July 8, 2014, A DAY OF IRONY

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History, Emeritus

How ironic that on the first day of the trial set up by a group that left the Episcopal Church because they opposed equal rights for homosexual persons, that the ongoing Episcopal Church diocese in lower South Carolina announced it would begin allowing the rite of the blessing of same-sex unions in the local churches of the diocese. Bishop vonRosenberg issued a letter announcing the process on July 8. The choice of using the liturgy is entirely at the discretion of the local vestry/mission council and clergyperson. No one will be forced to do anything.

The old diocesan leadership had fought against rights for homosexuals for nearly thirty years. In the Church as a whole they lost on every turn: homosexuals in the priesthood, homosexuals in the episcopate, the blessing of same-sex unions, and equality for transsexual persons. However, they could have kept all of that out of the Diocese of South Carolina. For instance, allowing the blessing of unions was the choice of the diocesan bishop. If Lawrence had remained the Episcopal Church bishop of South Carolina he could have simply refused to allow the rite in the entire diocese, period. When he became bishop in January of 2008 the Diocese had about 29,000 communicants. 2,000 left with St. Andrew's, Mt. Pleasant. Approximately 7,000 remained with the Episcopal Church after the schism in 2012. That means the secessionist group has the majority of the old diocese. Now, about a quarter of the old diocese will have access to the liturgy for the blessing of same-sex unions. If Lawrence had remained, he certainly would have refused to allow the rite in the Episcopal diocese. 

Lawrence is in court leading the charge in a major battle of a war he has already lost. The driving issue in setting up the battle was homosexuality. Studies show a sea change now going on in America in favor of equal rights for LGBT persons. Within a decade, even the most socially conservative parts of the U.S. will support these rights. Indeed, Lawrence and his allies are now denying that it was ever about homosexuality at all. They cannot cover up the past. The historical record is starkly clear. The situation they are now in resulted from their opposition to the Episcopal Church's resolve to extend human rights to all of God's creation.

Odds are Lawrence will win in the Circuit Court. Judge Goodstein has been overwhelmingly favorable to him from day one. Afterwards, the decision will be appealed. Somewhere down the road, maybe far down, a final settlement will be made. The tide of history cannot be held back. Eventually, the forces fighting for rights and equality will prevail, as in the end it is God's will that the right replace the wrong.



ON THE EVE OF THE GREAT BATTLE

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

The eve of the great battle is here. The trial is slated to open tomorrow, July 8, 2014 and run until Friday, July 18.


Napoleon Bonaparte typically spent a sleepless night before a great battle moving among his men from one campfire to another telling them the great moment was at hand and everything depended on them personally. He made each soldier believe the future of the world rested of his shoulders. It usually worked. They even marched a thousand miles to Moscow; and ninety percent never returned home.


So, the independent Diocese of South Carolina is rallying its forces for the great battle, the one for which they have been preparing for many years, thirty if one counts the first denunciation of the Episcopal Church under Bishop Allison.

The independent diocese is reporting a pastoral letter from Bishop Lawrence and a prayer for victory by John Barr, being circulated among the faithful:

   Gracious Lord, we pray that your will should be done through this trial. May we want what you desire. Speak your words alone through Alan Runyan and the other attorneys who represent us. May the courtroom be filled with the pleasant aroma of Christ, and at the end of the day, protect this Diocese and its parishes, that we might bring the redemptive power of the biblical gospel to the South Carolina Lowcountry, the Pee Dee and beyond. Let not our fear of outcomes tarnish our joy or deter us from the mission you have given us. Teach us to bless and never curse those on the other side of this conflict. They will be done on earth as it is in heaven. And make us victorious over-comers wherever this road leads. For we ask it all in Jesus' Name. Amen.

Lawrence's version of the prayer is slightly different but both offer a bargain to God: bring us courtroom victory so that we may take the "biblical gospel" to South Carolina. Curiously enough, Lawrence also changed the wording "Teach to bless and never curse..." to "Enable us to bless and never curse..." One should think that every person, particularly one in a position of Christian leadership, is able to choose his actions.


Several interesting points in this prayer: 1-Alan Runyan is the only person named, 2-calls for God's will to be done and then specifies that should be courtroom victory, 3-bless and never curse those on the other side.

Evidently, everyone at DSC is not on the same page on point number three. Space here does not permit a full explanation, just one example. Last October, Bishop Lawrence labeled his courtroom opponents as "the spiritual forces of evil." Who is "evil"? Surely Lawrence did not mean to call another bishop "evil." However, not only did Lawrence not retract or clarify that shocking statement, he has repeated it on the diocesan website. One has only to glance over the Chronology post on this blog to see how the old diocesan leaders demonized the Episcopal Church, particularly the Presiding Bishop, for years. "To bless and never curse" is certainly commendable, but it would also certainly be a dramatic reversal of DSC policy.

Alan Runyan et al have been preparing for the great battle for a long time. And, let us not forget who started all this mess of litigation. It was Lawrence's independent diocese that sued the Episcopal Church first, on Jan. 4, 2013. Runyan even went to Illinois last year to argue in court on the side of the breakaway diocese of Quincy, perhaps practicing up. We know that the DSC lawyers have now taken a number of depositions from loyal Episcopalians in SC. Everyone expects the DSC team to come out all guns blazing on July 7.

We can predict Runyan's arguments from the records of previous trials in other secessionist dioceses as well as his remarks in the public record. What we are likely to hear from DSC lawyers:

1-The Diocese of South Carolina is a sovereign entity. It existed before the Episcopal Church; it helped found the Church; and it never surrendered its sovereignty to the Church; (ECSC will say sovereignty rests in the General Convention. Dioceses are subject to the Church as parishes are to dioceses. The Episcopal Church is hierarchical. Once a diocese joins TEC it agrees to live under the C and C of TEC.)

2-DSC's accession to the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church was at its discretion; it could revoke the accession as it wished; its revocations in 2011 and 2012 were perfectly legal. (ECSC: DSC acceded to the C and C of TEC and agreed to the rules. Dioceses can only enter and leave with permission of the General Convention. Dioceses are required to give unconditional accession to the C and C of TEC.)) 

3-Only dioceses joining TEC later were required to give unqualified accession to the Constitution and Canons of TEC; that did not apply to the founding dioceses; (ECSC: the idea of a two tier government, one for the founders and one for everyone else, is absurd.)

4-Canons of TEC cannot be forced on the diocese because there is no sovereignty clause in the C and C of TEC (as there is in the US Constitution giving laws of Congress supremacy over the states); (ECSC: supremacy of General Convention is clearly implied and does not have to be spelled out.)

