In a post last Sunday, I offered a “Modest Proposal” for orthodox dioceses to go forward within the Episcopal Church (USA). The gist of my proposal was that the orthodox plow ahead, keeping true to their own traditional path, and simply ignore the bureaucracy at 815 and elsewhere — because the bottom line is that they can do nothing to a diocese that stays in the Church. Neither 815 nor General Convention nor the Presiding Bishop has any power to compel a Diocese within the Church to do anything. And if enough orthodox dioceses were to come together in a mutual protection plan, even threatened depositions could be effectively countered to the point where ECUSA would sink in a morass of litigation.
Now it appears that the Diocese of South Carolina might be embarking on the first steps toward such a brave strategy. Bishop Mark Lawrence addressed his assembled clergy today, and included the following statement of intention:
The Standing Committee and bishop will be proposing a resolution to come before the special convention that this diocese begin withdrawing from all bodies of governance of TEC that have assented to actions contrary to Holy Scripture; the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this church has received them; the resolutions of Lambeth which have expressed the mind of the Communion; the Book of Common Prayer (p.422-423) and the Constitution & Canons of TEC (Canon 18:1.2.b) until such bodies show a willingness to repent of such actions. Let no one think this is a denial of the vows a priest or bishop makes to participate in the councils of governance. This is not a flight into isolation; nor is it an abandonment of duty, but the protest of conscience. . . .
Some have already questioned whether this means that the Diocese of South Carolina will be following the path of the Dioceses of San Joaquin, Pittsburgh, Fort Worth and Quincy. After all, one of the bodies that has given its assent to actions contrary to Holy Scripture is General Convention itself, and would not a withdrawal from General Convention be a withdrawal from the Episcopal Church (USA)?
Not necessarily. I do not claim to be privy to South Carolina’s intentions and strategies, but like the next Episcopalian, I can read Bishop Lawrence’s statement in context. Had he meant to propose a resolution to withdraw from ECUSA, he could have said so; but he did not. He spoke of beginning to withdraw….
Question: Why do the new Title IV Canons not take effect til 2011? I thought it was a done deal? I understand changes to the Constitution take two Conventions, but that the Canons went into effect the year following GC.
Thanx
Grandmother
That’s what the Title IV changes provide in the text as adopted by General Convention, Grandmother (scroll down to the bottom of the link at the AC’s post). There are new hearing boards, conference boards, intake officers and a host of other positions that each diocese must appoint, and then the provinces have to create courts of review at their level, and so on. The last section of the changes provides some complicated transition provisions for the changeover from the old Title IV to the new.
Even the Romans knew that keeping lions was troublesome, they have to be fed. So they found some Christians who refused to hold to the current idolatry and used them as lion food. When the central message of your parish or diocese is condemning the sins of others, the role of eclesiastic authority is to assure that there is sin to be condemned. The Bishop has found his food locker in TEC. By proclaiming a circus to publicly refuse to do what was required by the General Convention is cheap satisfaction for the mob. Since the General Convention did not require that anything be done, it’s cheap food to refuse to do it. The next step, should it be refusal to abide by the Canons which he has twice taken holy vows to support, could be very expensive food. The State of South Carolina has clearly ruled on the validity of the Dennis Canon. He clearly knew what Canons he was swearing to when he took the vows. For the future benefit of this blog it might be nice to know whether contributors to the question are Episcopalians, or members of the Diocese in question. (for myself, yes, and no) Will they be participants in paying that price or do they just like to watch lions feed?
Yes, yes, yes, no…….
Grandmother in SC
In 1977 I urged the leaders of the then Evangelical and Catholic Mission, now FIFNA to adopt such a strategy. I suggested that while orthodox bishops continued to trot around taking part in episcopal ordinations, attending meetings of the H of B etc, their witness would be dampened. The hierarchy expected them to be good people, perhaps noisy and occasionally disruptive but finally team players. Instead the option was the creation of organizations which proposed structural solutions.