop her now??
In a recent fine op-ed piece at [b]The Living Church[/b] (Oct. 1st), +Lawrence used the graphic and apt image of the PB (and her ideological ilk) as reckless lumberjacks, felling trees needlessly in an old-growth forest. So who is going to intervene and stop her from destroying much of TEC in her blind pursuit of what she vainly imagines is the cause of “justice” and “social progress?”
It sure isn’t going to be any of the Instruments of Unity in the AC.
David Handy+
Proverbs 18:10
The name of the Lord is a strong tower;
the righteous run to it and are safe.
Psalm 61
1 Hear my cry, O God;
listen to my prayer.
2 From the ends of the earth I call to you,
I call as my heart grows faint;
lead me to the rock that is higher than I.
3 For you have been my refuge,
a strong tower against the foe.
4 I long to dwell in your tent forever
and take refuge in the shelter of your wings.
5 For you have heard my vows, O God;
you have given me the heritage of those who fear your name.
6 Increase the days of the king’s life,
his years for many generations.
7 May he be enthroned in God’s presence forever;
appoint your love and faithfulness to protect him.
8 Then will I ever sing praise to your name
and fulfill my vows day after day.
I have walked this same path with Bishop Jack Iker, and I am glad of it. The days ahead now will challenge the soul of this Diocese but be not afraid, only open wide the doors of the Diocese of South Carolina to Christ and He will guide you every step of the way.
Hey #14- What part of NOT LEAVING do you not understand? SC is going NOWHERE much to the chagrin of the national church. SC will remain a rock for those with a revisionist gospel to dash themselves upon. What about Lawrence is so deceptive that you would change your vote?
I pray that this might be considered within the ambit of the Bishop’s address, but my thoughts go specifically to the 6 e-mails of the PB described here. Fulminations of evil and ill-doing on her part aside: what is her intention by making these contacts? And how does Bishop Lawrence read those intentions?
You can interpret this in a relatively few ways: 1) she hoped that these particular 6 could convince Bp. Lawrence to change his course. That seems unlikely on the face of it, no? 2) she wished those 6 bishops to see more clearly how she intends to proceed in order to influence their future responses to her acts against Bp. Lawrence/SC. That does not seem too implausible. 3) or she might have selected 6 plausible “leverage point” bishops, who may or may not try to shift SC, but knew that among them were at least a couple who would surely contact him and ensure that the word would “get out” that she isn’t going to accept this kind of action without resistance. And then there’s the most cynical, but probably considered most probable scenario in these T19 parts — 4) she wants to establish her desire to see a mutually satisfactory resolution largely as a talking point in future litigation or standing committee action within TEC/PECUSA structures.
I’m not Episcopalian, and only mildly Anglican (in a Wesleyan sort of “lookee there” sort of manner), so I may describe the processes incompletely. But these four options would seem to exhaust the possible intentions behind this initiative of the Presiding Bishop’s office at this time. I’m open to other interpretations, or a more astute mingling of the four into a working scenario . . .
(Of course, what I’d really want to know to calculate which scenario is operative is something I won’t ever get — who were the BCC’s on this e-mail? I assume, I hope non-cynically, that part of the intention was for each bishop receiving this to see the other five who were apparently on the “To:” line. But the “Bcc:” line would really tell you what’s up, such as “boothbeers@lawyers.com” etc.)
#14, I do not understand your objection. How has he betrayed a promise? Larry
RE: “He promised one thing, and here, two or three years later, he’s proving that he just said what was necessary to get approved.”
He certainly did not promise to not differentiate the Diocese of SC from the grotesque corruptions of the national entity in which the diocese resides, while remaining in that entity.
I can understand, though, revisionist activists loathing that differentiation, as it sets up a nice striking contrast for all Anglicans to see.
Would that KJS and the majority of the HoB had upheld their ordination vows to safeguard the faith and order of the church half so well as +Mark Lawrence has upheld his promises.
Please keep Bishop Lawrence, the Standing Committee, and the priests and parishes of the Diocese of South Carolina in your prayers DAILY.
#14 If you were on a ship with lifeboats and saw the ship had been steered toward rocks certain to destroy it, wouldn’t you want to “differentiate” from it and take any sane people left into a lifeboat on a divergent course to safety?
KJS to her 6 chosen messanger bishops:
“Fly, my pretties!”
After all, KJS [i]is[/i] from the [i]West[/i], isn’t she? 🙂