5-secession from TEC is permitted because there is no provision in the C and C of TEC to prevent it; (ECSC: again, this is clearly implied, as it is in the U.S. Constitution. Besides, canons control admission and departure of dioceses.)

6-DSC is a separate legal entity under state law with all the rights to the identity and assets of the diocese; (ECSC: DSC was incorporated under the C and C of TEC. DSC had no right to remove TEC from its incorporation.)

7-the Dennis Canon is invalid in the state of South Carolina because the state Supreme Court ruled in the All Saints Waccamaw case that a trust cannot be created by an entity which did not have deed to the property. (ECSC: All Saints Waccamaw decision was for one parish alone. It did not invalidate the Dennis Canon is in SC.)


8-TEC attacked Lawrence and DSC and forced them to leave TEC. (ECSC: Lawrence and several others enacted a secret conspiracy over a several year period to cause a schism in order to defraud TEC of the diocesan properties and assets.)

In summary, the issue is where sovereignty rests, in the Episcopal Church or in the individual dioceses, and its corollary, whether the Episcopal Church is hierarchical or not. In general, court cases lean to TEC's positions.

Let's agree with the Rev. Barr "to bless and never curse" the other side. That would be an improvement. Let's remember that we are all in the same big boat. We are all going through life trying our best to carry out the gospel of Jesus Christ in the world. We are not enemies.

For the ECSC announcements and a useful summary of the ECSC position, see the recent press releases on the ECSC website. Also see the precise and concise article in the Charleston Post and Courier, June 25, www.postandcourier.com/article/20140625/PC1610/140629565 .

THE TWO DIOCESES ON THE SUNDAY BEFORE THE BATTLE

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History, Emeritus

Not surprisingly, the two dioceses handled the issue of the upcoming trial very differently on today, the Sunday before the trial.

The independent diocese declared it a major issue. Bishop Lawrence sent a long pastoral letter that was read in every local church today. (Lawrence has a history of letters to be read aloud in church.) Its message was predictable, a continuation of the longstanding points and appeals to God for favor. It reiterated the oft-repeated spin that the lawsuit was "to protect" the diocese and the local churches from unlawful seizure by the Episcopal Church. In fact, the independent diocese started the lawsuits and did so because they knew full well that the Church operated under the Dennis Canon. Under Church law that the diocese had recognized until 2011, all local properties were held in trust for the Episcopal diocese and the Episcopal Church. The purpose of the lawsuit was to convince the court to ignore the longstanding Church law and to grant ownership of property to the independent diocese and its local parishes. It was to maintain the properties that it knew were claimed by the Episcopal Church.

Lawrence also said that the lawsuit was to protect "the legacy of former generations." This charge is nonsense. From 1789 to October 15, 2012 every "generation" was in the Episcopal Church. The diocese was never independent. Everyone throughout those years considered themselves Episcopalians and active participants in the national Episcopal Church. In fact the "legacy" of over two hundred years was the Episcopal Church. It was Lawrence and the diocesan leadership who changed that legacy for the  majority of the communicants by willfully "disassociating" from the Episcopal Church on October 15, 2012. Sorry, Lawrence, but "legacy" in South Carolina history is squarely on the side of the Episcopal Church.

Once again, Lawrence repeated the prayer that John Barr had written calling on God to "protect this diocese and its parishes" in court. The prayer also says "bless and not curse those on the other side of the conflict." Lawrence would do well to take this prayer to heart. He is on record as repeatedly calling his courtroom opposition "the spiritual forces of evil." You can find it in various places on their website.

The purpose of Lawrence's pastoral letter of today was the same as so much of the old diocesan leadership's propaganda, to rally the masses to defend the supposedly righteous bishop and diocese against the supposedly evil attacks of the malevolent force from beyond called the Episcopal Church. Of course, the money helps. Thirty-seven lawyers are slated to appear in court for Lawrence on Tuesday. You know how much lawyers cost. Do the math.

In contrast, the Episcopal Church diocese had no pastoral letter from the bishop to be read aloud in every church today. Prayers were left to the discretion of the local churches and communicants. In the real Episcopal church I attended today in Florence, there were several remarks and prayers concerning the trial, all to the effect that God's will should be done. There was no self-righteous assertion, no calling on God for intervention through lawyers, and no demonization of the other side. In fact, the Episcopal Church diocese has never made derogatory comments about the others. Bishop vonRosenberg has never said a disparaging word about the rebel leaders who created the mess that everyone is in now. On the Episcopal Church side, I sense a calm serenity that God is in control and that the right will prevail in the end. I for one know just who is practicing the best of Christianity. 

THE MYTHS OF THE INDEPENDENT DIOCESE  -2nd Edition

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History, Emeritus

For years, the leaders of the independent diocese created myths in order to win and keep the support of the majority of communicants of the old diocese. Some were completely untrue, some only partially true, and others highly skewed versions of reality. The myths were spread throughout the diocese in massive public relations campaigns that escalated after Mark Lawrence became bishop in January of 2008. People tended to assume the story lines to be true since there was little or no counter argument from the Church side. It was important to the leaders that these myths be effective since this was a counter-revolution from the top down. The schism likely originated with the certain views of a relatively small group of people in leadership offices, perhaps no more than two dozen. (Lawyer Tisdale has charged in court that four people, Lawrence and three others conspired to enact the schism).


There were three periods of DSC mythmaking. The first period was from the mid-1980's to October 15, 2012. This was the run-up to the schism. At this time the message focused on the Episcopal Church as falling into sin and heresy and becoming the unrighteous aggressor against the pure, orthodox Diocese of South Carolina. The bishop and diocese were only innocent victims.


The second period was from October 15, 2012, to January 3, 2013. This was the time of the schism. The myths here depicted TEC as the wrongful aggressor trying to remove the righteous bishop in order to seize control of the orthodox diocese and stamp out the true religion in favor of sin and heresy. Thus, DSC was forced the leave TEC in order to preserve orthodoxy.


The third span of mythmaking was from January 4, 2013 to the present. This was the period of litigation. The story here was that DSC was forced to go to court in order "to protect" the diocese and the local parishes, mainly the properties, from illegal seizure by the heretical Church, whose motive, again, was the stamp out orthodoxy.


The common theme in all three periods of mythmaking is that TEC is the aggressor with malevolent motives while DSC is the innocent victim and righteous defender of pure religion.


The public relations initiatives changed from time to time according to the momentary aims of the diocesan leadership. For instance, the issue of homosexuality was the driving force that led up to the schism. Once the break was made, it was shelved. After litigation began, the leaders reversed themselves and declared that it had never been about homosexuality, only about theology. They are now trying to rewrite history to remove the issue of homosexuality apparently because they believe it will be detrimental to their future.


