Bishop Lawrence Out of the TEC

[Sean611]

Can you expand on what you mean? What you think is happening and what the moderates need to wake up to? I can think of a few different things you might mean.

Basically our Presiding Bishop Schori and her cohorts and bishops who sympathize with her are given free reign to wreck havoc on all those who oppose them. Whether it be bishop Lawrence and the diocese of South Carolina or selling former TEC parishes to muslim groups for pennies on the dollar when the former Episcopalians are willing to pay for full price. Denying prospective clergy men and women entry into seminary because they don't vote for the right political party. She is just a terrible leader and she has no interest in growing a healthy church. Also, her theology is some kind of mixed mess of mainline protestantism and "progressive" Christianity. Christopher Hitchens went so far as to speculate that she must be a closet atheist! This type of theology only appeals to a very small fringe element. These views and actions don't represent TEC, in my opinion.

Sadly, most people in the pews have no idea what is going on.

 

[Albion]

Basically our Presiding Bishop Schori and her cohorts and bishops who sympathize with her are given free reign to wreck havoc on all those who oppose them. Whether it be bishop Lawrence and the diocese of South Carolina or selling former TEC parishes to muslim groups for pennies on the dollar when the former Episcopalians are willing to pay for full price. Denying prospective clergy men and women entry into seminary because they don't vote for the right political party. She is just a terrible leader and she has no interest in growing a healthy church. Also, her theology is some kind of mixed mess of mainline protestantism and "progressive" Christianity. Christopher Hitchens went so far as to speculate that she must be a closet atheist! This type of theology only appeals to a very small fringe element. These views and actions don't represent TEC, in my opinion.

Sadly, most people in the pews have no idea what is going on.

Did you know that the reason she was elected was precisely because she was unqualified and would make a mess of TEC? The several bishops who later founded ACNA didn't want TEC to go on fooling anyone in the public or the Global South by being able to pose as moderately conservative or conciliatory but rather to have someone who had none of that tact or spiritual reputation (as has held up the Abp. of Canterbury's reputation despite his having done a poor job as an administrator).

 

[Sean611]

l

 

[Adam Warlock]

Did you know that the reason she was elected was precisely because she was unqualified and would make a mess of TEC? The several bishops who later founded ACNA didn't want TEC to go on fooling anyone in the public or the Global South by being able to pose as moderately conservative or conciliatory but rather to have someone who had none of that tact or spiritual reputation (as has held up the Abp. of Canterbury's reputation despite his having done a poor job as an administrator).

That is sickening and reflects very poorly on those bishops.

 

[Sean611]

Did you know that the reason she was elected was precisely because she was unqualified and would make a mess of TEC? The several bishops who later founded ACNA didn't want TEC to go on fooling anyone in the public or the Global South by being able to pose as moderately conservative or conciliatory but rather to have someone who had none of that tact or spiritual reputation (as has held up the Abp. of Canterbury's reputation despite his having done a poor job as an administrator).

I think I read this wrong initially, basically the bishops who went on to found the ACNA purposefully voted for her because she would help implode the TEC?

 

[Albion]

I think I read this wrong initially, basically the bishops who went on to found the ACNA purposefully voted for her because she would help implode the TEC?

Yes and no. "No" because they considered TEC to already be beyond saving. "Yes," in that they deliberately voted for an unqualified, intemperate candidate because--as I got it--they wanted the rest of the Communion to know what was really going on here instead of being misled into thinking that such claims were gross exaggerations put forth by a handful of malcontents. The several previous presiding bishops were thought skilled enough to have pulled the wool over the eyes of the rest of the Communion by making use of their reputations as moderates (although they actually were not that), very experienced leaders, and deeply spiritual men who could be counted upon to seek the reconciliation of the various factions within TEC. They felt that there was no way Bp. Schori could pull that off.

 

[MKJ]

Yes and no. "No" because they considered TEC to already be beyond saving. "Yes," in that they deliberately voted for an unqualified, intemperate candidate because--as I got it--they wanted the rest of the Communion to know what was really going on here instead of being misled into thinking that such claims were gross exaggerations put forth by a handful of malcontents. The several previous presiding bishops were thought skilled enough to have pulled the wool over the eyes of the rest of the Communion by making use of their reputations as moderates (although they actually were not that), very experienced leaders, and deeply spiritual men who could be counted upon to seek the reconciliation of the various factions within TEC. They felt that there was no way Bp. Schori could pull that off.

Hmm. Interesting. Was this something they made public or did it happen under the radar?

I can see why people feel that is distasteful - it is distasteful.

On the other hand, I can see if you had a choice between a candidate that was radical and had no bones about pursuing that agenda openly, and one who was radical but hid it and moved his agenda forward by stealth, you might pick the former person.

 

[Albion]

Hmm. Interesting. Was this something they made public or did it happen under the radar?

Well, it got reported through Anglican news sites. I don't know any of these bishops personally. OTOH, the strategy was not revealed until after the vote, according to those sources.

On the other hand, I can see if you had a choice between a candidate that was radical and had no bones about pursuing that agenda openly, and one who was radical but hid it and moved his agenda forward by stealth, you might pick the former person.

.

 

[Adam Warlock]

On the other hand, I can see if you had a choice between a candidate that was radical and had no bones about pursuing that agenda openly, and one who was radical but hid it and moved his agenda forward by stealth, you might pick the former person.

