What I can point to are the trends confronting our diocese.

1) In the past decade, our diocese has experienced not one, or two, but three tsunamis — General Conventions 2003, 2006, and 2009.

2) I can also say that there is a deep theological and practical divide between our clergy and laity, such that the conflict brought on by those every-three-year General Conventions is intensified and heightened.

3) The effect of those two things gives way to something that I have noticed not only in parish life, but also in individual lives and that is, simply, that we as Episcopalians have no further slack in the system. In the old days, parishes could go through the normal vicissitudes of parish life — a troubled rector, a search process gone wrong, a bad economy, some challenging diocesan issues, a layperson “in the news” for the wrong reasons — and recover from those issues, even thrive, fairly easily. But unfortunately, with the every-three-year tsunami, parishes simply have not recovered fully when met with everyday standard crises.

The effect is a rolling tide of cumulative loss and stress and conflict. Barely has one caught one’s breath from the latest General Convention than a local crisis hits. Barely has one recovered from — or just salvaged something — after the local crisis, then we have another General Convention. The diocese is in — and is likely to remain in — a constant state of stress. This is the “new normal” for TEC parishes, and it’s not something that we are prepared for at all.

Check it out.

Gay Episcopalians in central and southern Ohio can have their relationships blessed in church starting on Easter next year.

Bishop Thomas E. Breidenthal announced at the annual convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Southern Ohio on Friday that he would lift the prohibition on blessing same-sex unions.

The diocese includes Columbus and the lower half of the state, a territory of about 25,000 Episcopalians in more than 80 churches.

To allay the fears of some conservatives, Breidenthal added that no priest will be required to perform a same-sex blessing.

Read it all.

Check them out (pages 16-18).

Five new Congregations will be welcomed into the Diocese, with seat, voice, and vote, at our Annual Convention on November 6 and 7. The Church of Christ the Redeemer in Fort Worth will be recognized as a new mission church, with Fr. Christopher Culpepper as vicar. St.Francis Church in Dallas will be received as a new parish of the diocese; their rector in Fr. David Allen. The Bishop will introduce St. Gabriel’s Anglican Church in Springdale, Arkansas, as a new mission station, under the leadership of their rector, Fr. John Slavin. And then two parishes will be welcomed and seated under a new Parish Affiliation Agreement, authorized by the Bishop, Standing Committee, and Corporation of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth. They are St. Matthias’ Anglican Church in Dallas, Fr. Dwight Duncan, rector; and the Church of the Holy Spirit, Tulsa, Oklahoma, whose rector is Fr. Briane Turley.

Check them out.

The Diocese of Northern Michigan has decided that it will choose from multiple nominees when it next elects a bishop.

The diocese’s 114th annual convention, meeting on Oct. 30-31 in Escanaba, Mich., approved a new election process that allows for nominees by petition and will stress regular communication with the wider Episcopal Church.

Read it all.

The Dioceses of Western Louisiana and South Carolina have endorsed the Ridley-Cambridge draft of the Anglican Covenant, joining Central Florida as the third American diocese to formally back the Archbishop of Canterbury’s plan for creating a structure to manage the divisions over doctrine and discipline dividing the Anglican Communion.

On Oct 24, a special convention of the Diocese of South Carolina approved a resolution by a margin of 88 to 12 per cent that “endorses” the Anglican Covenant “as it presently stands, in all four sections, as an expression of our full commitment to mutual submission and accountability in communion, grounded in a common faith.”

Delegates to the Oct 9-10 annual convention of the Diocese of Western Louisiana also affirmed their support for the Covenant and backed Bishop Bruce MacPherson’s endorsement of the Anaheim Statement, which reaffirmed his commitment to remain part of the Anglican Communion and the Anglican Covenant process.

Read the whole article.

Minnesota’s 22,000 Episcopalians will be led by a 50-year-old priest from Spokane, Wash.

Delegates at the Episcopal Diocese of Minnesota’s 152nd annual convention Saturday voted to name the Rev. Brian Prior as their next bishop.

In doing so, they sidestepped three potentially historic choices for the 106-congregation diocese’s ninth bishop: a woman, a Native American or an openly partnered lesbian.

Read it all.

The Rev. David Thurlow, rector of St. Matthias Episcopal Church in Summerton, was a member of the standing committee that drafted the resolutions, along with Barr. Thurlow said that despite a certain consensus on the issue, the decision wasn’t easy for anyone.