In this post, I would like to review the major myths that the diocesan leadership has put forth starting with those of phase three, the period of litigation. The first four below were ones just repeated on their website on July 3 as "South Carolina Circuit Judge orders TEC..."




Myth # 1: The Episcopal Church adopted "a radical fringe scriptural interpretation that makes following Christ's teachings optional for salvation."

Fact: That is completely untrue. The Episcopal Church has never adopted anything such as this. It would take a resolution of the General Convention which has never happened and will never happen. I challenge anyone in the independent diocese to produce one document from the governing bodies of the Episcopal Church supporting this reprehensible assertion. If you cannot prove it, stop saying it. Anyway, if the Episcopal Church religion is heretical, why are you still using only the Episcopal Church prayer book in the independent diocese?




Myth # 2: The independent diocese disassociated from the Episcopal Church in October 2012 after TEC tried to remove its duly elected bishop.

Fact: Lawrence was not removed as a bishop in October 2012. He was "restricted" on Oct. 15 until either he was cleared by the Presiding Bishop or tried by the House of Bishops. The PB was trying to find a way to clear him. Lawrence announced to the Presiding Bishop on October 17 that the diocese had "disassociated" from the Episcopal Church as of October 15, that he had rejected the "restriction" and that he would not meet with her again. The PB allowed Lawrence seven weeks to reconsider. The PB accepted his renunciation on Dec. 5, 2012. In fact, Lawrence removed himself from the Episcopal Church. The PB deposed him only after that.

Myth # 3: The Episcopal Church and her dioceses sue local churches to punish and intimidate them.

Fact: The Episcopal Church goes to court to carry out the Dennis Canon that has long been church law. The Dennis Canon says that all local church properties are held in trust for the Episcopal diocese and the Episcopal Church. TEC goes to court to enforce its own laws which were duly made in the constitutional process spelled out in the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church.

Myth # 4: The independent diocese is part of the Anglican Communion because it has been "recognized" by Anglicans around the world.

Fact: The independent diocese is not in the Anglican Communion. The AC is a loose confederation of independent churches around the world tracing their heritage back to the Church of England. The only legal and legitimate branch of the AC in the United States is the Episcopal Church. The independent diocese is supported by a self-created Third World coalition of Anglican provinces that does not have any legal or legitimate status in the formal structure of the AC.




Myth # 5: It's about God, not gays.

Fact: Homosexuality was the wedge issue between the old diocese and TEC. Aspects included ordination of homosexual persons as priests, then as bishops, as well as the blessing of same-sex unions, and equal rights for transsexual persons. When these aspects came up for approval in General Convention, there was a backlash in DSC that finally led to the schism. Since the schism, DSC leaders have denied the actual events of their own history and now declare it was never about homosexuality, only about theology.




Myth # 6: TEC forced DSC to go to court in order "to protect" the diocese and the local parish properties.


Fact: DSC willfully and voluntarily went to court first and filed a lawsuit against TEC on January 4, 2013. No one forced them to do anything. Records show that the Standing Committee directed Alan Runyan to begin preparing legal action on November 6, 2012, two months earlier. DSC went to court first to set the legal agenda before TEC had time to reorganize the diocese and install a provisional bishop.




Myth # 7: DSC is the only legal and legitimate Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina.


Fact: By setting the agenda in court, DSC convinced a judge to recognize such in January 2013. However, under TEC rules that DSC recognized until 2011, only General Convention has the power to admit and dismiss dioceses. This has not happened. In TEC's view, the old diocese did not leave TEC. It was reorganized in January 2013 under new leadership and a new provisional bishop. TEC, and the Anglican Communion, recognize the continuing diocese under its bishop, Charles vonRosenberg, as the only legal and legitimate Episcopal Church entity in eastern South Carolina.


Myth # 8: South Carolina law invalidated the Dennis Canon in the state of South Carolina. (The Dennis Canon, in TEC Constitution and Canons holds that local property is held in trust for the Episcopal diocese and the Episcopal Church).


Fact: The case which the DSC leaders always cite is the All Saints Waccamaw decision of the state supreme court in September 2009. Actually, that decision was for one parish only. It did find in favor of the local church. However, it was not a blanket order for the whole state. The ruling did not declare the Dennis Canon invalid in the state of South Carolina.


These were the major myths of the third period, litigation. In future, I will look at those from the two earlier phases.



A GLORIOUS DAY!

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

Saturday, May 3, was a glorious day in every sense of the word. Well over 300 people took advantage of a perfect day weather-wise to converge on the most lovely and charming campus of the most gracious hosts at Holy Cross Faith Memorial Episcopal Church in Pawleys Island for a grand day of worship, fellowship, support, and sharing. It was a sort of big family reunion of devoted Episcopalians from every corner of the South Carolina diocese and beyond.

The day started with a magnificent Holy Eucharist celebrated by the Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church. The Rev. William Keith, rector of the church, delivered a lively, upbeat sermon. With the church's beautiful naturalistic Low Country setting revealed in its large, clear windows all around, all felt as one with God, God's people, and God's nature. It was a great festival of rejoicing, thanksgiving and celebration. It was a most uplifting moment that set the atmosphere for the rest of the day of that big family reunion.

Several speakers followed the Eucharist. The Rt. Rev. Charles vonRosenberg, bishop of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina, talked on "The State of the Diocese." In a nutshell, it is good and improving. The good bishop, ever the soul of peaceful reconciliation, exhorted the congregation to resist "artificial polarities": sad or liberated, litigation or rebuilding, progressive or conservative. The very character of the Episcopal Church is "the big tent" and not one view to the exclusion of the other; and certainly never to demonize people with whom we may disagree. He said that the diocese must do things differently in the future while reclaiming its history as one of the oldest and greatest of the dioceses in the Episcopal Church.

The Presiding Bishop next spoke on "Connections." She emphasized the work of healing relationships, that relationships lead to justice, that righteousness is in right relationships, that "restoring creation is God's mission." She continued that "mission is the ground of our being as Christians," that "we are sent to be a life-giving body in the world," that "the mission of the church is to reconcile all to God." She then went into detail about the Episcopal Church's Millenium Development Goals (2000-15) and Five Marks of Mission. She said "the church exists by mission" and holds a "vision of a healed world."

The next speaker was the Rev. Gay Clark Jennings, president of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church who spoke on "Leadership in Challenging Times." She talked of challenging the boundaries, of being the "church we used to be and the church God is calling us to be." Times are changing and the church we knew is changing too. The challenge is how to lead in this time in a positive and healing way. She emphasized the collegiate nature of the Episcopal Church where power is shared across a broad spectrum of laity, clergy and bishops. This, she said, is a good guide for the future as we try to sort out the best way to proceed.

