(AP) Judge again weighs issues in South Carolina Episcopal schism

For the second time in recent months, U.S. District Judge C. Weston Houck is weighing whether issues arising from the acrimonious Episcopal schism in eastern South Carolina belong in federal court.

As two bishops sat with their attorneys on either side of his Charleston courtroom, Houck heard about an hour of arguments Thursday on one bishop’s request for an injunction against the other.

Charles vonRosenberg, the bishop of parishes remaining with the national Episcopal Church, wants the court to block Mark Lawrence, the bishop of churches that left last year, from using the name and the symbols of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina.

Read it all.


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Culture-Watch, * South Carolina, Episcopal Church (TEC), Ethics / Moral Theology, Law & Legal Issues, Presiding Bishop, Religion & Culture, TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts, TEC Conflicts: South Carolina, Theology

5 comments on “(AP) Judge again weighs issues in South Carolina Episcopal schism

  1. Katherine says:

    Ah, so it is the federal trademark case, and the ruling will come in a week or so. This article is much clearer than the one posted yesterday.

    The judge sounded incredulous: “You want me to decide who’s the bishop?”

  2. Luke says:

    And, well he should sound incredulous.

  3. WestJ says:

    Hopefully the judge realizes this is more smoke from TEC. He ruled correctly earlier, hopefully he will do so again.

  4. tjmcmahon says:

    I am still a bit confused. Was this another case where the judge would have been expected to stay the case pending the outcome of the state trial, but TEC insisted on a hearing, anyway? (Anything to waste time and money for the other side). But assuming that the judge rules in a way consistent with his earlier ruling, the case will be put off until after the state court rules, correct?
    Also left wondering how TEC can agree to a ruling in state court, and then challenge it in federal court. Can von Rosenburg pretend NOT to be part of TEC for the purpose of suing +Lawrence over the diocesan seal, since TEC agreed not to contest what he is contesting? (Sorry that is so convoluted, but convolution is what TEC seems all about nowadays)
    Not much to do but pray, and remember Who it is that will ultimately judge this case- something that seems all but forgotten in the theology and ecclesiology of modern TEC.

  5. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    Yes, TJ.
    [blockquote] Matthew McGill, representing vonRosenberg, said the bishop is not a party to the state suit and Lawrence’s use of diocesan symbols involves federal trademark law.

    He said vonRosenberg “has a right to a federal forum for a federal claim.”[/blockquote]
    Very hard to see how Graff von Rosencrantz unt Guildenstern can maintain that when he is the nominee, appointee, payee and tool of the TEC Presiding Stinker.