Monday, February 15, 2010

BISHOP MARK LAWRENCE'S RECENT PASTORAL LETTER

In Bishop Mark Lawrence's recent pastoral letter to the members of the Diocese of South Carolina, the bishop seems distressed by the request for certain documents from the diocese and a number of the churches within the diocese by the office of the Presiding Bishop. I read over the letters of request by the attorney for the PB's office, Thomas Tisdale, to Wade Logan, Chancellor of the diocese, and I see no reason why the diocese objects to supplying the documents. Of course, I have no special knowledge of canon law nor of the law of the land.  The bishop asserts that he is the only bishop with canonical jurisdiction in the diocese, and he, along with his Standing Committee, claim sovereignty for the Diocese of South Carolina. Note that "Episcopal" is missing from the name of the diocese.

My first thoughts upon reading Bishop Mark Lawrence's letter were, "Whining, self-pitying, and sanctimonious!" - which led me to wonder if, in his letter, Bishop Lawrence is setting up his case for a claim of persecution by the office of the Presiding Bishop against him and his doocese.

Bishop Lawrence counsels against a unilateral, precipitous response to the "unjust intrusions", "provocative interference", and "unprecedented incursions" into the affairs of the diocese.

In the service for the Ordination of a Bishop in the Episcopal Church, Mark Lawrence was asked:

Will you guard the faith, unity, and discipline of the Church?

He answered:

I will, for the love of God.

One presumes that Mark Lawrence affirmed the statement in the knowledge that "the Church" meant the Episcopal Church.

Surely statements such as the one below from his address to the Special Convention of his diocese had nothing to do with the request for documents:

Surely most of you know that I believe the foundations of The Episcopal Church and this Anglican way of being a Christian are being bit by bit destroyed.
....

This false teaching, that I have called the Gospel of Indiscriminate Inclusivity, has challenged the doctrine of the Trinity, the Uniqueness and Universality of Christ, the Authority of Scripture, our understanding of Baptism, and now that last refuge of order, our Constitutions and Canons. (This is the kudzu.)
....

The General Convention has become the problem. It has replace a balanced piety in this Church with the politics of one-dimensional activism.

And his mantra repeated no less than five times:

"When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?" (Ps 11:3)

13 comments:

  1. Nothing gives a bishop power like professional martyrdom.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unless they have something to hide, why would it be necessary to reschedule the diocesan convention?
    I like it: the EC has been burned too many times by these holier than thou radicals, and I had been hoping for the church to be on the offensive.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unless they have something to hide....

    Yes, they'd need more time for that.

    Bp. Lawrence takes a more temperate tone in his letter compared to his words in the nine-page speech to the Special Convention. Perhaps the request for documents had a sobering effect.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The backroom scurryings of Lawrence and his co-conspirators - not least the convention delayed in response to Tisdale's letters - give the lie to the "reasserter" (surely there is a more appropriate collective noun for these right wing ideologues than their own self-description?) claim that the recent SC Supreme Court Pawley's Island ruling threw out the Dennis canon. Had it done so, Lawrence & Co could - and, I doubt not, would - have no hesitation in seceding immediately.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It was certainly interesting for me to read that post. Thanx for it. I like such themes and anything connected to them. I would like to read more soon.

    Best regards

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lapin, I think the leadership in the DoSC is a little concerned.

    Anonymous, if you return, please give a name or make up a pseudonym.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Perhaps it was good that he didn't give Tisdale the info as there seems to be some debate over who the official lawyers for 815 are. I know many here hate anything that the Anglican Curmudgeon has to say, but he has a copy of a letter from another law office to Tisdale saying that he shouldn't be getting the info because he's not the lawyer for TEC, they are--and they didn't ask for it. So, if I wandered into my diocese office and said I wanted all their records because I said I was the TEC lawyer, or the former TEC lawyer, or a friend of a lawyer, why should they just hand them over? How does one prove who the official lawyers for TEC are?

    Chris H.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Chris, a link to Anglican Curmudgeon's post would be helpful. Why didn't Bishop Lawrence mention that there's a question as to whether Wade Logan represents 815? Does he prefer to wear the martyrdom cloak?

    My question is: Are the documents available to anyone who wishes to see them? In reading the letters of request, I saw nothing of a request that needed to be kept confidential, such as personnel files.

    Here's the list:

    January 25, 2010 Tisdale Letter Regarding Perceived Threatened Departures from Diocese of South Carolina
    January 26, 2010 Tisdale Letter Requesting List of Recent Ordinations
    January 26, 2010 Tisdale Letter Requesting Diocesan Convention Documents
    January 26, 2010 Tisdale Letter Requesting Parish By Laws Ammendments
    January 27, 2010 Tisdale Letter Requesting Standing Committee Minutes
    January 28, 2010 Tisdale Letter Requesting St. Luke's Documents
    January 28, 2010 Tisdale Letter Requesting St. Andrew's Documents
    January 29, 2010 Tisdale Letter Requesting St. John's Documents
    January 29, 2010 Tisdale Letter Requesting Trinity's Documents


    I have nothing against Anglican Curmudgeon. I've heard of him, but I don't read his blog.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think it is more likely that some of SC's churches are getting ready to bolt and some in the congregations have appealed to 815 for help in keeping their congregations in the Episcopal Church. Lawrence seems to just want to give away the store rather than resist these moves. Maybe he is hoping to be their bishop when enough of them bolt since he is in sympathy.

    It seems that some of the letters have to do with changes to the wording of the Declaration (bcp p. 538-9) that all ordinands have to sign.

    Anglican Curmudgeon is usually wrong about all things Episcopal, canons and law. He indulges in wishful thinking instead.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I should have said "Thomas Tisdale represents 815" in my comment instead of Wade Logan, who represents the diocese.

    Ann, you are, no doubt, correct. So the diocese changed the BCP? Gee, I didn't know that a diocese could do that. I expect that a diocese cannot, on its own, change the BCP. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am not sure they changed the oath of conformity but that is what the letter seem to indicate. My sense of it is that they MAY have taken out The Episcopal Church and put this Church or some other wording

    ReplyDelete
  12. Well, Bishop Lawrence spoke the following words at his ordination:

    ...and I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church.

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous commenters, please sign a name, any name, to distinguish one anonymous commenter from another. Thank you.