“It’s sad that it’s come to this, that this is the situation that the church finds itself in, where members of the church are clearly going in a direction that is apart from the Scripture and tradition,” he said. “Our church voted for the resolutions because we are taking a stand for the catholic faith and order, which has been passed down to us through the centuries … These resolutions are the diocese’s way of differentiating itself from those in the church who are doing just that ”“ conforming matters of faith and doctrine to the pattern of the world, rather than the pattern of God’s word.”

[The Rev. John] Barr said he believes good things will come from the crisis.

“It’s been agonizing; it’s been painful,” he said. “But it’s also been a huge blessing, in that people are searching for Christian essentials ”” not the bric-a-brac. Not the side alleys, the ancillaries. People want to know when everything falls apart, what are the essentials of my Christian faith?”

Read it carefully and read it all.

Read it all.

We are in the ninth year of our Strategic Plan. We started out with a flurry of activity and accomplished much. After five years we got sidetracked by sexuality issues and the departures of several churches. In the face of the conflict in the larger church we have been faithfully living into various parts of the Strategic Plan.

Ӣ We have continued to plant churches. We have planted five churches and several new communities of faith, targeting Latinos, young adults, Koreans, and African Immigrants. Approximately ten percent of our average Sunday attendance is traceable to these new communities of faith.

Read it all.

We have heard a great deal about our unique polity in the Episcopal Church over the last several years. Polity is just a fancy word for how we do things ”“ what rules and principles govern our corporate actions, and what structures are involved in governing. Perhaps more pointedly, the Greek word from which we get our English term connotes the rights and obligations inherent in being part of a larger body. St. Paul uses this very term when he describes the Gentile Christians. Once, he said, we were excluded from citizenship (politeia) in Israel, excluded from the covenants of promise which God had made to them. But now, in Christ, we are made fellow citizens (sumpolitai), fellow members of God’s household.

So what characterizes this “unique polity”? Bishop Garrett understood this polity, this citizenship, in a particular way. “Every Diocese is an independent and sovereign state.”

It is evident that Bishop Garrett did not see this striking statement as something new. Indeed, he looked back to the founding of the Church by her Lord and its spread as the basis for the statement. “Responsibility,” he said, “involves power.” It would have been a vain thing if Jesus had commanded his Apostles to go into all the world and to proclaim the Gospel, if at the same time he did not commit to them the necessary authority to do so. He gave them the right and the power “to teach, ordain, confirm, place, support and [discipline]” within their places of responsibility. This was the mode of operations in the earliest Church ”“ a community of men and women carrying out the work of their Lord in each location, but joined in their common sense of mission.

Sovereignty, the power or authority to work and order a common life in a territory, was based both upon the mission of the Church and in turn the practical necessities of the Church. The mission was to proclaim Christ and to make his saving work known.

Read it all.

The voting margins were huge on Saturday as a special convention of the Diocese of South Carolina approved four resolutions [PDF] supported by the diocesan bishop, the Rt. Rev. Mark Joseph Lawrence.

A fifth resolution addressed diocesan convictions on sexuality, without explicit implications for the diocese’s relations with the Episcopal Church.

As Bishop Lawrence urged approval of the resolutions, he acknowledged criticisms that they have attracted: “The resolutions that are before us, while seeming tepid to some, have to others the feel of haste, even imprudence.”

Those disagreements are clear even within the diocese. Only about six miles from the convention’s meeting site, Christ Church in Mt. Pleasant, is St. Andrew’s Church, which already has begun a 40 Days of Discernment program to decide whether it will separate from the Episcopal Church and, by extension, from the diocese.

In mid-September, the Episcopal Forum of South Carolina said the diocese “teeters on the edge of schism” from the Episcopal Church.

Read it all.

Four of the five resolutions proposed by the Diocese of South Carolina’s Standing Committee were passed at the Special Convention held October 24, at Christ Church in Mt. Pleasant. All resolutions were drafted in response to Bishop Lawrence’s address to the clergy of the Diocese on August 13, which called the church to fight the “false Gospel of indiscriminate inclusivity.”

The first four Resolutions, presented as “guiding principles for engagement,” passed overwhelmingly. Collectively, they represent a comprehensive new strategy for addressing the future of The Episcopal Church and the larger Anglican Communion.

