[Magdalen] In South Carolina, it ain't over yet

[Ginga Wilder]

Jay, I get it.  I am gullible, an idealist, and blindly hopeful...until
those hopes are dashed.  I was so angry with myself last week when I
actually believed that the Lawrence church would let stand the SCSC
decision not to rehear the case.  How stupid I was/am...Most Episcopalians
in SC are worn out with all this.  I don't give a hoot about the property.
We're doing a pretty good job of being the church without any buildings.
Most of us do not want that property...how on earth could we afford it.  I
do know that TEC and TECSC have some important protocols to be specified in
the courts.  Whew!

Ginga

On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Roger Stokes <roger.stokes65 at btinternet.com
> wrote:

> On 25/11/2017 18:46, ME Michaud wrote:
>
>> We remember:
>> wasn’t Mark Lawrence’s election affirmed by the HOB?
>> We can’t look away, we can’t walk away,
>> we all share responsibility for this situation.
>>
>
> The consents came at the second attempt. The first time Lawrence was
> elected there were insufficient consents from Bishops with jurisdiction and
> from Standing Committees within the prescribed time-limit. As a result that
> election lapsed as being unconfirmed. There then followed a second
> "election" with the powers that be in the then diocese having such a
> curtailed period for nominations that it was not possible for those who
> opposed Lawrence to put forward a rival candidate so he was elected
> unopposed. Faced with that determination by the diocese, and I believe
> Lawrence was saying at the time that he would not take the diocese out of
> TEC, the requisite consents were given as there seemed to be no alternative.
>
> Roger
>