In the following question and answer period, Jennings responded to a question of whether the Episcopal Church has room for "traditional" views on sexuality. "Our unity is not based on thinking alike," she said. We are the church of diversity and toleration for different views. Bishop vonRosenberg reported on progress in reconciliation. One local church has returned to the Episcopal diocese and at least one clergyperson is in conversation to return to the Episcopal Church. "Reconciliation is our long range goal" he insisted.

Everyone than enjoyed a picnic lunch and fellowship while strolling around the magnificent broad green campus of grand old live oak trees well draped in long Spanish moss gently swaying in the cool breeze.

Afternoon sessions got down to the nuts-and-bolts of  survival and rebuilding after schism. The Rt. Rev. Kenneth Price, Jr., former Provisional Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh, spoke of his experiences in rebuilding the fractured old Episcopal diocese of Pittsburgh. That diocese has experienced a marvelous resurrection since its traumatic schism in 2007. Along the way ten local churches and numerous clergy returned to the Episcopal diocese so that today, the Episcopal diocese holds fifty-five percent of the pre-schism diocese and is growing. Price emphasized a positive attitude, always respectful of the opposition, never criticizing its leaders or communicants. These were words that were not lost on the South Carolinians.

After Price's energetic and uplifting talk, the meeting broke out into workshops, one for small churches and one for larger ones. The one for small churches was conducted by representatives from Pittsburgh. The Rev. Kris McInnes is priest at St. David's in suburban Pittsburgh, a church that originally departed then returned to the Episcopal diocese and is growing well. He emphasized the point of simply being the Episcopal Church, of keeping all doors open, of working in love and compassion for the reconciliation of all people without judgment or qualifications. That approach has worked well in healing the schism in numerous places around that diocese.

Rich Creehan is Communications Director of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh. He spoke on getting the message out into the public and of doing it in the most positive and constructive ways. He emphasized claiming the identity of the Episcopal Church, its history and nature so that the public understands just which Church is the true Episcopal and Anglican one. He cautioned, though, that this must be done with care and compassion for the other side and he gave practical guidelines on how to do that. He said a long détente exists in Pittsburgh between the two sides of the schism and that this has worked well in the interest of both parties. He exhorted the audience to go out and tell their experiences to their communities. Simply getting their stories out to the people around them will do wonders, as it has in Pittsburgh. The attendees left that meeting encouraged and energized.

The Episcopal Church in South Carolina is slowly but surely rebuilding. It is doing so because of thousands of devoted people and because of their many great leaders. It is doing so as the church of the big tent, big enough to encompass all, big enough to heal all wounds, big enough to extend care and compassion to all of God's creation. This was the message of the day. This is the message of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina and far beyond. This has been the story of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina for well over two centuries now. This will remain her message for ages to come.

There is an old saying that you can't go home again. That is not true. One can always go home again. Home is the place where they will always take you in because you are family, no questions asked. One can always go home to that ancient place in South Carolina that sustained generations of faithful Christians in the Episcopal Church.


See also Steve Skardon's report at www.scepiscopalians.com and many pictures at www.episcopalchurchsc.org . For a wonderfully detailed description of the conference see:  www.episcopalchurchsc.org/enthusiastically-episcopalian.html .

A MOMENT TO CELEBRATE!

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

Come ye faithful, raise the strain of triumphant gladness!

God has brought His Israel into joy from sadness

Long-suffering, intrepid Episcopalians of South Carolina, it's time to rejoice in God's goodness and to celebrate the ongoing life of the Episcopal Church in the Low Country! A great weekend is at hand.

"Enthusiastically Episcopalian in South Carolina" is the name of the conference hosted by the Episcopal Forum of South Carolina at Holy Cross Faith Memorial Episcopal Church at Pawleys Island on May 3. For a decade now, the Episcopal Forum has carried the torch for the Episcopal Church in this diocese. Along the way they were made to suffer many "slings and arrows" from those who wanted to depart from the Church. The Forum never flinched. They never quit. They never gave in no matter the odds against them. They are heroes. Every Episcopalian in South Carolina owes the leaders of the Forum a huge debt of gratitude.

The schedule of the day begins at 9:00 a.m. with the Presiding Bishop celebrating Holy Eucharist. The balance of the day will be a conference of speakers, panels, and discussions that will feature the Most Rev. Jefferts Schori, the Presiding Bishop, the Rt. Rev. vonRosenberg, the bishop of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina, the Rt. Rev. Kenneth Price, former provisional bishop of Pittsburgh, and the Rev. Gay Jennings, president of the House of Deputies. Workshops will include "Rebuilding while Rejoicing" for small churches, and "Showing the Way while Staying the Course," for large ones. It will be a day of worship, celebration, sharing, learning, and support. At least 330 people have registered for the day.

Registration to attend the conference closed a couple of weeks ago. However, for those who cannot attend, there will be streaming information on the Facebook and Twitter accounts of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina. The diocese will also post a report on its website www.episcopalchurchsc.org . I expect to be in attendance and will post a report on this blog as soon as possible.

This will be the Presiding Bishop's third official visit to the diocese. How different those occasions have been! The first visit was on February 25-26, 2008. Jefferts Schori had been pointedly not invited to the consecration of Bishop Lawrence the month before. She was invited for a visit to South Carolina and a date was arranged. Her entire time was managed by the old diocesan leadership. She was not allowed to celebrate a Eucharist, preside at any service, or visit a pro-TEC church. On the first day she processed into St. Philip's for evensong alongside Lawrence. She was allowed only a brief prayer. Afterwards she stood by Lawrence in a receiving line until the crowd was told to clear out of the hall for a Lenten study group. 

The next day she was put to the test in a closed meeting with the diocesan clergy at St. Andrew's of Mt. Pleasant. Videos were made, apparently in secret by the staff of St. Andrew's. "Clarity Ensued" is still available in 12 parts on The Living Church website www.livingchurch.org/clarity-ensued . The videos total 90 minutes, about half of the entire meeting. They were heavily edited to remove many of Jeffert Schori's answers. Edited or not, these videos stand as invaluable evidence of the true feelings of the diocesan leadership toward the Presiding Bishop. I highly recommend these videos to anyone who wants to understand the attitudes of the pre-schism leadership toward the national Church.