Read it all.

Read it all.

The Rev. Dow Sanderson, rector of Church of the Holy Communion, an Anglo-Catholic parish, said passage of the resolutions is not likely to have an immediate effect on the daily life of the diocese, “but it gives people a sense that something momentous occurred.”

“The diocese does not want to follow resolutions of General Convention that contravene 2,000 years of church history,” Sanderson said, calling the vote a “move toward differentiation” from the national church.

The Rev. Al Zadig, rector of St. Michael’s, said the bishop’s opening address was his finest, eloquently expressing the grievances of the diocese. Passage of the resolutions was a blessing, he said.

“It will bless my leadership because when the bishop and rectors are on the same page, you can do so much more ministry,” Zadig said. “It helps me explain to my parish where we are.”

Read it all.

“The only model that’s been out there for us has either been leave or acquiesce, and that hasn’t been working,” [Bishop Mark] Lawrence has said. “We need to get the 30,000 members of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina awakened to the challenges before us. … Once we have done that, then the question is how do we engage the larger Episcopal Church?”

Saturday’s vote authorizes the South Carolina bishop and the diocesan Standing Committee to begin withdrawing from church councils and governing bodies that have “assented to actions contrary to Holy Scripture,” according to the resolution text.

The Diocese of South Carolina is comprised of 75 parishes in the southern and eastern part of the state. Other Episcopal churches in the state are in the Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina.

Read it all.

The Bishop’s Address at the Synod or Special Convention of the Diocese of South Carolina, October 24, 2009

“When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?” Ps 11:3

I begin this morning’s address with this verse from the eleventh Psalm of the Psalter. The Hebrew Bible cites this as a Psalm of David. There is some discussion as to whether these are David’s words or the words of his advisors. Certainly what precedes this verse was spoken by the king’s counselors””for they suggest he “flee like a bird to the mountains.” Everything is lost. Seeking refuge is all there is left to do. But the psalmist has begun his prayer by declaring that the only refuge he is interested in is God; and God has not moved to the mountains. So the psalmist will stand tall and trust. Nevertheless, this verse from the psalm has haunted me for some time now. “When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?”
No one can fail to acknowledge that this Special Convention””this synodical gathering of the Diocese of South Carolina””is being carried out before watching eyes. The resolutions that are before us while seeming tepid to some, have to others the feel of haste, even imprudence. Whatever can be said in support or detraction, they have caught the attention of the secular and religious world around us. Even before we take up the work of this gathering it can hardly be suggested the rank and file members of the diocese have not been apprised that at least something of significance is going to take place today. This is not another ho hum ecclesiastical meeting. To that end, even those who would mount resistance have helped in getting the word out, even if fraught with fear and misinformation. I am thankful that along with the lay delegates and the clergy of the diocese we also have three bishops of the Church present; The Rt. Rev. C. Fitzsimmons Allison, 12th Bishop of South Carolina, The Rt. Rev. George Edward Haynesworth, retired Bishop of Nicaragua and retired assisting bishop of South Carolina, and The Rt. Reverend Alden M. Hathaway, retired bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh. Their presence is important because the issues before us in final analysis are issues of faith and order, and historically these have been the concern of the episcopacy.

We owe it to ourselves and to those we represent as well as to the larger Church to take these matters seriously and, I might add, prayerfully. So let me return to the words of the psalmist””whether uttered by a hard pressed king or his advisors, these words come down to us through the centuries: “When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?” Surely most of you know that I believe the foundations of The Episcopal Church and this Anglican way of being a Christian are being bit by bit destroyed. This is hardly the time for me to state again the argument that I put before the Clergy of the Diocese in my address on August 13th. Whether I was sufficiently clear in my exposition of the problems, or whether my words were fully understood, I believe their main thrust through congregational forums, clericus and deanery meetings should at least by now be broadly understood. Put simply it is a false understanding of the Christian faith that has spread abroad in our Church; a wrong understanding founded upon human speculation rather than divine revelation. This false teaching, that I have called the Gospel of Indiscriminate Inclusivity, has challenged the doctrine of The Trinity, the Uniqueness and Universality of Christ, the Authority of Scripture, our understanding of Baptism, and now, that last refuge of order, our Constitution & Canons. Like an invasive vine, like kudzu in an old growth forest, it has decked The Episcopal Church with decorative destruction. It has invaded and now is systematically dismantling the fundamental teachings of our Church and our Christian heritage. This has happened through the concerted actions of a few and the passivity of a multitude of churchmen and women””bishops, priests and laypersons.

