Comments: South Carolina proposals get press attention

"God has called me as a bishop of the church to proclaim the gospel in season and out of season, regardless of what others will or will not do. This includes protecting the faithful from false teachings." +South Carolina

Certainly seems like a "mountain of conceit" to me. What about false witnessing?

Looks like the rebels out at Ft. Sumter are fix'in for a fight again.

Posted by choirboyfromhell at Monday, 12 October 2009 at 9:37am BST

choirboy-- agreed about the desire to rebel, once again, in the Palmetto state of South Carolina - however (warning: historical factoid approaching) in 1861 the rebels fired FROM Charleston TOWARDS Fort Sumter - where the Federal troops were in a defensive position.

Posted by ettu at Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:05pm BST

In a Q&A above Lawrence says:

A: Your question suggests a complete misreading of my statement. My offer was made to those parishes in the diocese that may feel uncomfortable with engaging the "national" church in such an assertive manner as I've described. It is directed toward those who may feel themselves more in step with The Episcopal Church, not those who might want to leave the Church.

I find no logic or good practice in this. Surely Lawrence has adopted a very specific position and proposes a definite set of actions, if he can offer alternative oversight to those who think he goes too far why can he not offer the same pastoral provision to those who think he has not gone far enough?

This seems grossly unfair.

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:08pm BST

"It’s hard to imagine an English diocesan synod meeting getting this kind of space in the local paper!"

If the diocese was threatening to withdraw from the CofE, wouldn't it?

Posted by BillyD at Monday, 12 October 2009 at 1:20pm BST

My bad ettu, you're right, it was a Fed facility. It is just seems incredulous that Charleston, which is such a progressive place could allow this to fester. I worked a vessel there and it was a hopping busy container port, modern as could be. I was lucky enough to sing an evensong at St. Michael's (Howell's Col Reg) and thought it to be correctly restrained low church but NOT nutso!

You'd think that the local church there would be more concerned with the high crime rate and poverty in N. Charleston, near one of the shipyards, and very unlike the rest of Charleston, than obsessing about some bishop in New Hampshire. Unbelievable.

Posted by choirboyfromhell at Monday, 12 October 2009 at 7:35pm BST

"If the assembly votes in favor of these resolutions, it will be a “protest of conscience,” and a pullback from the national church, but not a full disassociation, Lawrence said." - Adam Parker, Post & Courier -

'A pullback from TEC but not a full disassociation' - Does this sound like the word of a recently-appointed TEC Bishop, who promised, at his epsicopal ordination to obey the rites, ceremonies and Constitution of the Episcopal Church in the U.S.A.? And did he not promise, immediately before his election, that he would not lead his diocese out of TEC?

This sounds to me very much like the exercise of a 'cleft-tongue' - against which the Bible warns the people of God. This may raise up an argument for a term of provision tenure for episcopal appointments in the futrure. To have resiled from his solemn promises of loyalty to TEC within a few months of his appoinment would seem to be a serious defect in the behaviour of a man of God.

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Tuesday, 13 October 2009 at 2:23am BST

For Orthodoxy holding the line on gays.

Lawrence accepts women priests, re-marriage after divorce, contraception etc

Some folks are more orthodox than others...

Posted by Robert Ian williams at Tuesday, 13 October 2009 at 6:33am BST

"Some folks are more orthodox than others"

Technically, the Church hasn't been orthodox since the Great Schism. The problem is with the word itself. As with most things, it doesn't mean what it seems to mean. It is NOT "right praise", it means "I'm right and you're not". It has only ever been used as a means of identifying and forcing out the people who disagree with you. It is a pompous self justification for bad behaviour, that's all it ever was, that's all it is now.

Posted by Ford Elms at Tuesday, 13 October 2009 at 2:06pm BST

"Technically, the Church hasn't been orthodox since the Great Schism." - Ford Elms -

Tell that to the Patriarch of Constantinople!

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 11:28am BST

I was speaking of the Anglican Church. For the Orthodox, we are not part of the Church. There is the Church, which faithfully preserves and transmits the fullness of the Gospel She has received, the hospital of the soul, and then there is the rest of us. Within the Church there is salvation. Outside it, who knows? The Orthodox would say "We cannot presume on the mercy of God to say who will and who will not enter the Kingdom. We know where the Spirit is, we do not know where She is not." For them, the Church is always Orthodox, and if you don't agree with Her, you aren't. You can't be Orthodox if you don't believe Orthodox doctrine. It is assumed that belief will be expressed in orthodox liturgy, whether Eastern or Western. Simple. What that means for your soul is another matter. But, to them, if you have a proven medicine, why would you go after unproven stuff?

Posted by Ford Elms at Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 8:15pm BST
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.