The fourth area church, All Saints Episcopal Church on Hilton Head
Island, staked a more moderate stance, but the Rev. Richard Lindsey, the
church's rector, said the congregation will comply with Lawrence's
views.
"I stand solidly behind the (national) Episcopal Church,"
he said. "That's not to say I'm not loyal to my bishop, but I tend to
disagree. ... We will honor where he stands because we are part of his
diocese and he is our bishop."
The church's website states it is a
"welcoming, inclusive" church, and Lindsey said he was not surprised
with the General Convention's decision because it is the direction the
national church has been headed for more than a decade.
"This is
the tip of the iceberg," he said. "The real issue is about how we read
scripture, about how we interpret God's Word today. God has given us
indications we need to have a broader understanding of creation and a
broader understanding of how humans are formed."
The cheers are for the Rev. Richard Lindsey's courage in speaking publicly of his loyalty to the national church and of his disagreement with the position of Bishop Lawrence on same-sex blessings.
The text of Bishop Lawrence's letter may be found at the link above.
Following the early departure from General Convention 2012 of all but two of the deputation from the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina, Bishop Mark Lawrence wrote a letter to the congregations in the diocese.
Some of you have actively followed the decisions of the 77th General Convention of the Episcopal Church. Others have been blissfully unaware that our denomination even had a General Convention. We have. And the actions taken mark a significant and distressing departure from the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this church has received them.
Read the letter in its entirety at the link above.
Paul Bagshaw at Not the Same Stream explains for us what happened at the recent conference in London of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans. Here's a snippet, but do read the entire post.
The epistemic divide is clear. FCA members have objective criteria (both
biblical and from within traditional church teaching, though the former
is definitive) by which to critique both secular society and Christian
praxis.
In particular history in the sense of legitimating and
identity-forming narratives is replaced by salvation history: judgement
by objective biblical and theological criteria.
Our own (or is he?) +Mark Lawrence attended the London conference and, according to Simon Sarmiento at Thinking Anglicans, he was invited by The Guildford Diocesan Evangelical Fellowship to give a talk in Surrey, before he headed home to Charleston, South Carolina. If you'd like, you can listen to +Mark's talk at Baby Blue Online.
I wonder if +Mark will attend General Convention of TEC this year. GC09 left him feeling quite dyspeptic. Few would be greatly surprised if the bishop bolted from TEC.
Random and out of context quotes from Bishop Mark Lawrence's address to the Reconvened Diocesan Convention of the Diocese of South Carolina:
I do not wish to keep you long this morning, though I may. ....
At our Diocesan Convention in 2009 I put forward what I believed was a God-given and gospel vision that would guide us through the stormy waters facing us at that time. The vision was succinctly stated as, “Making Biblical Anglicans for a Global Age.” ....
It is my great pleasure to announce at this Reconvened Annual Convention that he (Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali, retired Bishop of Rochester in England) has agreed to be Visiting Bishop in South Carolina for Anglican Communion Relationships. ....
Certainly we have challenged and will continue to challenge a tendency to revise the core doctrines of our church and to reshape the polity of the Episcopal Church through an inappropriate extension of power. ....
Along with the voices that just say, “Be quiet and get along,” there are others who say, “Bishop why don’t you just leave? Depart with or without the buildings?” To these voices I say “We still have a God-given vocation within this worldwide struggle.” Not unlike a battalion in a military campaign which is ordered to hold a pass or a position against overwhelming odds—so we are called to resist what many of us believe is a self-destructive trajectory within the Episcopal Church; to resist until it is no longer possible and at the same time to help shape the emerging Anglicanism in the 21st Century, which is increasingly relational and less institutional.
It may well be true that “The pen is mightier than the sword.” Unfortunately, it has not always been mightier than the axe. As that eloquent environmentalist Aldo Leopold wrote: “A conservationist is one who is humbly aware that with each stroke [of the axe] he is writing his signature on the face of his land.” Far too many of the leaders in our church have never learned this lesson.
There is much axe swinging these days in the Episcopal Church. I have grown sad from walking among the stumps of what was once a noble old-growth Episcopalian grove in the forest of Catholic Christianity. It may surprise some, but I write not to bemoan the theological or moral teaching that is in danger of falling to the logger’s axe. I have done that elsewhere. My concern here is that as the church’s polity is felled only a few bother to cry “timber.”
I have space to raise three concerns, and these briefly: the presiding bishop’s threat to our polity —litigious and constitutional; the revisions to the Title IV canons; and, finally, a passing word about inhibitions and depositions to solve our theological/spiritual crisis.
Bishop Lawrence never calls Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefforts Schori by her name, but rather refers to her as "the presiding bishop" or "she" or "her". He likens Bishop Katharine to a "rapacious lumberjack" who fells trees indiscriminately, rather than a conservationist, concerned about renewal of the forest - er - church. Yet he says:
I hasten to add my concerns are not with her personally. My problem is with how she and her chancellor are felling our polity.
It seems to me that the manner in which Bishop Lawrence speaks of Bishop Katharine and his failure to refer to her by name indicates a level of disdain bordering on contempt.