And I might say it has happened, ironically, because of the faithfulness of many to the tasks that were set before them and giving too little time to resist the maneuvers a foot in the Church. I count myself for many years among them. For most of my ministry I have been plowing the field before me. If I tell my own story here it is because I believe it is the story of many. I was always working to grow the congregations to which God had called me. I knew I did not like the direction the “national” church was headed. But I did not get overly involved in these problems. I did my work in the parish””whether I was a vicar or a rector. There was always more work to do than time in the day. Baptisms to prepare people for, confirmands to teach, marriages to perform, the faithful, and nominally churched members to bury, the unchurched and lost to win. There were Bible studies to teach, sermons to prepare, services to lead, visitations, pastoral counseling, Stewardship Committees, ECW retreats, etc”¦. I and those with whom I served were busy growing the Church. Then there were diocesan responsibilities””COM, BOEC to chair, Standing Committee, years as a rural dean. Community involvements””Salvation Army Board, Hospital Ethics committee, and other local needs begging for leadership. Certainly I dealt with the challenges of the culture and the larger Church whenever it was in my purview whether parish or diocesan responsibility. All the time, however, I knew that TEC was moving inexorably in what seemed an increasingly unbiblical direction. I knew there were those who were fighting the battle””Bishops like Bishop Allison, Bishop Salmon, and Bishop Hathaway””fighting the good fight. In those days those resisting the dismantling of the foundations were substantial but I fear not bold enough. When some were taking radical actions, disregarding the creeds and the canons, the defenders of orthodoxy were gentleman still fighting according to Marques of Queensbury rules. Those pushing the agenda were more like street-fighters.

Yet even after all the hemorrhaging of the Traditionalist, Catholic and Evangelical wings of The Episcopal Church in the last 30 to 40 years””there are many who still remain. Even today I know that across the country there are vicars and rectors and lay persons who love their church and do not like the direction successive General Conventions have taken us; who do not know what to do. They get up each day to the demands of their flock, the care of their families and jobs, and their parish congregations. They do not know what has happened to their church or how it is they could have so many leaders of TEC that do not represent their views. And now I, like my predecessors, have to find a way to fight the fight in this day when those who are with us in this Church and willing to take a stand, are so few.

I have sought not to make The Episcopal Church the problem. Rather, I have suggested it is the embrace of this false gospel of indiscriminate inclusivity which is the problem. You will have to judge whether I have been successful in this. But what has happened is that the agenda of this false gospel has taken deep roots within the Church. We may have gone past the point of saving, but I have not yet given up.

I’ve said all of this in order to answer three questions:
Ӣ Why are we here today?
Ӣ What are we to do?
Ӣ What difference will it make?

Why Are We Here Today?

Or to ask the question differently, why have the Standing Committee and I called this Special Convention””this Diocesan Synod. Let me begin my answer with a story that Abraham Lincoln once told. When he was a circuit riding lawyer in frontier Illinois he stopped one hot day for a drink at a large farm house that was built under an enormous tree. He found the owner sitting under its shade. “Hank”, said Lincoln, noticing the troubled look on the farmer’s face, “What seems to be troubling you?” The farmer said, “Mr. Lincoln, do you see this here tree? It is the pride of the county. Look at the way those limbs stretch out over of my house like a canopy. About two months ago I came in from plowing the field to rest under the shade of this tree, when I looked up and saw a squirrel run into a hole in that branch. Well that caught my curiosity. So I shimmied up the tree and looked into that hole. It went the entire length of the branch. When I looked around, why there were holes in other branches too. And to my horror even the very trunk was hollowed out. Well, I figured I’d better fell the tree. But with all the contorted branches I couldn’t figure out a way to fell the tree and not bring down my house. So then I figured I’d just leave it up. But one night while I was in bed the wind began to howl and I thought ”˜What if one of those branches crashes down on my house and kills my family?’ I’ve been thinking about that now for two months” “Well,” asked Lincoln, “what did you decide?” “I decided I wish I’d never seen that darn squirrel!”