The Presiding Bishop was placed alone in front facing the clergy in the pews. An image of a criminal under the lights in the interrogation room of the police station may come to mind. Another imagine may be the wolf surrounded by the ranchers who move in on the one that had been menacing their sheep. What was supposed to be a sort of informal discussion between the Presiding Bishop and the clergy turned into a scripted and choreographed presentation of the diocesan leadership to the Presiding Bishop. They made it plain they were there to present their grievances to her, not to listen to her. She remained cool and calm and endured nearly three hours of charges, accusations, and insults with serene dignity. Lawrence opened the show reading to her from the Bible and demanding that she take back her words from an interview with Time magazine. Kendall Harmon followed with personal accusations. She did her best to ignore them. She showed a ripple of emotion only once on the videos, when a clergyman said he was glad there was one orthodox bishop present (Lawrence). Jefferts Schori calmly stood and said quietly that she resented the insinuation that she was not orthodox. A hush fell over the crowd. The clergyman apologized to her. In the end, it was reported that the Presiding Bishop threw up her hands in frustration and exclaimed that she was struck by their inability to communicate.

The second visit to the diocese was the reverse of the first. It was to attend the special convention of January 25-26, 2013, when the old diocese was reorganized under a provisional bishop, Charles vonRosenberg. That was an occasion of festival celebration. Many a tear of joy was shed as she slowly processed down the grand aisle of that Gothic masterpiece, Grace Church of Charleston. It was as if the whole Episcopal Church filled the high vaulted ceilings of that old edifice.

And so the Presiding Bishop returns to the Episcopal Church in South Carolina, and once again she brings with her the presence of the entire Episcopal Church. The Episcopal Church goes on in South Carolina. It goes on because of the thousands of ordinary, faithful Episcopalians who refused to be defeated and who refused to give in to the pressures of the misled crowd. They are all heroes. It goes on because of the Forum. It goes on because of her devoted deacons, priests and bishops. Even in bar-b-que stands, funeral homes, old schools, and borrowed sanctuaries, the Church goes on in South Carolina. Now is a moment to celebrate.

GAFCON AND THE IMPRISONMENT OF HOMOSEXUALS

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

GAFCON (Global Anglican Futures Conference) has struck again. It is the reactionary, homophobic shadow government of the Anglican Communion centered in equatorial Africa. The majority of its Primates' Council is from there (Uganda, Nigeria, Rwanda, Kenya, Sudan). On April 27, the Council issued a "Communique," as usual obsessed with homosexuality. This one, however, goes a step farther in a jaw-dropping declaration: "5. We are equally concerned for the affected communities in Chile from the recent earthquake, terrorist attacks in Kenya, and the backlash from the international community in Uganda from their new legislation." (read the whole statement at http://gafcon.org/news/communique-from-the-gafcon-primates-council). Yes, you read it correctly. It equates the devastating earthquake in Chile and bloody terrorist attacks in Kenya to the international opposition to the recent anti-homosexual law in Uganda (not the law itself, but the BACKLASH against the law).

The "Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2014" was signed into law on Feb. 24, 2014 (see the excellent article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Anti-Homosexuality_Act_2014). The text of the law may be found at http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/files/2014/02/Anti-Homosexuality-Act-2014.pdf . The new law calls for life imprisonment for persons engaging in certain homosexual acts. Among additional things, it provides for prison terms for individuals who fail to turn in family, friends, and neighbors they know to be engaging in homosexual acts. This is, of course, a blatant violation of basic human rights, the persecution of a helpless, defenseless minority. The law has been almost universally condemned in the western world, especially by American, Canadian, and British leaders and practically every human rights association in the world. But not GAFCON. Quite the opposite. GAFCON is on record blasting the opponents of the this new law.

See also the article by Cathy Lynn Grossman in Religion News Service of April 28 (www.religionnews.com/2014/04/28/). Grossman points out that Robert Duncan, archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America, signed the Communique as a member of the council of primates of GAFCON. Duncan has been recognized by GAFCON as the only legitimate Anglican primate in America. Duncan, however, refused to comment on the Communique. But obviously as a signatory he cannot disclaim the statement. 

In another excellent commentary, on April 29. Jim Naughton wrote in Episcopal Café "Why Won't ACNA Say it is Wrong to Put Gay People in Prison?" (www.episcopalcafe.com/lead) Naughton believes that Duncan and the other breakaway leaders in the U.S. are trying to hide the fact of their anti-homosexual agenda: "ACNA's leaders in this country know that their church won't survive if its homophobic roots...become widely known."

The evidence shows that this is also true in South Carolina. A simple glace over the "Chronology" section of this blog shows the obsession with homosexuality in the Diocese of South Carolina since the days of Bishop Allison in the 1980's. The consecration of Gene Robinson in 2003 had an enormous backlash in South Carolina. Then, in the first two years of his episcopacy, Mark Lawrence made a major issue of what he called "indiscriminate inclusivity," his term declaring opposition to rights for homosexuals. The issue worked as the wedge to separate the diocese from the Episcopal Church. This was accomplished by resolutions of the October 2010 special diocesan convention which ended accession to the canons of the Episcopal Church. Once done, homosexuality was pushed aside. The "Rubric of Love," a resolution of compassion for homosexuals, had already been permanently withdrawn in the convention of March of 2010. After that, the diocesan leadership tried to bury the issue of homosexuality as they put all their emphasis on theological and organizational differences with the national church, such as the Title IV reforms. Since the schism, the diocesan leadership has carried on a campaign to rewrite history to say that it was all about God, not gays. The historical evidence says otherwise loudly and clearly.

In South Carolina, Mark Lawrence and other diocesan leaders, as Kendall Harmon, have been great advocates of GAFCON. Lawrence attended both GAFCON conferences (2008, 2013) and warmly endorsed their statements. Just a few weeks ago, Harmon gave a workshop at a diocesan convention promoting the Jerusalem Declaration, the official statement of the 2008 GAFCON meeting. Harmon just promoted the new GAFCON Communique on his blog (without mentioning its point #5). It is clear that the independent Diocese of South Carolina has strong ties to GAFCON.

The truth is that the driving issue in leading the majority of the old diocese out of the Episcopal Church was homosexuality. However much the pre-schism diocesan leaders may try, they cannot hide the truth. Moreover, time and history are against them. All the evidence shows a huge sea change in America supporting rights for homosexual persons including marriage equality. Within a decade, even a majority of South Carolinians will support marriage equality. Young people already overwhelmingly support it. In time, a church based on opposition to rights for homosexuals will shrink away.

The good communicants of the independent Diocese of South Carolina should ask themselves whether they really want to be connected to GAFCON. Their diocesan leaders are enthusiastically supporting GAFCON. GAFCON is supporting the legal persecution of homosexuals in Uganda. They have said that the backlash against the law is as bad as an earthquake or a terrorist bomb. GAFCON pretends to be a Christian leadership organization. The new law is anything but Christian. Do the good people of South Carolina really want to support an organization that defends the cruel and bizarre belief that homosexuals belong in prison, and for life? If not, they ought to reconsider the decisions their leaders have made for them.

