Episcopal Press and News
SOUTH CAROLINA: No petition candidates will challenge Lawrence’s expected re-election
Episcopal News Service. July 16, 2007 [071607-02]
Mary Frances Schjonberg
When the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina’s special bishop election convenes on August 4, the only name on the ballot will be that of the Very Rev. Mark Lawrence.
No petitions to add other names to the slate were received by the July 11 deadline, according to an announcement on the diocese’s website from the Standing Committee President, the Rev. J. Haden McCormick.
Bishop Edward Salmon, in a letter earlier this year to the clergy of the diocese, said that the electing convention would be convened "for the purpose of re-electing Fr. Lawrence."
Lawrence, 56, rector of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Bakersfield, California, in the Diocese of San Joaquin, was first elected September 16 to be South Carolina's 14th bishop.
On March 15, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori declared that election "null and void," saying that a number of the consent responses did not adhere to canonical requirements.
Salmon reported that the standing committee had concluded that "the Holy Spirit had spoken in the election of Fr. Lawrence" and that "Bishops and [other] Standing Committees had intended to consent to the election even though technicalities had prevented it."
Episcopal Church canons, which govern the procedures for the election of bishops, call for consents to episcopal ordinations from standing committees to be "signed by a majority of all the members of the Committee. (III.11.4 (b))"
Further, the canon states (on pages 101-102) that standing committee members must sign in their own handwriting: "In witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands this (blank) day of (blank) in the year of our Lord (blank)."
Where the signature requirement had not been met by standing committees, the consent forms for Lawrence's election were rejected for not complying with that part of the canon.
Canonically adequate ballots were received by South Carolina from 50 diocesan standing committees of the 56 required. Several other standing committees were reported to have consented, but no signatures were attached to their ballots, or the ballot itself was missing from South Carolina's records, Jefferts Schori reported in March. Any committee that did not respond to the diocese's consent request is considered to have voted no.
Lawrence's election did receive the canonically required consent of the majority of Episcopal bishops with jurisdiction.
In the weeks that followed Lawrence's September election, questions arose about his intentions concerning the diocese's membership in the Episcopal Church. Two affiliated groups issued statements of advice to the bishops and standing committees, and other individuals expressed concern either privately to Lawrence and the diocese or through postings on Internet commentary sites.
Some diocesan standing committees announced that they would not consent, and some publicized their decisions, including Bethlehem, Eastern Michigan, and Kansas.
In early February, letters sent to the Church's standing committees, signed by McCormick, asked those committees which had voted against Lawrence to reconsider and asked those who had not yet responded to the consent request to do so affirmatively. The letters addressed questions about the diocesan leadership's and Lawrence's intentions to remain in the Episcopal Church, the participation of Jefferts Schori in the consecration of the next bishop of South Carolina and concerns about the diocese's request for "alternative primatial oversight."
McCormick's letter was the second time that Lawrence or the diocese had contacted standing committees about his election. In December, Lawrence sent a letter to standing committees and bishops in responses to several inquiries about his stance on certain issues.