Well that’s why we’re here today. Your Bishop and Standing Committee have seen the squirrel. And in spite of the fact that at times we wish we hadn’t, we cannot deny it. In my Bishop’s Address to the Clergy, I not only described the challenges that are deconstructing our Episcopal heritage, I put forward what I believe ought to be four unswerving principles to guide us: The Lordship of Christ and the Sufficiency of Scripture; Godly Boundaries; Domestic Engagement for Missional Relationships; and, Emerging 21st Century Anglicanism. I believe we need to hold on to these guiding principles while remaining in a state of ready flexibility. The landscape around us in The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion is changing almost daily. This week alone has brought remarkable and gracious news from the Vatican but it will give us little relief but that of hope that one day all who hold the faith of the apostles shall be one. Meanwhile these four principles need to guide us; otherwise we will be tossed about by every windy gust of news or tidal wave crashing on the shore. I fear these principles have been lost in the discussion and debate over these resolutions. The guiding principles have produced the resolutions; the resolutions have not produced the principles. As a reminder, the principle is put succinctly at the top of each resolution. The resolutions have been drafted by members of the Standing Committee and some of the deans. Are they perfect? Of course not. There are places that I even would make changes. But I hope we will not get so bogged down in amendments that we fail to discuss or debate the substance.

Clearly the resolution that has caught the most attention has been Resolution #2. The controversy over this resolution is a good illustration of how the resolutions have been unhinged from the principles. Take the way resolution #2 has been portrayed””that we are leaving The Episcopal Church. That it gives the bishop and Standing Committee permission to leave the “national” church at will. It does nothing of the kind. Frankly bishops have been staying away from House of Bishops meetings for years without needing the permission of their diocesan conventions. This gives me no authority I do not already have. What it does is acknowledge we have entered a time when the need for more radically ways of speaking is painfully apparent. As for the suggestion this gives the Standing Committee and me the power to take the diocese out of TEC that is just not true. This argument ignores Article I of the Constitution of this Diocese which states that we “”¦accede to the Constitution & Canons of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America.” The Episcopal Church didn’t put that statement in our Constitution & Canons; this diocese did. It was a sovereign act of this Diocese of South Carolina.

Then there is the question often posed to me””if your intention bishop is to more thoroughly engage the “national” church and the culture, how does withdrawing from certain bodies of the Church enable us to more fully engage? To that question I say three things””first, remember there are four principles, not just this one. Secondly, most of us at some point in our lives have found ourselves in a dysfunctional system or relationship. We eventually recognized the need for appropriate boundaries. It is the only way to remain engaged with the family or system that embodies the dysfunction. Thirdly, it is the very withdrawing that facilitates the engagement. Here I refer to the analogy Canon Kendall Harmon uses. Our purposed action is similar to a wife whose husband is having an affair and after frequent confrontations and conversations he continues in his adulterous behavior. Eventually, without ending the marriage or leaving their home, she says, “I’m moving my bedroom down the hall. I haven’t given up on this yet, but somehow I have to get your attention that this isn’t working for me!” To summarize or evaluate all that she is doing to bring health or wholeness to the relationship by this one action would be patently unfair and inaccurate. What needs to be recognized is that it is one action she is taking along with several others. And the action regarding the bedroom is because it is the marriage bed that is the place the covenant has been broken. She knows that this move may provoke his anger. The children may blame her for their discomfort. But she has not ceased to engage.

Then others will ask, “Will this mean we will not send deputies to General Convention? How can we effect change if we don’t go to General Convention?” While the first question will ultimately be a decision of the diocese, let me say one thing clearly about the second question. The General Convention is not the answer to the problems of The Episcopal Church. The General Convention has become the problem. It has replaced a balanced piety in this Church with the politics of one-dimensional activism. Every three years when the Episcopal Church train pulls into the station of General Convention more traditional, catholic and evangelical Episcopalians get off the train and do not return. Do you know that in 1968 this Church had 3, 600, 000 members. In 2008 we had just barely over 2,000,000. It is even less than that now. Think about it, in what the Bible refers to as one generation we have lost 1,600,000 members! That is a 44% decline in one generation. All this while the U.S. population has skyrocketed! If you as an Episcopalian entered a train in 1968 with ninety-nine people randomly chosen, the odds were you would encounter another Episcopalian. But if you enter a train today with a random sampling of ninety-nine others, there would not be another Episcopalian on board, and the odds are just barely over 50–50 that even you would be there. I do not cite this to beat up on our Church. I cite it to say, we cannot take another generation like this. Some would suggest this is the price of being prophetic; I fear it is the price of being increasingly irrelevant. We have little to offer the world that a segment of the culture is offering. It is a matter of institutional survival. This train is moving fast toward a station where many of us in this diocese will not go. We fear the track this train is on””this train ain’t bound for glory, this train. That’s why we’re here today; to try and wake up passengers, brakemen and engineers alike. “When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?”