LITIGATION SUMMARY, APRIL 12

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

A summary of pending litigation between the independent Diocese of South Carolina (DSC) and the Episcopal Church in South Carolina (ECSC) derived from the public record as of April 12:

1. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR THE FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT (state court, St. George, Dorchester County, Judge Goodstein)

     ---July 7 and 8 set as dates for trial, Dorchester County Courthouse, St. George, Courtroom "D", approximately 10:00 a.m.

     ---DSC has issued at least 14 subpoenas "commanding" each person to appear at a time and place to give an official deposition. 1-George M. Hearn, Jr. (Apr. 11), 2-Holly Behre (Apr. 30), 3-Robert Black (Apr. 29), 4-Bishop John C. Buchanan (Apr. 16), 5-Lonnie Hamilton III (Apr. 29), 6-Bishop Dorsey Henderson (Apr. 24), 7-Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori (Apr. 23), 8-Melinda Lucka (Apr. 30), 9-Barbara Mann (Apr. 28), 10-Steve Skardon (Apr. 14), 11-James E. Taylor (May 2), 12-Bishop Charles vonRosenberg (Apr. 22), 13-Callie Walpole (Apr. 21), 14-Michael Wright (Apr. 25). Each was "served" by an official process server.

DSC gave no explanation of why these persons and not others were subpoenaed. Some of the above names have had no official capacity in a diocese.

     ---Judge Goodstein has an outstanding order to "stay," or stop, the taking of depositions. On January 17, DSC made a request to Goodstein for permission to take depositions. Goodstein denied the request pending a ruling from the appeals court. On March 18 the appeals court denied ECSC's appeal; and soon thereafter DSC asked Goodstein to lift the "stay." She did not respond to this request. In apparent disregard of Goodstein's "stay" order, DSC proceeded with issuing subpoenas to the fourteen persons listed above. On March 31, ECSC filed "TECSC's Notice and Motion to Quash Subpoenas Issued by the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of South Carolina and the Trustees of the Protestant Episcopal Church in South Carolina and to Hold Them in Contempt of Court." This asked Goodstein to 1-stop the subpoenas, and 2-hold DSC in contempt of court. Goodstein has not responded to this request. On April 8, ECSC filed with Goodstein, "TECSC's Notice and Motion for Immediate Hearing" asking for an immediate stop to the subpoenas. Goodstein has not responded to this request.

     ---The first deposition, of Hearn, was to have taken place on Friday, April 11. We do not know yet whether it actually occurred.

     ---Goodstein has pending requests from both sides: DSC to lift "stay", and ECSC to stop the subpoenas and to hold DSC in contempt. We are awaiting her response.

2-SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT.

     On January 13, ECSC filed an appeal with the South Carolina Court of Appeals asking the court to overturn Judge Goodstein's decision to disallow ECSC's request for the correspondence between Lawrence and Runyan. On February 6, DSC asked the South Carolina Supreme Court to assume jurisdiction over the appeals from Goodstein's court. ECSC did not object to this request. On March 18, the appeals court rejected ECSC's motion of appeal; and on March 25, ECSC filed a new petition with the appeals court for a rehearing. However, on April 4, the S C Supreme Court granted DSC's request and moved the appeals to the supreme court.

     The South Carolina Supreme Court will now consider all appeals coming from Goodstein's court. ECSC did not oppose this.

3-THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT.

     On February 5, ECSC filed an appeal of U.S. judge Houck's decision to the Fourth Circuit court of appeals in Richmond, Virginia. This is the regional court for appeals from U.S. district courts.

     On April 7, ECSC filed "Opening Brief of Appellant [ECSC]." 53 pages. In this, ECSC emphasizes the Lanham Act, an act of Congress, and Serbian Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, a U.S. Supreme Court decision.  The Lanham Act (see en.wikipedia.wiki/Lanham_Act) is a 1946 law providing the primary trademark statute for the U.S. It also forbids false advertising. The Serbian Orthodox case (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Orthodox_Diocese_v_Milivojevich) is a Supreme Court ruling that the First and Fourteenth Amendments preclude the government from interfering in the internal matters of an hierarchical church. It emphasizes the principle of separation of church and state. It holds that internal decisions must be made by the institution, and not by civil courts.

     ECSC's case is based on the claim that it alone is the Episcopal Church diocese of South Carolina and vonRosenberg is the only legal bishop of the diocese. It asserts that the Episcopal Church is hierarchical and must be allowed to resolve its own internal differences.

     DSC, on the contrary, holds that it is the only legal and legitimate Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina because it is and has always been a sovereign entity. Therefore, the Episcopal Church is not an hierarchical institution. DSC seeks to have "neutral" principles followed in court. This would judge property disputes "neutrally" between the two sides.

     So far, there is no public record that DSC has responded to ECSC's action in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

4-EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF FORT WORTH.

     There is one other important legal action to bear in mind, the plan of the Episcopal Diocese of Ft. Worth to submit a writ in the U.S. Supreme Court for consideration of the Texas Supreme Court's decision against the diocese. The application will have to be made by June in order to be considered by the court for next year.

COURT NEWS, APRIL 8

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

On April 4, 2014, the Supreme Court of South Carolina issued an "Order" under the signature of Jean H. Toal, the chief justice, of four sentences. It said that the Diocese of South Carolina (DSC) had moved that the appeals made by the Episcopal Church in South Carolina (ECSC) in the South Carolina Court of Appeals be moved to the Supreme Court of South Carolina. ECSC did not file a counter motion to the DSC request in the SC Supreme Court. Therefore, "The motion [of DSC] is granted and the appeal is hereby certified [moved] to this Court." This means that the SC Supreme Court will rule on the appeals ECSC made from the Circuit Court of Judge Goodstein.

The second bit of news is that Judge Goodstein has set the date for the trial in her circuit court as July 7 and 8 of 2014.

Not surprisingly, the two dioceses have posted very different interpretations of the state Supreme Court order. ECSC's post of April 7 is entitled "Appeal Over Withheld Evidence Moves to State Supreme Court." ( www.episcopalchurchsc.org/news-release-april-7-2014.html ) ECSC lawyers appealed Goodstein's refusal to require DSC to turn over some 1200 pieces of correspondence between Bishop Lawrence and his lead lawyer, C, Alan Runyan, before November 17, 2012 (the date of the purported disassociation). The lawyers claim the Episcopal Church diocese owns this correspondence since Lawrence was the legal bishop of the Episcopal Church diocese at that time. They have charged that Lawrence and his inner circle enacted a conspiracy to try to remove the diocese from the Episcopal Church and to take the property that belonged to the Episcopal diocese under the terms of the Church and diocesan constitution and canons.

