SMACKDOWN
As per their request, South Carolina Episcopal Bishop Mark Lawrence will meet with Province 4 bishops this coming Wednesday. If this letter from South Carolina’s Standing Committee is any indication, that meeting may be more than a little tense:
First, the stated purpose of your inquiry concerns the release of quitclaim deeds to the parishes of this Diocese. Given the very public nature of their release, the accompanying explanation (all still widely available on the internet), and their availability from any county deed registrar, the necessity of such questions is puzzling. Of more concern, however, is the character of your requests.
You guys do know that you have no authority whatsoever in South Carolina, don’t you?
We are sure you are aware that the Constitution of The Episcopal Church does not allow a bishop to act within any other Diocese on any basis except for episcopal acts and then only by request of the Bishop of that Diocese. (Art. II, Sec. 3). It also provides that a diocese only participates in provincial matters if it consents to such participation. (Art. VII). Further, only the provincial Synod can determine the provincial synodical “rights and privileges of the several dioceses within the Province.” (Canon 1.9.3) and the Synod expressly lacks any “power to regulate or control the internal policy or affairs of any constituent diocese.” (Canon 1.9.8)
So we don’t have to account to you at all.
Therefore, the bishops of Province IV have no constitutional or canonical grounds for these requests, which relate exclusively and entirely to matters involving the internal policies and affairs of this Diocese. Our decisions to date have been made out of a fully informed concern for the people of South Carolina, which we shall continue to exercise, as we prayerfully believe God directs.
By the way, that Matthew 18 reference of yours really wasn’t appreciated, both for what you implied and how badly you handled it.
Second, the theological underpinning of your request, Matthew 18:15-20 and your oath, is very troubling. We fail to see how the issuance of quitclaim deeds to the parishes of this diocese could be construed to be a “sin against you”, and of course you have ignored the meeting between “you and him alone” and proceeded to the last scriptural step by “tell[ing] it to the church” through your publication of the matter. As to your oaths, if that perceived basis is to uphold the “doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal church”, then you must realize that your inquiries into the affairs of this diocese, without constitutional or canonical support, are contrary to that oath.
Quite frankly, we’re awfully tired of non-South Carolinians who think that they have some kind of mandate to interfere in diocesan affairs.
Third, this diocese grows weary of the constant interference in its internal affairs that continues to disrupt our mission. First, there was the non-canonical intrusion by the Presiding Bishop’s office hiring counsel for the episcopal church in this diocese to investigate our parishes, then there was the assertion by a subcommittee of the executive council that our constitutional and canonical amendments duly considered and passed were somehow not effective, then there were charges brought against our bishop now correctly recognized by the Disciplinary Board of Bishops for what they were at the outset – without merit. Yet, within less than two weeks of that decision, we have yet another attempt without canonical or constitutional support to inject others into the internal affairs of this autonomous diocese.
Kindly inform Mrs. Schori that neither she nor you have any rights here.
So, let us be clear. We will not use the coercive force of threatened litigation over property to impose a false and destructive unity upon this Diocese. We cannot sanction the compromise of a full gospel proclamation that is undermined by actions such as the communion of the un-baptized. We cannot sanction the undermining of Christian marriage by the practice of same sex marriage or blessings. In such matters of the internal governance of this Diocese, out of the great depths of our love and concern for our people, we will continue to assert the autonomy that is historically and constitutionally ours and we will do so consistent with our belief that God alone dictates our future.
We’ve let Bishop Lawrence know how we feel.
Bp. Lawrence has communicated to us his intent to meet with you and other attending Province IV bishops next week in the spirit of collegiality invoked in your letter. Given all we have said above, we are concerned about your motives and have expressed these concerns to Bp. Lawrence.
The Daniel letter and the Standing Committee’s response suggest that 815 has launched a proxy war against South Carolina. Church Center knows that it probably can’t legally clean out that nest of conservatism directly and so Clifton Daniel (a member, it must be emphasized, of the Presiding Bishop’s Council of Advice) just happened to come up with bogus “concerns” about South Carolina’s actions.
One assumes that if those “concerns” are not addressed to the satisfaction of Daniel and the other bishops, then it’s standard operating procedure time again. An abandonment of communion charge will be trumped up, the Standing Committee will be fired and Mrs. Schori will appoint a new Quisling in Lawrence’s place. It is good to know that South Carolina’s not going to give up without a fight.