What are we to do?

Frankly, I have been wondering how long the average Episcopalian will just sit there and let this train load of radical activism roll them along to a dead end station. It reminds me of an old story of a parish which had fallen into lethargy. The priest invited an elderly nun from a nearby convent to address the congregation one Sunday. She said to the congregation, “There is a folk legend where I come from that when a baby is born, an angel comes down from heaven and kisses it on one part of its body. If the angel kisses him on the hand, he becomes a handyman. If the angel kisses him on the mouth he becomes a great speaker. If he kisses him on the forehead, he becomes bright and clever. And I’ve been trying to figure out where the angel has kissed all of you so that you should sit there for so long and do nothing.” These four principles that I’ve put forth to guide this diocese set us on a course to further engage our culture and our Church. So likewise, these are not random resolutions. The Standing Committee put them forward in response to my address to the clergy. There’s a resolution for each principle: If one tries to understand them separately you may fail to see they are in response to a consistent strategy, a coherent game plan for engaging the challenges and opportunities before us.

Resolutions 4 seeks to engage the international challenges. I haven’t time to rehearse what I spoke of at our Diocesan Convention last March when I put forth the vision of “Making Biblical Anglicans for a Global Age.” But it is briefly summarized in the “whereas” sections of the resolution. As I’ve stated at the clericus and deanery meetings around the diocese, I believe what is at stake is not merely Anglicanism or Episcopalianism in North America; it is the Anglican Communion. That is the key and vital theatre of engagement. We dare not take ourselves and our difficulties so seriously that we do not see and labor for the bigger prize””the emerging Anglicanism of the 21st Century.

Resolution 3 casts an eye toward those of whom I referred in the beginning of my address. Who are day by day ministering in their parishes but feel paralyzed by the overwhelming magnitude of the problems in our Church. Who yearn for those who will partner with them for the gospel, for the growth of the Church. Where we can, we must encourage them. So also we will look to partner with U.S. dioceses for the common purpose of winning the lost to Christ and to find better ways to grow our parishes and plant new congregations. Our purpose is not merely to establish healthy boundaries as Resolution 2 addresses it is to foster healthy mission and ministry among Episcopalians in this country.

But, if we are to grow we have to continue to ordain clergy. And they need to know, and the congregations in which they are ordained need to know, what the vows they are making mean. That is the purpose of Resolution 1. Over half a century ago Archbishop William Temple put it well: “The Church needs to be very clear in its public pronouncements so it may be very pastoral in its application.” When addressing some of the great moral questions of our day we have been dreadfully muddled in our public pronouncements. The recent resolutions of General Convention ’09, in D025 and C056 regarding human sexuality offer the most recent case in point””the nuances of descriptive not descriptive just doesn’t fly. Is the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church what a news report says? What some presiding officer says? What the Executive Council says on any given day? Is it really so mercurial? It feels at times like were holding liquid mercury.

I realize for some these resolutions are too risky; or even unnecessary. For others it is too little, too late. But it is something; and it is more than we have done to date. The time is now more critical; the clock now ticks loud””all can hear who have not plugged their ears; and so I believe at the present moment, passing these resolutions is what we need to do. We have heard the porter call out the station of destination and there are far too many of us who cannot go there. “When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?”

Finally, What difference will it make?