The historical record is clear that C. Alan Runyan played an active role in the run-up to the special diocesan convention of October 15, 2010. It was that convention that passed six resolutions making a de facto separation of the diocese from the Episcopal Church. The resolutions asserted self-rule, local sovereignty, and the right of nullification. They declared the removal of South Carolina from accession to the canons of the Episcopal Church, deleted the Dennis Canon from the diocesan canons, and altered the diocesan corporate charter to remove references to the Episcopal Church. This was the turning point for South Carolina. DSC, however, claimed that it had not separated from the Church because it still acceded to the constitution of the Church. Nevertheless, these resolutions would be the core issues on which the Disciplinary Board for Bishops would rule in 2012 that Lawrence had abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church. The presiding bishop then placed a restriction of Lawrence. Lawrence rejected the validity of all of this and discarded his consecration vows of loyalty to the Episcopal Church by acts of November 17, 2012. The presiding bishop then removed him as the bishop of the Episcopal Church diocese of South Carolina.

By his own testimony ("The Personal Testimony of Mr. Alan Runyan, Attorney for the Diocese of South Carolina," audio, Christ/St. Paul's, Jan. 12, 2014, www.kendallharmon.net 13-1-14), Runyan, a former Baptist deacon and Sunday School teacher, became very interested in church legal issues after the South Carolina Supreme Court's ruling on All Saints, Waccamaw in September of 2009 (overruled the Dennis Canon for All Saints, Pawleys Island). Soon thereafter he and Lawrence formed a close working relationship. By January of 2010, Runyan had becaome a very prominent lawyer in the diocese even though Wade Logan remained chancellor. When Tisdale, as lawyer for the presiding bishop, attempted to get information from the diocese for the national church in January of 2010, it was Runyan who issued a number of letters against this. The diocese refused to turn over any document to Tisdale. By September of 2010, Runyan was apparently close with the Standing Committee and was speaking around the diocese in support of the six proposed resolutions for the upcoming special convention of Oct. 15, 2010. His presentation to the convention is available on youtube ("DSC 2010 Convention: Alan Runyan Explains Canons," Oct. 15, 2010, Anglican TV, 11 min., posted 17-10-12,  www.youtube.com). All six resolutions easily sailed through the convention. As stated earlier, these resolutions were the point of no return for the diocese of South Carolina. Runyan remained an important legal advisor, perhaps the most important, to Lawrence throughout 2010, 2011, and 2012. After the schism he has remained as the apparent lead lawyer for DSC. He even went to Illinois to participate in the trial there between TEC and the secessionist diocese of Quincy. Therefore, the correspondence between Lawrence and Runyan would be of great importance to the case prepared by ECSC lawyers. DSC, however, refuses to turn over any correspondence on the grounds of lawyer-client confidentiality. Judge Goodstein refused to order the turn over of the correspondence, hence ECSC's appeal to the SC Court of Appeals.

The independent Diocese of South Carolina posted a story on its web site on April 8: "SC Supreme Court Takes Jurisdiction over TEC Appeals: Justices' Decision Likely Prevents TEC from Using Legal Maneuvers to Drag Out Proceedings, Drain Local Funds." (www.diosc.com) DSC believes TEC and ECSC are "misusing" appeals to drag out the proceedings as long as possible to deliberately bleed DSC of funds. This does not point out that DSC, and not the Episcopal Church, started the lawsuits in South Carolina. It is also interesting to note the last line of the article: "The Diocese has consistently disagreed with TEC's embrace of what most members of the global Anglican Communion believe to be a radical fringe scriptural interpretation that makes Christ's teachings optional for salvation." Yet, it will be recalled that just last month the DSC convention passed a resolution that only Episcopal Church liturgies may be used in churches of the Diocese of South Carolina. Apparently the contradiction of word and deed does not occur to the leadership clique in DSC. The ordinary person-in-the-pew of the independent diocese would do well to ask, "If the Episcopal Church religion is so bad, why are we following only the Episcopal Church religion?" The average person is not fooled. This is not about religion, it is about the interaction between religion and society.

Given the rulings already made by Judge Goodstein and by the South Carolina Supreme Court, the ECSC side should not expect favorable outcomes from either. However, all of this could become moot if the U.S. Supreme Court takes the appeal of the Episcopal Diocese of Ft. Worth from the Texas Supreme Court. One should not forget too that ECSC has an appeal pending in the U.S. Fourth Circuit in Richmond. Historically speaking, federal courts are more likely to recognize rights of the Episcopal Church.



CHRISTIANS AND LAWSUITS

By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

April 2, 2014

It is useful at this point to remind ourselves of St. Paul's well-known admonition against Christians bringing lawsuits against fellow Christians. I Corinthians 6: 1-7 (NIV):  If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment...I say this to shame you...The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. These are sobering words indeed. In the light of what has happened in South Carolina, we would all do well to reread and contemplate St. Paul's words in this passage. Have two certain groups of Christians in South Carolina completely defeated themselves already? If so, shame.

Bishop Lawrence is a man who holds the Scriptures in very high esteem; the same for his lead lawyer, Alan Runyan, a former Baptist deacon and son of Baptist missionaries. Before the schism, Lawrence and his allies spent a great deal of time and energy criticizing the Episcopal Church for being non-Biblical (particularly on the parts about homosexuality). When the Presiding Bishop visited Charleston in 2008, Lawrence proceeded to read the Bible and to preach to her from it in front of the assembled clergy. And yet, on January 4, 2013, Lawrence decided he had to do what St. Paul had said in the Scriptures not to do, bring a lawsuit against fellow Christians. That was the first lawsuit filed in the contest between the two sides in South Carolina. For the next fifteen months the legal proceedings snowballed as the two sparring side pulled out all the stops to win in court. Shame.

In sum, the lawsuits are about legitimacy. Each diocese claims to be the only legal and legitimate continuation of the old Episcopal diocese in lower South Carolina and therefore entitled to all the rights and properties of the pre-schism diocese. They have gone to court to get judicial rulings to validate their claims alone and therefore to invalidate their rival's claim. This is a contest between two institutional units. Yet, all along it has been disturbingly personal and is ever becoming more so. Shame.

A simple review of the "Chronology" post on this blog shows the unfortunate personalization of the dispute. In August of 2012, a committee of fourteen persons filed a complaint against the actions of Bishop Lawrence with the Disciplinary Board for Bishops. The Board reviewed the case and agreed that Lawrence had abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church. Amid loud protests that Lawrence was being deprived of due process by not knowing his accusers, the names were revealed publicly in October. Lawrence's supporters sneered at the fourteen as a small band of  malcontents from the dissident minority called the Episcopal Forum. Shame.

