(Local Paper) Roy Hills on the Dio. of South C.–Diocese has long history of moving away from church

Read it all.


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * South Carolina, - Anglican: Commentary, Episcopal Church (TEC), TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts, TEC Conflicts: South Carolina, TEC Diocesan Conventions/Diocesan Councils

5 comments on “(Local Paper) Roy Hills on the Dio. of South C.–Diocese has long history of moving away from church

  1. Jeremy Bonner says:

    [i]While most of the dioceses in the U.S. encourage open searches for priests in parishes with vacancies, this diocese has chosen to select priests who seem to fit the narrow line.[/i]

    [i]Some of our approved, good and orthodox Episcopal seminaries have been excluded by this diocese as “not where we should send our people.”[/i]

    While no doubt true at least from Fr. Hills’ perspective, he must surely be aware that the same process occurs in the wider church. It’s just that elewhere its Trinity and Nashotah that are blacklisted and conservative clergy who are excluded from shortlists.

  2. Sarah says:

    RE: “While most of the dioceses in the U.S. encourage open searches for priests in parishes with vacancies . . . ”

    What a hoot of a clueless comment from Roy Hill. Up here in the Diocese of Upper South Carolina our diocesan apparatchiks routinely threw out dozens of traditional clergy from the process before the names ever got to parish search committees. It was like a scythe going through the prospects.

  3. Ralph says:

    [blockquote]I was at the General Convention when our presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, was elected by our House of Bishops and House of Deputies. The convention hall was overcome with what many thought to be an action of the Holy Spirit.[/blockquote]
    Heh. Grin. This is where I stopped reading. ‘Tis a letter…full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

  4. MichaelA says:

    Hmmm, well if the diocese has been “moving away” from TEC for over 40 years, then why is this Bishop Lawrence’s fault? You can’t have it both ways.

    Fr Hills writes:
    [blockquote] “It is at least questionable that this diocese portrays itself as “right” and “orthodox” while almost 2 million other Christian Episcopalians are viewed as “wrong” and “sinful”.” [/blockquote]
    Firstly, its not “almost 2 million other Christian Episcopalians” -whatever way you look at it, there are many Episcopalians that agree with those in South Carolina. They may not be popular with the leaders of TEC, but they are definitely there.

    Secondly, if Rev. Hills is going to try to play a numbers game, then what about other Episcopalians/Anglicans in the world? There are over 80 million of them, which makes TEC’s “almost 2 million” seem a very small drop in a very large bucket.
    [blockquote] “It is possible that the diocese is not nearly as unanimous in its thinking as the leadership has believed.” [/blockquote]
    Probably. Neither is the rest of TEC (did you really not see that response coming, Rev Hills? Its a pretty obvious one).
    [blockquote] “TEC is not perfect, but neither is the Diocese of South Carolina, and I think it improbable that the diocese will find another alliance more perfect.” [/blockquote]
    I may be wrong but I don’t recall anyone in Dio. South Carolina suggesting for a moment that they wanted a “perfect” alliance. They have said that they want to be in communion with those who don’t openly flout the Christian faith. That sounds a fairly reasonable and restrained objective.

    And what is all this about “finding another alliance”? Dio SC is already in communion with orthodox Anglicans all over the world. Its not a matter of finding – it is already there.
    [blockquote] “Now the leadership of this diocese seems to believe that it can “leave” and take the people and property with them, and the larger church, to which they have been canonically tied, should just acquiesce.” [/blockquote]
    As to whether property can be “taken” (either by Dio SC or by TEC), that will be a matter for the courts, if no agreement can be reached. But you can’t “take” people. As has been amply proved time and again over the last few years, the people go where they wish to, and this is quite independent of the property. If the people don’t want to stay in TEC, they won’t, even if every skerrick of property does.
    [blockquote] “I believe that Jesus was “radically inclusive” and a lover of all people.” [/blockquote]
    Thank goodness, Fr Hills finally gets it! Jesus did love everyone. And so he warned them: “Unless you repent, you too will all perish.” It is the sign of true love to warn people against a terrible danger. Jesus made it his business to warn all people that unless they accepted and relied on his atoning sacrifice (death) for their sins, they will perish. What is TEC doing to get this warning out to all people?

  5. Luke says:

    Mr. Hills – how repetitively sad this is.

    It is the Diocesan’s role to monitor incoming priests, just as always, and, as always, postulants are directed to seminaries. If this were not so, why would the range of available teaching vary all across the rainbow?