MUELLER: The Episcopal Church has gone after traditionalists with a vengeance and now you are zeroing in on South Carolina, the same God-fearing Episcopalians who have been the backbone of the Church since the its colonial foundation in 1706, more than 300 years ago. Apparently, Presiding Bishop, you have retained an attorney to deal with local matters. What are those local matters and how are you going to deal with them?

JEFFERTS SCHORI: My understanding is that Episcopalians in South Carolina have expressed concern about some who have departed The Episcopal Church and attempted to maintain control of Episcopal Church assets. They have asked for some assistance because the Church as whole has some responsibility.

The vagueness of her answer speaks volumes. St. Andrews Episcopal Church, the largest parish in the Diocese of South Carolina, voted overwhelmingly to leave The Episcopal Church and join with the emerging Anglican Church of North America.

Bishop Lawrence has chosen not to pursue litigation against the church, which clearly has the Presiding Bishop apoplectic. This, of course, begs the question: Why was she not just as upset with Bishop John W. Howe (Central Florida) and James Stanton (Dallas) for their failure to implement legal action against fleeing parishes from their dioceses? Bishop Stanton let Christ Church, Plano go for a cool $1 million - a campus worth 20 times that amount.

One suspects that personal animus lies behind her hatred of Bishop Lawrence, couched, of course, in the language of Episcospeak "comprehensiveness" along with the "big tent" theory that ALL Episcopalians can live together if we will just "listen", engage in "conversation", and tolerate each other's diverse viewpoints. Fiat Lux.

After all it took two votes to get Lawrence elected and then Bonnie Anderson, HOD president swept into the diocese to deliver the Episcopal Church's official line that "thou shalt obey" or face the wrath to come. Apparently that day (of wrath) has come.

Mrs. Jefferts Schori would like us to place our trust in her and not listen to silly, biased Episcopal/Anglican news services like VOL and blogs like Anglican Mainstream, the AAC, Baby Blue and attorneys like A.S. Haley and Phil Ashey because (ahem) we might just be right. After all, if TEC and liberal dioceses are prepared to spend upwards of $30 million on litigation costs while the Diocese of Haiti (the largest in TEC) lies in shambles and is irreparably damaged because TEC hasn't got the money to fix the problem, it might be worth mentioning. Ya think.

So now we have an impending legal assault against this orthodox bishop who has said and done nothing, and who is doing his best to stay within the parameters of the diocese's canons and constitution and yes, Holy Scripture.

It should be noted here that the former Bishop of South Carolina, the Rt. Rev. Ed Salmon spent nine years and countless thousands of dollars trying to retain All Saints Pawleys Island and had several opportunities to cut deals that would have netted the diocese both property and two million dollars. He turned it all down believing the courts would see it in his favor. They didn't. He and the diocese lost.

The Supreme Court of South Carolina overturned the Dennis Canon allowing the property to be retained by the parish.

Dr. Ross "Buddy" Lindsay, a trust attorney and canon lawyer, told VOL in an interview in January that the recent SC Supreme Court decision in favor of All Saints Pawleys insures, once and for all, that neither TEC nor the Diocese of South Carolina have any claim to their property or to the property of any other Episcopal Churches in South Carolina.

The Chancellor of All Saints Pawleys Island believes that if the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the All Saints Pawleys property case, the Dennis Canon will be overturned, freeing thousands of church properties from the clutches of The Episcopal Church (TEC) (as well as the Presbyterian and Methodist churches who have their own "Dennis Canons").

On February 9, Bishop Lawrence announced that he was postponing the diocese's annual synod from March 4 to March 26 to permit him time to respond to the "unjust intrusion into the spiritual and jurisdictional affairs of this sovereign diocese of the Episcopal Church" by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.

On announcing this, he then provided copies of letters showing that the former chancellor of the diocese, Thomas Tisdale, Jr., had written to the current chancellor, Wade Logan III, seeking copies of the minutes of all standing committee meetings held since he took office. He also wanted a copy of oaths of conformity given to the new clergy, as well as the parish by-laws and other documents from four parishes that have indicated they may quit the Episcopal Church.

In the lawyers' exchange, Tisdale, who styled himself "South Carolina counsel for the Episcopal Church" told Logan that it is his understanding that Bishop Lawrence would not take any legal action in response to "recent and ongoing actions by some congregations in our diocese that threaten to 'withdraw their parishes from the diocese and the Episcopal Church."

Logan responded saying that no parishes have quit the diocese during Bishop Lawrence's tenure, and that "the bishop, was the sovereign authority in this diocese." Logan added that "it seems transparent that the Episcopal Church is trying very hard to find a reason to involve either the bishop or the diocese, or perhaps both, in an adversarial situation."

On October 24, following the Anaheim General Convention vote to end the moratorium on gay bishops and blessings, the Diocese of South Carolina held a special meeting declaring the moratorium votes "null and void" in South Carolina.

They also authorized Bishop Lawrence to begin withdrawing the diocese from national Church bodies that approve "actions deemed contrary to Holy Scripture, the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this church has received them, until such bodies show a willingness to repent of such actions."

Clearly irked by continuing exposure of this issue in the blogosphere, Mrs. Jefferts Schori issued a statement at Executive Council in Omaha saying that Bishop Lawrence has delayed the South Carolina annual synod in response "supposedly to my incursions in South Carolina."

"He's telling the world that he is offended that I think it's important that people who want to stay Episcopalians there have some representation on behalf of the larger church," she said. She then asked for prayers for the diocese. One wonders just how many Episcopalians is she talking about anyway?

Asked at a press conference held at the conclusion of Executive Council, Mrs. Jefferts Schori said she "would hope that Episcopalians in South Carolina have a clear understanding of the church's polity and not rely upon erroneous information." The representations on the theology of the church as a whole are inaccurate, she said.

Presumably this erroneous information was coming from the much-loathed conservative blogosphere. She then went on to offer the lame excuse for her intrusion by offering up this, "My understanding is that Episcopalians in South Carolina are concerned about those who have departed and are attempting to keep the Episcopal Church's property," she said. Which Episcopalians? She wouldn't say.

Could we count them on one hand? House of Deputies President Bonnie Anderson immediately jumped in adding that there is an "influx of information coming from sources outside the official bodies" of the Episcopal Church. Really.

"The national Church should be the [sole] source of information on the polity and structures of the Episcopal Church," she said.

This is a bit like saying Americans should only read The New York Times, The Washington Post, the LA Times and not the Drudge or Huffington Reports. Bishop Lawrence is clearly in the line of fire of both women, a more ugly sight one cannot imagine. The upcoming legal battle should be a doozy.

One bishop who is surely watching this unfolding legal drama is the Bishop of Albany, the Rt. Rev. William Love. He and his diocese have distanced themselves from the national church by passing a diocesan resolution saying all ordained, elected and licensed clergy must be married or celibate.

The "Marriage Resolution", affirming that only marriage between a man and a woman may be blessed, was enshrined as canon law for the diocese. At the time, several delegates said it was necessary to put the resolution in Canon Law in order to prevent a future General Convention rejecting an orthodox bishop being elected in the diocese because of the necessary two-thirds vote by the HOB. The diocese did not want to be subject to the vagaries of future General Convention resolutions. Bishop Love has also felt the revisionist wrath of Bonnie Anderson intruding into his diocese.

Depending on how it all goes in South Carolina, can we expect more diocesan revolts?

Either way, Bishop Lawrence now must face the legal wrath of David Booth Beers and surely, like the dying thief who cried out, "he has done nothing wrong" he must now face his own Calvary.

END