The former Bishop of South Carolina, The Rt. Rev. Dr. C. Fitzsimons Allison, told VOL that they should consecrate him anyway. Why should they have any respect for those [diocesan] Standing Committees? Clearly they are walking separately from the Anglican Communion and for the faith the bishops themselves swore to uphold when they were consecrated.

"What we are up against is a whole culture where ideas have consequences. We have doctrine and teaching in the church and we have the Creeds, and we have made oaths that these bishops don't mean to keep either. The conventional idea is to call another convention and elect him again. Mark is an impeccable person and those who did not give consent, elevate the canons above the Christian Faith.

"I respect him for doing the canonical thing, but I think he should go ahead and be consecrated anyway. I was surprised that it was that close. Mrs. Schori and David Booth Beers are so embarrassing to The Episcopal Church and worldwide Anglican Communion."

As far as the fallout is concerned, it makes it much clearer that the TEC is walking away from the Anglican Communion and the Christian Faith, said Allison.

The retired scholarly bishop said he was reminded of a quote by V. A. Demeant, Regius Professor at Christ Church, Oxford, who said in 1947, "A religion which in its essence does not derive from Christianity is a much greater threat to the Christian Faith than active atheism.

"Briefly it represents an undogmatic, unsupernatural and unevangelical religion, it equates Christianity with good ideals, it attaches no real vital meaning to sin, grace, redemption, or to the church as a divine society. Instead, this religion is one of moral exhortation; it thrives in church groups which once represented distinct and sincere camps of differing doctrine and spirituality and which now have only a social or political significance. There is nothing about God as creator, Savior, judge or about the cross or about the soul and its cure or surrender of the will of Christ and this involves surrender to his visible but disfigure body the church."

Asked if what happened to Lawrence would cause more people to leave The Episcopal Church, Allison replied, "Certainly it is discouraging to faithful people. The real tragedy," said Allison, "is that the Windsor Report and the Primates dealing with it are trying to find unity on the basis of some kind of process rather than faith. We have two faiths in the Episcopal Church and that must be recognized."

Werner Elert, an historian on the Early Church, wrote that it was very, very clear that when a bishop is heretical, you do not obey him, said Allison.

The Rt. Rev. Jack Iker, Bishop of Ft. Worth, said he thought the diocese should proceed with the consecration, but that it is their decision to make. "After all, he got a majority of both the bishops and standing committees. Those disqualified on a technicality could still be verified." Iker said Lawrence should stand for re-election as soon as possible. "This signals the continuation of the battle that has been going on in ECUSA for the past 25 years or so. The liberals are trying to force conformity to a new religion they are creating. And yes, I expect this will motivate others who have been thinking about it to go ahead and leave the TEC."

The Rt. Rev. Stephen H. Jecko, Assistant Bishop in The Episcopal Diocese of Dallas, when asked if Lawrence should go ahead and be consecrated anyway, said, "That's a tough call at this point. I think the Standing Committee needs to decide its next steps and we need to support them in that decision. I suspect there are more than enough bishops willing to consecrate him anyway, but the question is, at this point, is it the right tactic?"

Asked, if the diocese has a second election, should Lawrence stand again, Jecko replied, "I think he should stand again, but that is a decision for both Lawrence and the Standing Committee to make. I suspect they both are privy to forces we know nothing about at this point."

When asked what sort of signal this sent about possible orthodox successors in other orthodox dioceses, Jecko said, "It strikes me that any orthodox successor will have a tough time getting consents, more from SC's than from bishops. The danger is (like my successor, John Howard of Florida) a nominee can present himself as orthodox and still be an institutionalist who will not be a friend to the orthodox."

Asked if this refusal to give consents would drive more people out of the Episcopal Church, Jecko replied, "Of course, especially given the technical nature of the refusal when the needed number had been received. People are not dumb, when (big if) they know the facts. The thresholds of pain seem to be closer than ever for a lot of folksSeptember 30th will be the telling point I suspect. If ECUSA does not respond, as asked and clearly so, I think it's over."