Bishop Lawrence does not write about the Episcopal Church's false theology, nor does he write about the church tearing "the fabric of the Anglican Communion". He speaks not of the Episcopal Church's mistaken stance on "profound questions of doctrine, morality and discipline". No, he's already covered those issues at great length. And don't I know it, for I've read a good many of his speeches and writings. Now Bishop Lawrence challenges Bishop Katharine's "axe swinging" manner of exercising her office. He references the "national" church with scare quotation marks, for the dioceses are "independent" (my scare quotes!) of the "national" church.
At his ordination service, Bishop Lawrence said,
"I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church."
Would this be the "national" church that Bishop Lawrence now references with scare quotes?
I'll leave it to others to take up the questions of whether Bishop Katharine has exceeded her authority or performed unconstitutional acts, or whether "we have entered into a new era of unprecedented hierarchy and autocratic leadership." Others far more knowledgeable than I will take up the question of whether "all of these are strokes of the axe hacking at the stately grove of TEC."
The disrespectful tone of this piece about the leadership of the Episcopal Church, from a supposedly loyal son of the Church, distracted me greatly from any rational points that Bishop Lawrence may have been attempting. I hope that one day, as he stands amongst the stumps of what was once a stately grove of trees, Bishop Lawrence may choose to consider his tone as composes his next public message, but the time is not now. Bishop Lawrence's address to the South Carolina diocesan Convention, which is presently taking place, can be read here in its verbose and bombastic entirety.
Note: On the diocesan web page, "Episcopal" does not appear in the name of the diocese. However, the Google search for "Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina" calls up the home page for the diocese in which the word "Episcopal", the church which, along with its Presiding Bishop, must not be named.
For further commentary, read the words of Bishop James R. Mathes, of the Episcopal Diocese of San Diego, at the Daily Episcopalian.
UPDATE: "The Lumberjack Song" thanks to Ann.
UPDATE 2: Andrew Gerns at The Lead continues with updates on the activities at the diocesan convention of the Diocese of South Carolina.
Andrew Gerns at The Lead offers an update on matters concerning the Diocese of South Carolina and Bishop Mark Lawrence, which includes a link to an excellent essay by Dr. Joan Gunderson.
I am truly surprised by the Anglican Communion Institute's and the Diocese of South Carolina's sudden negative reaction to the revised Title IV (ecclesiastical discipline) of the Episcopal Church canons. While I do not find the revision perfect and hesitated briefly before voting for them as a deputy at the 2009 General Convention, the time for protest is long past. In fact, these canons were developed over at least seven years in an open process that included posting of multiple drafts. The 2006 draft received numerous criticisms, but questions of constitutionality were not raised. In fact, conservative blogger Brad Drell republished (June 9, 2006), a set of comments made by Province I Chancellors after a careful study of the 2006 draft. Constitutionality issues were raised neither by Drell nor the Province I Chancellors. General Convention listened to the many critics and, rather than pass the 2006 version sent the draft back to committee for further revision. The intent of the revision was to move away from an adversarial mode based on a courtroom trial model focused on uncovering truth and fostering reconciliation. Its closest model was the professional standards board. Driving the revision were concerns about dealing with sexual misconduct, not theological controversy.
Dr. Gunderson concludes:
So why is there such a fuss now? Is it really the changes that worry South Carolina, or is it that some are looking for a wedge issue to drive South Carolina further from the rest of the Church and isolate it more? Were some of South Carolina’s leaders following a strategy based on evading one set of disciplinary canons only to find that the loopholes they had counted on were about to be closed? Were South Carolina leaders so asleep at the switch that for five years they didn't notice a major revision of the canons until the deadline for implementation of the canons drew near? Whatever explanation you pick, it would seem the problem lies more within the Diocese of South Carolina than in Title IV.
Why only now the objections? An excellent question, indeed.
It is increasingly clear that we are engaged in a worldwide struggle for the soul of Anglicanism in the 21st Century. This Diocese of South Carolina has been affirmed in our stand by numerous Dioceses and Provinces around the world: Archbishops and bishops from Ireland to Australia, Southeast Asia to Tanzania, from England to Egypt have pledged us their prayers and their hearts. What will emerge from this struggle we cannot say—but I am convinced of our vocation to Make Biblical Anglicans for a Global Age. It is far more than a slogan for a T-shirt. Not unlike a battalion in a military campaign which is ordered to hold a pass even against overwhelming odds, we are called to resist what appears is a self-destructive trajectory by many within The Episcopal Church. We are called to stand our ground and proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ until it is no longer possible; and at the same time to continue to help shape the emerging Anglicanism in the 21st Century, which is increasingly less provincial, less institutional and more relational. If this is our calling then we rejoice that his strength is made perfect in weakness. This is not a time to give-in nor give up; rather let us hold fast to the best of our Episcopal heritage while sharing Christ’s transforming freedom—with hearts set free—to a needy world today.
Cue the violins.
Bp. Lawrence's overblown rhetoric is a call to battle in the struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil, and the troops on the side of good rally and prepare for battle knowing that Jesus is on their side. (Multiple eye-rolls)
Yes, I know. Lots of links, but it can't be helped if you want the latest information. I lifted shamelessly from The Lead, for which I pray Andrew Gerns forgives me. You really should go over there to read their article, because Andrew includes more links (Yes, even more links than my post!) and more information.
