South Carolina Diocesan Trial Day 14–Drama Ends with the Testimony of Bishop Mark Lawrence

The Right Rev. Mark J. Lawrence, 14th bishop of the Diocese of SC, whom TEC supporters have accused of plotting to lead the Diocese out of the denomination, was the only witness called during the final day of the trial. Diocesan attorneys asked him several questions about TEC’s authority and the process followed to punish him.

When asked if he had planned to lead the diocese out of TEC, he said, “Absolutely not.” He explained that no one had ever asked him to lead the diocese out and said it only decided to leave after TEC had taken steps to remove him as bishop ”“ violating its own process for doing that.

The bishop also contradicted testimony from earlier in the week, in which TEC witnesses claimed that the denomination has supreme authority over its dioceses and congregations. The bishop said that he shared the opinion of 14 other bishops that TEC has no actual authority over its member dioceses.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Christian Life / Church Life, * Culture-Watch, * South Carolina, Church History, Episcopal Church (TEC), Law & Legal Issues, TEC Conflicts, TEC Conflicts: South Carolina, Theology

8 comments on “South Carolina Diocesan Trial Day 14–Drama Ends with the Testimony of Bishop Mark Lawrence

  1. Karen B. says:

    The Rev. James Gibson has a good reflection on the trial at his Locusts & Wild Honey blog:
    http://locusthoney.blogspot.com/2014/07/south-carolina-end-of-trial-and-end-of.html

    It was encouraging to read his words about the passion and energy of all those from the Dio of SC involved in the trial. Sounds like there has been much answered prayer in terms of grace and strength and wisdom for all representing the Diocese.

    Praying for a good outcome, but above all that these matters would not distract from the preaching of Christ and making disciples…

  2. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    ‘he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts’

    Prayers for the wonderful Diocese of South Carolina and the judge as she deliberates.

  3. CSeitz-ACI says:

    What was all the commotion about on Day 13 between Goodstein and Kostel? It sounds like the latter was judged by the former as ‘instructing’ her on matters of her own discretion. The reports from the TEC side major in pointing to the commotion but don’t give any reasonable explanation for it. They only see the Judge as an intemperate and biased idiot.
    In the TX Supreme Ct case I can well recall Kostel acting as if she was the prime authority and bordered on insubordination at one point.

  4. Katherine says:

    The TECSC blogs about the last day of the trial were all wound up claiming that the DioSC counsel had given away the store by somehow showing that Bishop Lawrence was no longer able to lead the Diocese once he left TEC. However, I don’t see this gets them anywhere, because even if the Bishop is (rightly or wrongly) restricted, the Standing Committee always has standing to lead the Diocese.

    Good this is over. The Quincy appeal verdict is very encouraging as well.

  5. SC blu cat lady says:

    #3. It is no surprise that The TECSC site has a rather “enraged” Judge Goodstein reprimanding the “mild-mannered” Kostel. The author is not known for his “objectivity”….

    There was some sort of “tense conversation” between the two. I think Jeremy Bonner and Alan Haley have the best explanation. From my memory (you should be able to find that day’s post over at SFIF)….. The point of contention was the “abandonment of communion” certificate/form was entered into evidence by TECSC as “final decision” by which Judge Goodstein must abide in her decision. However, our Chancellor, Mr. Wade Logan, testified that it was similar to a conviction not a sentence. Ms. Kostel objected to that. Then ensued the conversation between Kostel and the Judge. I suspect there was indeed some *heated* exchange of words. Judge Goodstein mentioned possible sanctions against Kostel for violating Rule 3.1 (SC code that governs attorney conduct or something similar). The Judge asked local TECSC attorneys talk to Ms. Kostel privately and counsel her as to Rule 3.1). There have been many mis-steps by TECSC attorneys. Many wonder if they are wanting a re-trial….. That is just a guess. But they have really been off their game. On the other side, our attorneys have kept their cool, have objected TECSC statements occassionally but never angered Judge Goodstein like Ms. Kostel did.

  6. Luke says:

    Desperation often leads to mis-steps.

  7. SC blu cat lady says:

    True#6…… or is this a plan to get a “mis-trial” and then a new trial? Their behavior makes me wonder……. really wonder….

  8. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    Hanlon’s razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

    We need to keep praying earnestly for the wonderful diocese of South Carolina, its legal team and for the Judge and always with humility, thanks and praise to God for all the blessings he daily grants to those who acknowledge his name. In all this may his name be lifted up and his Kingdom established.