Sadly, the second-place candidate was definitely a moderate. Things would have looked very different had he won. There's no point in crying about it now, but the conservatives who got Schori elected and then bolted really did the rest of us a disservice.

 

[Albion]

Sadly, the second-place candidate was definitely a moderate. Things would have looked very different had he won. There's no point in crying about it now, but the conservatives who got Schori elected and then bolted really did the rest of us a disservice.

Possibly. But I believe that their view was that the same general course of events would have taken place, only with more finesse on the part of the PB, if one of the other finalists had won. IOW, if there were a real choice, they would not have voted as they did.

You feel that the second-place candidate was definitely a moderate, but they did not. I am sure, however, that they would agree with you that things "would have LOOKED different had he won." For them, that was the problem.

 

[Adam Warlock]

Possibly. But I believe that their view was that the same general course of events would have taken place, only with more finesse on the part of the PB, if one of the other finalists had won. IOW, if there were a real choice, they would not have voted as they did.

You feel that the second-place candidate was definitely a moderate, but they did not. I am sure, however, that they would agree with you that things "would have LOOKED different had he won." For them, that was the problem.

Not to debate it (since there's no changing what happened & everybody's got an opinion), but the second-place Bishop Parsley was our bishop for years, and he was nothing like Schori. He was a moderate, not an ultra-revisionist fringe liberal. He was orthodox regarding the Gospel and interested in repairing & maintaining Anglican relationships. They can think whatever they like, but they made a major error and forced the rest of us to live with the consequences.

 

[Albion]

Not to debate it (since there's no changing what happened & everybody's got an opinion), but Bishop Parsley was our bishop for years, and he was nothing like Schori. He was a moderate, not an ultra-revisionist fringe liberal. He was orthodox regarding the Gospel and interested in repairing & maintaining Anglican relationships. They can think whatever they like, but they made a major error and forced the rest of us to live with the consequences.

And as I was trying to say, you may be exactly correct about the consequences. I am merely reporting what I read.

But to be fair to the bishops in question, their intention was not to help put the worst possible candidate into the office merely because they were about to leave.

And we need also to remember that we're referring to only a handful of conservative bishops who had just enough votes to put her over the top; most of her votes came from other bishops still IN the Episcopal Church.They really are more responsible for the success of her candidacy, except that the conservatives had been counted on to vote for someone other than Bp. Schori.

 

[brevis]

Denying prospective clergy men and women entry into seminary because they don't vote for the right political party. S

That is a very serious claim, any references?

 

[mark46]

It follows that they could have supported the moderate and the current PB wouldn't have been elected. THe bishops in question ended up with exactly the result that they supported. Apparently, they hoped that after this election, more would follow them to ACNA.

We can each judge how we should now treat ACNA.

And as I was trying to say, you may be exactly correct about the consequences. I am merely reporting what I read.

But to be fair to the bishops in question, their intention was not to help put the worst possible candidate into the office merely because they were about to leave.

And we need also to remember that we're referring to only a handful of conservative bishop who had just enough votes to put her over the top; most of her votes came from other bishops still IN the Episcopal Church.They really are more responsible for the success of her candidacy, except that the conservatives had been counted on to vote for someone other than Bp. Schori.

 

[Albion]

It follows that they could have supported the moderate and the current PB wouldn't have been elected.

Correct, but that's also true of the other bishops who delivered many more votes to Bp. Schori.

The bishops in question ended up with exactly the result that they supported.

Yes.

Apparently, they hoped that after this election, more would follow them to ACNA.

There's no evidence of that, and it's certainly not an "apparently."

 

[Cjwinnit]

Sadly, the second-place candidate was definitely a moderate. Things would have looked very different had he won. There's no point in crying about it now, but the conservatives who got Schori elected and then bolted really did the rest of us a disservice.

Of course Schori could have decided to be conciliatory and moderate in office once elected...



Nevermind...

And we need also to remember that we're referring to only a handful of conservative bishops who had just enough votes to put her over the top; most of her votes came from other bishops still IN the Episcopal Church.They really are more responsible for the success of her candidacy, except that the conservatives had been counted on to vote for someone other than Bp. Schori.

We can't let mere facts get in the way of a bit of good old-fashioned demagogery....

 

[higgs2]

I can't imagine anyone is surprised by this. We've just been wondering "when?"

Bishop Lawrence is now out of The Episcopal Church. The Diocese of south Carolina is now not a part of the Episcopal Church by a previous vote of its Standing Committee triggered by the notification sent to Bishop Lawrence.

There will be an annual clergy conference in early November, as previously scheduled. There will be a convention in mid-November.

http://www.diosc.com/sys/images/documents/tec/tec_restriction_of_ministry.pdf

Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina

 

[MKJ]

I can't imagine anyone is surprised by this. We've just been wondering "when?"

I tend to agree, but nonetheless there were people here who never thought it would happen.

 

[Adam Warlock]

I thought that it would happen at the end of the summer. When it didn't, I wasn't sure what to expect. The timing on TEC's part definitely caught some people off guard.

 

[MKJ]

I thought that it would happen at the end of the summer. When it didn't, I wasn't sure what to expect. The timing on TEC's part definitely caught some people off guard.

Well, what it looks like they did is arrange things so they could find him guilty more easily, and then try him again.