To this question I can only answer, I do not know. But I can say if we do nothing it is clear where we will be three years from today after the next Triennial. To wait until GC2012 to see if this Church canonizes the moral equivalency of same-sex marriage with the Christian understanding of marriage and then mount some protest will be too late. I fear our leaders have succumbed to emotion not reason. I’ve heard clergy in this Church, after casting votes that would alter our Church’s teaching on human sexuality, say “I am humble enough to acknowledge I may be wrong.” Let’s not cloak such actions with the garment of humility. Such action may be misguided compassion, but it is hardly humble. If one recognizes one may be wrong, would not humility suggest that one give the balance of weight to the plain reading of Holy Scripture? To two thousand years of the Church’s reflection upon those Scriptures? To the expressed mind of the Anglican Communion””and to the four Instruments of Unity? To the counsel of Christians around the world””Roman Catholic, Orthodox and the vast majority of Protestants? To what even the Natural Order reveals? Would not humility suggest one should”¦well, why both to say it? This is not about, nor ever has been about, excluding some from the grace and forgiveness of God. It is about is what the Church has the authority to recognize as authentically Christian, and what is appropriate for ordained leadership.

Should this Diocese of South Carolina pass these resolutions I suppose some may accuse us of disloyalty to The Episcopal Church. They might even suggest that it is we who will be guilty of destroying the foundations. I would say to this, if we are disloyal, it is the disloyalty of those who have loved what we believed is our best heritage; the disloyalty of those who have sought to protect the true breadth of our tradition. Not those who in recklessness tore it down or with ill-advised innovation tried to destroy the foundations that were once laid in Jesus Christ.

Ӣ Why are we here today? To face the problem before us, and The Episcopal Church, and the Anglican Communion.
Ӣ What are we to do? Decide the level of our engagement.
”¢ What difference will it make? God alone knows””we shall trust it to Him. The psalmist began his prayer by declaring that the only refuge he is interested in is God; and God has not moved to the mountains. His holy address hasn’t changed. He’s still in charge”¦as always. (The Message)

So let us turn now to today’s business. Let us do so recognizing, as David did in Psalm 11, that God is sovereign; that “His eyes behold the inhabited world; his piercing eye weighs our worth.” May God bless each one of us as we seek Him in the things we do today.

Read it all.

Read it all.

You can find all the links for information here.

She said her intention in writing to the deputies from South Carolina was to preserve their presence in the House of Deputies.

“I could see them throughout the whole convention,” she said of South Carolina’s deputation to this summer’s General Convention. “I appreciated the depth of their involvement.”

The Rev. Kendall Harmon, canon theologian to the Diocese of South Carolina and a four-time deputy to General Convention, objects to the letter as an intrusion in the deliberations of the special convention.

“I am interested in the issue of precedent,” said Canon Harmon, who published the letter on his weblog, TitusOneNine. “I can’t name a time when a House of Deputies president intervened in a diocese before a convention like this.”

Read it all.

Dear Deputies and First Alternates,

Greetings and Peace to you in the Name of Jesus Christ.

I am writing to you again after, what I perceived to be, a very holy conversation this morning with Deputy John Burwell.

I believe that my letter of yesterday to you may have been misunderstood. I can see how that would be the case. Please let me clarify my intention in writing to you as you approach the special convention in the Diocese of South Carolina.

It is my practice as President of the House of Deputies to write to all deputations as they approach their diocesan conventions and special conventions. I familiarize myself with the content and theme of their convention, and comment upon it, always wishing deputies well and thanking them for their continued service.

The special convention in the Diocese of South Carolina focuses in some measure on whether you or your successors will continue to participate in the councils of the Episcopal Church. Your departure would be a significant loss to me personally, as I deeply value the relationships we have begun to build. It would also be a deep and significant loss to the Episcopal Church as a whole. My desire to keep you within the councils of the Church was at the heart of my letter.

I also felt that it was important, in the spirit of open dialog and mutual accountability, to let you know that my interpretation of the constitution and canons of the Episcopal Church, are quite different than the interpretations which inform the resolutions that will come before your special convention. After talking with Deputy Burwell, I can see that discussing this point at such length may have obscured my primary purpose for writing, and for that, I am truly sorry.

I do pray that you and your diocese will continue to send a deputation to the General Convention. I pray, too, that our common call to mission partnerships across God’s church throughout the world will be lived and enacted together as members of The Episcopal Church.

In Jesus we walk together because it simply is so. Thank you for all that you are and for all the gifts you so freely give on behalf of our Beloved Savior.

Peace,

Bonnie Anderson, D.D.
President, The House of Deputies

The Rev. Dr. Frank Larisey, rector of the Episcopal Church of the Redeemer in Orangeburg, says another resolution will ask the diocese to sign the Anglican Covenant. The theological document is an attempt to state the common beliefs that holds the church together.

