Bishop Lawrence Out of the TEC

[ebia]

Lay power doesn't necessarily have to be formalized, and I'd say historically it hasn't been. It isn't really formal to run your bishop out of town by throwing stones at him.

But yes, I agree it hasn't existed in the Anglican Communion in any effective way on a large scale.

I don't see why that doesn't mean something is an issue. Who says that when we left Rome we managed to set up a really robust system? It seems entirely likely to me that the problems of today could be rooted in something that we never had properly.

I also wouldn't say I mourn it. I think it is a problem if what we have doesn't work, and I think we got somewhat off track when we began to make our own way, and that was probably inevitable under the circumstances. And maybe if we can correct that, or at least keep the deficit in mind, it could be a tool or useful information for the future.

I'm not saying there isn't an issue. I just pointing out that we never seem to have had a very appropriate system for decision making.

I'm not especially convinced that any part of the church has, but we certainly haven't. It's not a recent problem.

 

[Albion]

Bishop Lawrence walked out of the convention, and had a private meeting with bishops on the way out. After that the ensuing events were simply a matter of time.

All right. I assumed that you were using that word as an expression for quitting, wheras you meant it literally.

I believe he was not afforded the due process he was entitled to, but I have also read a few comments claiming that he had resigned--or, as 'rhartdsc' insinuated--that Bp. Lawrence had joining the ACNA in mind.

None of that is fair to him, but I jumped the gun on you when I read taht word and mistook your meaning. My apologies.

 

[Albion]

So is your idea of "fair and accurate" that its her fault that she responded to his actions? That would be unreasonable.

Then why don't we be guided in answering your question by what I actually wrote? And what was that again? Oh yes, I said that the charge that Bp. Schori was being scapegoated was unfair and inaccurate, not that she responded to his actions. In fact, I specifically wrote that it's fine with me if you say that she is the boss in this situation...just not the incongruous proposition that because she is acting like the boss means that someone has made her a scapegoat.

The charges were from his own laity and clergy.

Oh Right. You mean that out of the whole diocese two clergy and a dozen laity--all of the whom belong to an organization already dedicated to opposing Bp. Lawrence and eight of whom are husband and wife couples--this is the best Bp. Schori could scrape together. It's a popular mandate!

 

[rhartsc]

How exactly was Bishop Lawrence denied due process? My limited understanding is that the finding by the committee leads to a trial being held.

Clarification: I do not know the PB and wouldn't consider myself her supporter and frankly I don't feel she is the issue. I wouldn't care if she was a man or a conservative etc. The only reason I am concerned in the least is that my primary residence is in Coastal Carolina (though my wife who was born and raised in Beaufort, and I are in Wisconsin for school) and there used to be an abundance of Episcopal Churches. When we move back in a couple of years where will we worship?

 

[rhartsc]

Then why don't we be guided in answering your question by what I actually wrote? And what was that again? Oh yes, I said that the charge that Bp. Schori was being scapegoated was unfair and inaccurate, not that she responded to his actions. In fact, I specifically wrote that it's fine with me if you say that she is the boss in this situation...just not the incongruous proposition that because she is acting like the boss means that someone has made her a scapegoat.



Oh Right. You mean that out of the whole diocese two clergy and a dozen laity--all of the whom belong to an organization already dedicated to opposing Bp. Lawrence and eight of whom are husband and wife couples--this is the best Bp. Schori could scrape together. It's a popular mandate!

PB Schori does not control the committee or its findings. When they make a finding as they did it is her duty to follow the established procedures. You would have us believe that she is responsible for everything including finding a small group of dissidents. LOL. That sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. If you have evidence please provide it. I read the committees findings and they appear to be fair and accurate. If they are not I invite you and anyone else to disprove them. I am open to listening. But to say that it is the PB out to get anyone is just nonsense. Or it is not nonsense provide some evidence so I can join the chorus.

I am still hoping that reconciliation can be achieved.

 

[rhartsc]

Bp. Schori is using a very wide broom to clean out any possible opponent. The shame of this is that Bp. Lawrence, from 'day one,' was seeking to REMAIN, with his people, IN the Episcopal Church while not compromising the historic structure and beliefs of Episcopalians. TEC tolerated Bp. Spong but can't live with Bp. Lawrence (or the other nine who are scheduled for expulsion next).

This is what I was referring to when I was speaking of scapegoating. though there are plenty of other comments by posters in other threads that I feel are unfair and unfounded. Perhaps you have a reason to feel that way. But just because you feel that way doesn't mean it is fair or accurate. It was not my intent to get into an argument with you. When I see a comment like that I will request evidence before I can believe it. Call me a sceptic.

 

[mark46]

DUE PROCESS AND BISHOP LAWRENCE

Yes, Bishop Lawrence was technically given due process under the canons of TEC. I will give a couple of salient facts and you be the judge of how you feel about this due process.

On September 18, the committee judged Bishop Lawrence to have abandoned TEC. Bishop Lawrence was given no notice of any charges against him, nor was given the opportunity to address any issues raised. In fact, he was not even aware that such proceedings were taking place. He might even presumed that since he had been exonerated of similar charge in November 2011, that this avenue of discipline was completed and would not be repeated.

On October 3rd and on a couple of occasions later, the PB met and negotiated with Bishop Lawrence and the Bishop of Upper South Carolina. When confronted with the issue of her not mentioning the charges, she indicated that she she did not have the papers in front of her at the time of the meetings. When pressed, she indicated that she was aware of the proceedings and findings. It is worth noting that when the letter of abandonment was sent to Bishop Lawrence it was undated.

