Thinking Anglicans

South Carolina re-election confirmed

The Diocese of South Carolina announces that it has been notified that a majority of bishops with jurisdiction and a majority of Standing Committees have consented to the election of the Very Rev. Mark Lawrence as the 14th bishop of South Carolina.

The consecration will be held January 26, 2008 at the Cathedral Church of St. Luke and St. Paul in Charleston, South Carolina. There is no indication in the official announcements of who will preside at this service.

More details of this in the Episcopal News Service report here.

The Diocese has also announced that:

The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori has accepted our invitation to meet with the leadership of the Diocese of South Carolina February 25-26, 2008. This will give us an opportunity to state with clarity and charity the theological position of this Diocese in a manner similar to when we met with Most. Rev. Frank T. Griswold shortly after his Installation as Presiding Bishop.

An appropriate agenda will be developed after the Consecration.

Press reports:

Associated Press New Episcopal Bishop for S.C.

The State Diocese names new bishop

Bakersfield Californian Pastor named bishop after long struggle

14
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
14 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
msmarystrikensFord ElmsNPMalcolm+Robert Ian Williams Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
NP
Guest
NP

Shame this has taken so long and involved so much acrimony and politics………

Ford Elms
Guest
Ford Elms

“It’s a serious matter when someone as gifted and highly qualified as Mark takes this much work to confirm,” he said. “It simply is one more manifestation of a church that is in a very serious state of struggle at this time.” I knew I’d find it. Now AP, and the Bakersfield Claifornian both make it appear his original rejection was because of his politics. I at first first felt sad for the new bishop. After all, despite two newspapers valiant efforts, his status as conservative martyr seemed untenable. I mean, he was turned down because he didn’t have the… Read more »

Malcolm+
Guest
Malcolm+

It is telling that the media coverage fails to point out that, far from conspiring in the previous rejection, the Presiding Bishop actually took the unprecedented (and possibly uncanonical) step of extending the deadline by a couple of days in an effort to make up the small defecit in consents from standing committees. But then, that fact gets in the way of the “conservative” mythology of persecution.

Merseymike
Guest
Merseymike

So he is staying in TEC after all, then? Or will this be a short-lived promotion?

Robert Ian Williams
Guest
Robert Ian Williams

Bishop designate Lawrence believes in the ordination of women…so Bishops Iker and Schofield will only be in impaired communion with him!

NP
Guest
NP

Ford….in the last couple of years, consents were given for others who had not sent in the right forms…..

Ford Elms
Guest
Ford Elms

“consents were given for others who had not sent in the right forms”

Who? Don’t ignore this. If you do not prove this allegation, I will be forced to think it nothing more than propaganda you have been fed to justify the martyr myth.

Malcolm+
Guest
Malcolm+

Why ever should NP have to offer evidence? Surely “everyone knows” that consents for “liberal” bishops-elect aren’t really checked for correct form. After all, everything in the Episcopal Church is driven by the massive EHBL plot to persecute the puir, wee “conservatives.” NP will not present any evidence because there is no evidence. In fact, the only evidence at hand is that the EHBL-in-Chief, the Presiding Bishop, actually bent the rules by extending the deadline for consents, thus improving the field for Lawrence. But the facts get in the way of the paranoid rantings of the “conservatives,” so the facts… Read more »

Ford Elms
Guest
Ford Elms

NP has another name for it too, but that only applies when it’s the EHBLs. Like I said, it’ll be interesting to see how far people like NP will go to snatch persecution from the jaws of victory. It’s a prime example buying into one of the prevailing trends of modern society: defining ourselves as victims fighting against an oppressor. To admit a victory is to be less of a victim. So, to win, paradoxically, diminishes us. Thus, we must avoid at all costs admitting a victory, and, if it can’t be avoided, we must downplay its significance. Both sides… Read more »

NP
Guest
NP

Ford, here you go…

http://www.livingchurch.org/publishertlc/viewarticle.asp?ID=3517

http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/4628

And…some here complain when I tell you of how God has blessed us with so many people of all ages and types… (this is seen as boasting and triumphalism) while at the same time accusing me of playing the victim…….have you seen me arguing for scriptures to be ignored because not to do so is discriminating against some victimised group?? (clue – the answer is not yes) (“playing the victim” is using emotional arguments, not addressing the facts or the scriptures)

Ford Elms
Guest
Ford Elms

“have you seen me arguing for scriptures to be ignored because not to do so is discriminating against some victimised group??” No, we have seen you ignoring Scripture and pretending you don’t. As to the issue of consents, the link you post gives a situation in which the request for consercation was unusual but had been used before, and the person in question got the required consents. Fr. Lawerence, on the other hand, used the correct form in requesting consecration, but did not get the required consents. The two issues are not the same. I admit this is uneven, and… Read more »

NP
Guest
NP

Ford – glad you can see that I was not making up “propaganda” and playing the victim as you suggested I may have been above….

Ford Elms
Guest
Ford Elms

“glad you can see that I was not making up “propaganda” and playing the victim as you suggested I may have been above….” Well, thanks, I guess, but I still don’t see your point. One person was approved despite one type of irregularity. The other was not approved because of another irregularity entirely. The two are not the same, so the comparison of them proves nothing. I do think your attempt to link these two different issues proves my point. “Your guy” has been approved, having gotten the required consents. Rejoice! You won! But, as I said, to claim that… Read more »

msmarystrikens
Guest

All-Nighters: Mind Games
Jonah Lehrer explores how the nature of the human mind can make it an enemy of sleep.