The retired Bishop of Eau Claire, the Rt. Rev. William Wantland, told VOL that perhaps the easiest thing would be for the Diocese of South Carolina to re-elect Mark in a special Convention, and then push to see that the consents were in proper form. "Of course, the Diocese COULD simply proceed to consecration on the grounds that sufficient consents were given, even if in improper form. However, this raises the probability of a suit against the Diocese by David Booth Beers, Mrs. Schori's attorney (almost a certainty, actually). In any event, this action has led to a turning away from TEC by more and more people, and helps destroy any hope of fair treatment from the revisionists."

Wantland went on to say that "as a matter of record, Mark [Lawrence] received enough consents; "some five or six were just not in complete form. It would have been so easy to announce that while consents had been given, some were incomplete, and those Dioceses would be given a week to get the proper forms in. A crisis would have been averted, and the canons honored. Instead, the heavy hand of oppression is seen one more time."

The Rt. Rev. John W. Howe, Bishop of Central Florida, opined that Mark [Lawrence] has said that under no conditions would he be part of an irregular consecration. "The Presiding Bishop says that not only were some of the consents in improper form, but some were unsigned. Ed Salmon (recently retired Bishop of SC) says they will reconvene, reelect Mark, and this time the consents will be in proper form and on time."

The Rt. Rev. Dr. John H. Rodgers, former Dean of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry and now a bishop with the Anglican Mission in America, told VOL that "at this point I believe that the best path forward would be for the diocese of South Carolina to immediately elect Mark a second time and let him decide if he would accept that call, and assuming he would, for the various standing committees to get their responses in, in a correct form and in a timely fashion. There should be no need for a third time.

"As for a re-election, Lawrence should stand again", said Rodgers "My preference is that they should just do it and let Mark consider whether or not to accept the election."

As to the future and possible orthodox successors in orthodox dioceses, Rodgers, who is deeply acquainted with Episcopal politics said, "I think it would be wise for orthodox dioceses to wait for future elections until after September 30th."

Asked how the refusal to give Lawrence consents would impact parishioners leaving the TEC, Rodgers said, "It might, on the other hand, I hope it will lead more and more people inside and outside of TEC to work for an orthodox province in the USA recognized by an orthodox Anglican Communion and to be unwilling to be satisfied with anything less in either entity. I am very concerned about a weak Anglican Communion Covenant that does not bind us to the clear teaching of the historic Anglican formularies and that does not contain any designated body to discipline violations of the Covenant, especially on the part of Provinces. Actually we have always had a binding Anglican Covenant. Why not decide to reaffirm it and really mean it and identify who would be responsible to discipline violations of it."

A Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) Bishop in the US recalled Edmund Burke's famous line: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

"If the Standing Committee of the Diocese of South Carolina rolls over to Mrs. Schori and the national church and deep sixes the Rev. Mark Lawrence they will reveal themselves to be little more than spineless jelly fish, moral cowards, incapable of standing up to the bullying of the national church that would not dare oppose the consecration of V. Gene Robinson for fear of being called homophobic or lacking inclusion," said Bishop David L. Moyer, a rector of Good Shepherd, Rosemont, on Philadelphia's main line.

"When one bows the knee to the idol of the institution, then the Devil does handstands of glee and triumph. I feel for Mark Lawrence who has been tossed aside as the bishop-elect of whom the Standing Committee said was the Holy Spirit's choice. So much for the Holy Spirit."

One noted revisionist bishop, John Chane of the Diocese of Washington, told a layperson in an e-mail, "I do not know what will happen next. But I do believe that Fr. Mark will be re-nominated, and that with his election assured, the consents from Standing Committees will this time around come in."

At the gathering of the House of Bishops in Camp Allen, Texas, Mrs. Schori told the gathering that her decision to void the election of the Very Rev. Mark Lawrence as Bishop of South Carolina was at the advice of her chancellor, David Booth Beers. She said that of the 57 consents received from the standing committees, seven were in improper form including some that were unsigned.

END