Yes, per TEC canons and discplines, Bishop Lawrence was given due process. In the US generally, the above process is far from the process due to a high official in an organization.

 

[mark46]

np

BTW, Bishop Lawrence although has close relationships with those in ACNA and GAFCON. He has no intention to jump into another relationship anytime soon (his words from last night). In addition to needing to catch his breath, there will be lots to deal with in the next few months. For starters, all mention of TEC is being taken out of the diocesan canon and constitution. He is also making a tour of parishes and having clergy conferences, culminating in the general convention i=on November 17th. ACNA can wait for a year.

All right. I assumed that you were using that word as an expression for quitting, wheras you meant it literally.

I believe he was not afforded the due process he was entitled to, but I have also read a few comments claiming that he had resigned--or, as 'rhartdsc' insinuated--that Bp. Lawrence had joining the ACNA in mind.

None of that is fair to him, but I jumped the gun on you when I read taht word and mistook your meaning. My apologies.

 

[Albion]

This is what I was referring to when I was speaking of scapegoating.

Maybe you just don't know what the word means. It can hardly be scapegoating if one attributes the initiative to her and it actually is her doing.

It was not my intent to get into an argument with you.

I have to answer your other message to me. Then let's call it a closed matter here and now.

 

[Albion]

PB Schori does not control the committee or its findings. When they make a finding as they did it is her duty to follow the established procedures.

I sense that you are trying hard to think of some way of making this seem other than it was. Mark1 may be correct about Bp. Lawrence having technically received due process as TEC sees due process, but you are just flying by the seat of your pants in trying to make Bp. Schori into a figurehead who was just swept along by events and the decisions of other people, having no control over events or even a stake in the outcome. Ummmm...NO. You'd have to have no knowledge of how TEC operates to honestly think that.

 

[rhartsc]

Maybe you just don't know what the word means. It can hardly be scapegoating if one attributes the initiative to her and it actually is her doing.


Then let's call it a closed matter now here and now.

It is scapegoating because it appears to be beyond your ability to provide evidence for your accusations against the PB.

 

[rhartsc]

I sense that you are trying hard to think of some way of making this seem other than it was. Mark1 may be correct about Bp. Lawrence having technically received due process as TEC sees due process, but you are just flying by the seat of your pants in trying to make Bp. Schori into a figurehead who was just swept along by events and the decisions of other people, having no control over events or even a stake in the outcome. Ummmm...NO. You'd have to have no knowledge of how TEC operates to honestly think that.

More conspiracy theories and innuendo. How exactly did you discover the PB was behind this from the get go? Did Bishop Lawrence violate his oath and the canons because he prophesied her impending betrayal?

 

[Albion]

More conspiracy theories and innuendo. How exactly did you discover the PB was behind this from the get go? Did Bishop Lawrence violate his oath and the canons because he prophesied her impending betrayal?

"Scapegoating," "conspiracy," and "innuendo" are neat words, all right, but you can't argue on the basis of nothing. You said it best when you said "It was not my intent to get into an argument with you," and I took that at face value.

 

[mark46]

Neither the BP or Bishop Lawrence now have any interest in reconciliation. Reconciliation, if it should ever occur, would be between a new Presiding Bishop, ACNA and the other church bodies, including the Diocese of South Carolina. Almost as a pre-requisite would be a reconciliation between the AC as a whole and GAFCON. As the situation is now, any dissident knows that they can turn to Southern primates for support.

I am still hoping that reconciliation can be achieved.

 

[rhartsc]

Neither the BP or Bishop Lawrence now have any interest in reconciliation. Reconciliation, if it should ever occur, would be between a new Presiding Bishop, ACNA and the other church bodies, including the Diocese of South Carolina. Almost as a pre-requisite would be a reconciliation between the AC as a whole and GAFCON. As the situation is now, any dissident knows that they can turn to Southern primates for support.

Sadly you are probably right.

 

[rhartsc]

"Scapegoating," "conspiracy," and "innuendo" are neat words, all right, but you can't argue on the basis of nothing. You said it best when you said "It was not my intent to get into an argument with you," and I took that at face value.

Perhaps you could have taken it at face value without adding the following insult:"Maybe you just don't know what the word means."

 

[DariusArcturus]

Neither the BP or Bishop Lawrence now have any interest in reconciliation.

I remain unconvinced that there was any wish for reconciliation in the first place the more I read up on this situation from various sources.

Lawrence has been moving for quite some time away from TEC over the past few years, scrubbing mentions of the Diocese's affiliation and even the term "Episcopal" from legal documents of all sorts, being lassiez faire about congregations within his diocese leaving TEC on their own, his own rather strong comments in sermons and at conventions, and what happened with his son.

All of this seems to be culminating to this point, and at many steps and junctures other choices could have been made.

That said, I have no doubt that he is sincere in his beliefs that TEC has "erred," although I (and many others) do not completely agree with him. I am also not the biggest "fan" of the Presiding Bishop (in fact I wholeheartedly believe that her vestment fashion sense is criminal and reflects poorly on us all; *that* should be punishable somehow, somewhere in the cannons ) and with the decisions made to push for disassociation, as such a move only makes things harder on parishioners.

So, in short, the more I read about this, the more this debacle unsettles me.

 

[Albion]

Perhaps you could have taken it at face value without adding the following insult:"Maybe you just don't know what the word means."

Make sense of this then, if you think that my conclusion wasn't warranted:

It is scapegoating because it appears to be beyond your ability to provide evidence for your accusations against the PB.

.

 

[brevis]

Lord guide the Church in America through these difficult times; God in your mercy.

 

[Episcoboi]

Lord guide the Church in America through these difficult times; God in your mercy.

Hear our prayers.