“It is basically a conservative, orthodox document that carefully holds the line on traditional Christian values with some places for other judicious interpretation,” Larisey said. “The first three sections deal with how we come together, theologically, as a body.”

“The fourth section is the punitive one, the one with teeth. That spells out what will happen if the covenant is entered and then abandoned,” he said. “This is an attempt at discipline in the church that has never been there before.”

Larisey says he feels the document is worth signing, although he points out that the Episcopal Church has a long history of signing agreements and then member components going their own way. Lawrence is asking that the entire four sections of the covenant be accepted by the diocese.

“It’s not as strong as I would like, but it is a good document,” Larisey said. “It will be of help especially if the fourth section is finalized, although that won’t be until at least 2012.”

Read it all.

“There is a real spirit of joy [in the diocese],” said the Very Rev. Kathleen McNellis, who is serving as vicar of St. Francis on the Hill, El Paso, Texas. The congregation has moved out of its church building and is meeting in a synagogue after the vestry voted to leave the Episcopal Church. The congregation and the Episcopal Church are suing the departed St. Francis parish in a property dispute.

The Rev. Lew Powell, deacon at St. Thomas of Canterbury, Albuquerque, said there’s “a real sense of collegiality that I haven’t always felt. The presence of the Holy Spirit is healing the diocese.”

Among the changes to the diocesan canons was to call its annual gatherings “conventions” instead of “convocations.” The latter term had been introduced by Bishop Kelshaw, who saw the gatherings as “the bishop calling the people together,” Canon Kelly said. The new term is a more democratic form. “A convention is the people of God coming together,” he said.

Read it all.

Read them carefully and read them all.

The Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh has chosen Bishop Kenneth Price, Jr., as its provisional — temporary — bishop, and declared its departing, part-time shepherd, Bishop Robert H. Johnson, to be “assisting bishop emeritus.”

The diocese is still recovering from a split in October 2008, when a majority of the clergy and laity at its last regular convention voted to leave the Episcopal Church over theological issues.

Read it all.

A proposal for the Pittsburgh diocese’s convention, which takes place today and Saturday, had called for formation of a task force to study the possibility of a reunion between the two dioceses. They had once been one.

But that resolution will be replaced, according to a statement from the Pittsburgh diocese. The new resolution will call for “discussions with a number of neighboring dioceses to explore collaborative partnerships to enhance the ministries of our dioceses and to improve the efficiency of diocesan operations,” the statement said.

Read it all.

From here:

The writer of a recent letter titled “Don’t break up Episcopal Church” stated, “The church that kept its Northern and Southern sections together during the Civil War. …”

I would like to refer her to the book “The Church in Confederate States” by Joseph Blount Cheshire, D.D.

“A Convention was held in Columbia, South Carolina, to organize the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Confederate States. A church constitution was drawn up and other matters settled. Within a few months, most of the Southern dioceses, including South Carolina, had ratified the constitution and had become part of the new church. The church’s only “General Council” was held in Augusta, Georgia, November 12-22, 1862.”

The Northern and Southern churches did reunite shortly after the end of the War Between the States.

Much of what became the Diocese of South Carolina started as the Church of England, and then freely joined the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States, then became the Protestant Church of the Confederate States and then back to Protestant Church in the United States, and that name has been recently changed to the Episcopal Church.

WILLIAM McINTOSH III

Co-archivist

St. Philip’s Church

The Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh reaches an important milestone and moves into a new phase of rebuilding this weekend. It meets in convention to approve a Provisional Bishop, conduct business that points to both greater stability and vitality, and to witness the ordination of a woman with deep ties to the diocese’s only predominantly African-American parish.

The governing body will convene Friday and Saturday, October 16 and 17, 2009, at the traditional seat of the diocese, Trinity Cathedral in downtown Pittsburgh.

Approximately 145 clergy and lay deputies from the diocese’s 28 active congregations will be asked to affirm the Rt. Rev. Kenneth L. Price, Jr., as Provisional Bishop. In that role, he would assume full ecclesiastical authority and responsibility as chief pastor and overseer of diocesan administration and finances until a permanent bishop can be elected and installed.

“I look forward to coming to Pittsburgh as part of a collaborative effort. Let’s work together to find out what we can do to make this the strong diocese that is part of its history,” says Bishop Price.

Read it all.