South Carolina Developments (II)—Tennessee Bishop offers support to dissident South Carolina clergy

Posted by Kendall Harmon

A diocesan press statement released on 8 Nov further stated that the rector of the church that was to host the meeting said he had been “misled in offering to host this meeting, expecting it was for a small group of clergy who had already decided to reaffiliate with TEC. ‘Neither I nor anyone at Holy Communion sent that email,’ said the Rector. ‘I have notified the sender that we will not be hosts’.”

The diocesan statement further stated Bishop vonRosenberg had “no authority to convene or preside at any meeting in this diocese and to do so would put him in violation of TEC’s canons.”

Bishop von Rosenberg told Anglican Ink the diocesan statement misconstrued his role in the affair.

“A group of loyal Episcopal priests felt the need to gather, for mutual support. They asked me to offer a homily during the liturgy they will share. I had previously been licensed in this diocese by Bishop Lawrence. I certainly felt able to respond to the invitation affirmatively, and I look forward to being with that group,” the bishop said.

Read it all.

Filed under: * Anglican - EpiscopalEpiscopal Church (TEC)TEC BishopsTEC ConflictsTEC Conflicts: South CarolinaTEC Polity & Canons* South Carolina* TheologyEthics / Moral TheologyPastoral Theology

12 Comments
Posted November 13, 2012 at 5:00 am [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. WestJ wrote:

It appears that the good bishop has had his eyes on South Carolina for some time. I hope that he is as successful in growing the quisling pseudo-diocese as he was growing his own diocese when he was the bishop of East Tennessee.


http://www.standfirminfaith.com/?/sf/page/26818

November 13, 12:12 pm | [comment link]
2. Cennydd13 wrote:

And just exactly WHO would those “loyal Episcopal priests” be loyal to…...Schori, or Christ and His Church?

November 13, 9:53 pm | [comment link]
3. Dan Ennis wrote:

So I am one of those TEC loyalists who lives in South Carolina.  So let’s say that on my way to my richly-deserved eternal damnation that I want to worship in a TEC congregation and not move to the upstate, or North Carolina. In my shoes wouldn’t you begin meeting and organizing rather than wait for the stage-managed convention Bishop Lawrence has planned?

There are two ridiculous positions here.  One is the TEC stance that “a Diocese cannot leave.”  Of course it can.  I just saw my diocese leave.  The Presiding Bishop is ignoring reality here.

But the second, equally absurd, position is the one Bishop Lawrence has taken, similar to the one Bishop Iker holds:  That once a Diocese leaves TEC the departing orthodox have the right and power to prevent TEC from existing within the Diocesan geographical boundaries.  Here the orthodox are ignoring reality. 

There are loyal TEC clergy and parishes in SC.  We are not bound by your decision to leave.  We don’t have a functioning bishop.  Naturally, we’re going to reorganize, call ourselves Episcopalians, and do all the things that churches do.

November 14, 12:15 am | [comment link]
4. Cennydd13 wrote:

But again, I ask the question:  To whom are you loyal…..Schori, or to Christ and His Church?  There is a difference here.

November 14, 2:04 am | [comment link]
5. Sarah wrote:

Cennydd, that’s really not an appropriate question for revisionists. They don’t share the same faith that we do, and so it’s just a hopeless question.  Their answer is to their version of “Christ and His Church” which is obviously not the version we share.  So it’s a question that can’t get an “apples to apples” response.

RE: “That once a Diocese leaves TEC the departing orthodox have the right and power to prevent TEC from existing within the Diocesan geographical boundaries.”

It doesn’t sound like that’s what Mark Lawrence is trying to do at all. Rather, it sounds like he’d like for those leaving the Diocese and staying within TEC to come up with their own identity and not steal the diocesan seal, etc!

November 14, 7:34 am | [comment link]
6. Katherine wrote:

#3, Dan Ennis, you are certainly entitled to remain affiliated with TEC and to reorganize yourselves as a diocese so affiliated.  As I understand it, the Diocese of South Carolina has proffered quit claim deeds which enable all parishes to do exactly that.  The issue here is the growing evidence that TEC’s national leadership, and your group’s leadership locally, will attempt to take ALL the parishes, not only the ones who do not choose to follow Bishop Lawrence after his purported deposition.  Where’s the Christian charity in that?

November 14, 10:00 am | [comment link]
7. WestJ wrote:

The Protestant Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina is a corporate entity separate from TEC. The Diocese existed before TEC and chose to affiliate in the past. Now, because of the apostasy (I would say lunacy) of the national church, the Diocese of South Carolina has chosen to disaffiliate from TEC. Those churches who wish for some reason to remain affiliated with the rotting corpse in New York may do so, but they must organize under a different corporate charter.

November 14, 11:54 am | [comment link]
8. Dan Ennis wrote:

4, It is a well-established and unchallenged T19 posting tradition to consign anyone who disagrees with Bishop Lawrence to the Pit, so let me just save you the trouble and admit that I worship Satan and his Bride KJS. It is unlikely you’d accept any other response as authentic, so there you go.  smile

November 14, 2:24 pm | [comment link]
9. Pageantmaster ن [Repent Justin Welby] wrote:

#8 Dan Ennis
An entertaining thought, but I am sure you don’t.  However, it does seem to me that there is indeed something demonic at work in this church, and has been for some time.  Had the Presiding Bishop working with a small group of dissident liberals within South Carolina not tried to get rid of Bishop Lawrence, and instead had shown that indeed conservative Chrisitians, just like the majority of the Anglican Communion can exist within TEC, then the diocese would not have left.

If you are one of those who agrees with the actions initiated by the Presiding Bishop then you are part of those who have only themselves to blame for the situation in what was the only growing diocese within TEC, and which I personally had hoped would be allowed to remain as a witness and a beacon in a dark land.

But as with the Communion Partners, it appears that fresh back from being gladhanded by the Quislings at Lambeth Palace and St Andrew’s House, the Presiding Bishop is cleaning house.

November 14, 5:39 pm | [comment link]
10. Cennydd13 wrote:

With a vengeance (and malicious intent?)

November 14, 8:28 pm | [comment link]
11. Sarah wrote:

RE: “It is a well-established and unchallenged T19 posting tradition . . . “

No it’s not.

November 15, 12:29 am | [comment link]
12. MichaelA wrote:

“Rather, it sounds like he’d like for those leaving the Diocese and staying within TEC to come up with their own identity and not steal the diocesan seal, etc!”

That will be a very interesting issue.  It has never been clear to me how TEC can end up with ownership of the diocesan seal of SC.

November 15, 1:33 am | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.




Next entry (above): South Carolina Developments (III)—Local Newspaper article on the TEC-Diocese of SC Struggle

Previous entry (below): South Carolina Developments (I)—Two Emails From a TEC Steering Committee Led Group to SC Clergy

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)