First, the stated purpose of your inquiry concerns the release of quitclaim deeds to the parishes of this Diocese. Given the very public nature of their release, the accompanying explanation (all still widely available on the internet), and their availability from any county deed registrar, the necessity of such questions is puzzling. Of more concern, however, is the character of your requests.
You guys do know that you have no authority whatsoever in South Carolina, don’t you?
We are sure you are aware that the Constitution of The Episcopal Church does not allow a bishop to act within any other Diocese on any basis except for episcopal acts and then only by request of the Bishop of that Diocese. (Art. II, Sec. 3). It also provides that a diocese only participates in provincial matters if it consents to such participation. (Art. VII). Further, only the provincial Synod can determine the provincial synodical “rights and privileges of the several dioceses within the Province.” (Canon 1.9.3) and the Synod expressly lacks any “power to regulate or control the internal policy or affairs of any constituent diocese.” (Canon 1.9.8)
So we don’t have to account to you at all.
Therefore, the bishops of Province IV have no constitutional or canonical grounds for these requests, which relate exclusively and entirely to matters involving the internal policies and affairs of this Diocese. Our decisions to date have been made out of a fully informed concern for the people of South Carolina, which we shall continue to exercise, as we prayerfully believe God directs.
By the way, that Matthew 18 reference of yours really wasn’t appreciated, both for what you implied and how badly you handled it.
Second, the theological underpinning of your request, Matthew 18:15-20 and your oath, is very troubling. We fail to see how the issuance of quitclaim deeds to the parishes of this diocese could be construed to be a “sin against you”, and of course you have ignored the meeting between “you and him alone” and proceeded to the last scriptural step by “tell[ing] it to the church” through your publication of the matter. As to your oaths, if that perceived basis is to uphold the “doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal church”, then you must realize that your inquiries into the affairs of this diocese, without constitutional or canonical support, are contrary to that oath.
Quite frankly, we’re awfully tired of non-South Carolinians who think that they have some kind of mandate to interfere in diocesan affairs.
Third, this diocese grows weary of the constant interference in its internal affairs that continues to disrupt our mission. First, there was the non-canonical intrusion by the Presiding Bishop’s office hiring counsel for the episcopal church in this diocese to investigate our parishes, then there was the assertion by a subcommittee of the executive council that our constitutional and canonical amendments duly considered and passed were somehow not effective, then there were charges brought against our bishop now correctly recognized by the Disciplinary Board of Bishops for what they were at the outset – without merit. Yet, within less than two weeks of that decision, we have yet another attempt without canonical or constitutional support to inject others into the internal affairs of this autonomous diocese.
Kindly inform Mrs. Schori that neither she nor you have any rights here.
So, let us be clear. We will not use the coercive force of threatened litigation over property to impose a false and destructive unity upon this Diocese. We cannot sanction the compromise of a full gospel proclamation that is undermined by actions such as the communion of the un-baptized. We cannot sanction the undermining of Christian marriage by the practice of same sex marriage or blessings. In such matters of the internal governance of this Diocese, out of the great depths of our love and concern for our people, we will continue to assert the autonomy that is historically and constitutionally ours and we will do so consistent with our belief that God alone dictates our future.
We’ve let Bishop Lawrence know how we feel.
Bp. Lawrence has communicated to us his intent to meet with you and other attending Province IV bishops next week in the spirit of collegiality invoked in your letter. Given all we have said above, we are concerned about your motives and have expressed these concerns to Bp. Lawrence.
The Daniel letter and the Standing Committee’s response suggest that 815 has launched a proxy war against South Carolina. Church Center knows that it probably can’t legally clean out that nest of conservatism directly and so Clifton Daniel (a member, it must be emphasized, of the Presiding Bishop’s Council of Advice) just happened to come up with bogus “concerns” about South Carolina’s actions.
One assumes that if those “concerns” are not addressed to the satisfaction of Daniel and the other bishops, then it’s standard operating procedure time again. An abandonment of communion charge will be trumped up, the Standing Committee will be fired and Mrs. Schori will appoint a new Quisling in Lawrence’s place. It is good to know that South Carolina’s not going to give up without a fight.
No comments:
Post a Comment