In January, February and March of 2013, the independent diocese had court papers served to certain persons on four different occasions although none was necessary. On Jan. 23, DSC had the Temporary Restraining Order against ECSC officially served to twelve people: George Hawkins, Virginia Wilder, Callie Walpole, Lonnie Hamilton, James E. Taylor, Erin Hoyle, Barbara Mann, Melinda Lucka, Charles vonRosenberg, John Buchanan, Steve Skardon, and Michael Wright. On Jan. 31, DSC had the Temporary Injunction against ECSC served to: vonRosenberg, Lucka, and Wright. On Feb. 27, DSC had its amended lawsuit officially delivered to: Thomas Tisdale, vonRosenberg, and Wilder. On Mar. 19, DSC had its Motion for a Partial Summary Judgment served to: Tisdale, vonRosenberg, and Wilder. DSC has not given a reason why the papers had to be served at all, and has not explained why these particular people were singled out and not others. Some of the names above had no official capacity in any diocese. Shame.

DSC lawyers are moving forward with the personalization of their litigation. According to ECSC ( www.episcopalchurchsc.org/news-release-april-1-2104 ) "Starting in January, the breakaway group has been taking the unusual step of hiring a process server to track down local Episcopalians at their homes and workplaces and serve them with subpoenas to appear and give depositions...So far, at least 10 people are known to have been subpoenaed by the breakaway group." The only one known publicly so far is Steve Skardon ( www.scepiscopalians.com ) but I think we can take a wild guess at the others by looking at the lists in the preceeding paragraph. It is hard to imagine what Skardon, or almost anyone else here, might have to add to the actual litigation going on in court. Once again, DSC has not revealed why it deems it necessary to make this personal. Shame.

On March 31, 2014, ECSC lawyer Tisdale filed with the circuit court (state court) in Dorchester County, a request for Judge Goodstein "to quash subpoenas" issued by DSC and "to hold them in contempt of court." The circuit court is where the original lawsuit is proceeding. Tisdale formally asked that Goodstein stop DSC's subpoenas for personal depositions and hold DSC in contempt of court because they ignored her "stay" order that placed a freeze on all proceedings pending a ruling from the state appeals court. In January ECSC had filed an appeal with that court; the appeal was rejected in March, but ECSC filed a new appeal to the same court immediately thereafter. The new appeal is pending. Goodstein has not removed her original stay order of January. DSC proceeded to subpoena certain Episcopalians in South Carolina for official depositions anyway. Shame.


The struggle between the two dioceses is institutional and should remain that way. Only the office-holding leadership should be accountable. Others should be left out of this. Sadly, St. Paul's advice has already been ignored. The court actions are there. They cannot be undone. The record cannot be erased. Shame.


Therefore, what should the sides do from this point? How should they proceed in the future with the lawsuits that should not have been in the first place? For starters, they should remember that they are all Christians and should move forward by treating each other accordingly with all the respect, care, and compassion that Our Lord exhibited in the Gospels. The world rightly judges Christians by what they do and not what they say. There is another scriptural passage that all should take a moment to remember:  Mark 8: 36 (NIV) What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?


Someday all of this unpleasantness will be over. When that day comes, everyone should be able to look back and say they behaved as good Christians.  If not, everyone should look back in shame. 



REFLECTIONS ON THE OVERSIGHT "COUNCIL" SCHEME


By Ronald J. Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

The primatial oversight scheme for the independent Diocese of South Carolina approved in their recent annual convention is remarkable in many ways. Here are the salient facts as we know them now:

1-Bishop Lawrence and Bishop Mouneer Anis are longtime close friends and conservative allies. Anis is the chairman of Global South, an alliance of socially reactionary Anglicans committed to opposing rights for homosexual persons. Global South is closely associated with GAFCON and its offshoot the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans. All of these groups were formed to oppose rights for homosexuals.

2-The Global South Primates Steering Committee suddenly issued a statement on February 15, 2014 inviting DSC into a primatial oversight arrangement. This was four weeks before the DSC convention.

3-The Steering Committee is composed of the Anglican primates of: Egypt, Indian Ocean, Myanmar (Burma), Southern Cone, Burundi, South East Asia, Sudan, and Nigeria. All signed the Feb. 15 statement except Nigeria, the largest Anglican province in the world. The signers represent many of the smallest provinces in the Anglican Communion. The Global South Steering Committee does not represent anywhere near a majority of the AC. Many provinces have refused to join as Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Korea.

4-In the statement of Feb. 15, not one detail was presented for this "Primatial Oversight Council." Who is to be on the Council? How many members will be on it? How are they to be chosen? How long will their terms last? Is the primatial oversight for DSC to be by committee or by an individual primate? If by individual, how is he to be selected? What powers will he have? What will be the relationship between the Council and the primate? How much is DSC to pay this Council? 

5-R-3 says DSC can withdraw from the Council arrangement as it chooses. How is the Council to exercise power over a diocese that does not have to obey its will?

6-The "Rationale" with R-3 says this offer is God's Will ("providential"). However, there is to be no set time limit because they do not want to "box in" the Holy Spirit. This business of proclaiming God's Will is truly astonishing and should go without comment except to say that in the past Bishop Lawrence has declared events to be God's Will.

7- The offer was rushed through the convention. The proposal for the oversight Council was presented immediately to the DSC for vote with the directive that it was "providential." There was very little time to consider it. In a newspaper article (P & C, March 15, 2014) one delegate complained that "There was no time to sit and have an examination with the laity of the whole diocese." This has become the habit of DSC in quick succession: decision from the top, passed on the Standing Committee and Council for unanimous approval, passed on to clergy, passed on to diocesan convention. Along the way little or no public discussion. Little or no room for differences of opinion let alone dissenting positions.

8-R-2 and R-3 passed unanimously. The offer of primatial Council got not one negative vote. This demonstrates the complete bond between diocese and bishop.

9-Bishop Lawrence does  not know the details of the primatial Council offer. He said in a video interview on March 19 that "as I understand it" there will be one primate. (www.youtube.com  Anglican TV Interviews Bp Mark Lawrence," 18 min.). He cannot say for sure what the arrangement will be.

10-Lawrence is to appoint personally and solely a "discernment" committee. They will come from the Council and Standing Committee. This gives him complete control over the discernment process. Can there can be any doubt that the "discernment" will be his choice?

These are the conclusions I reach from all this:

---DSC and Lawrence are desperate for legitimacy. For the last 16 months the DSC has had no identity and no legitimate status. They are not the Episcopal Church in lower South Carolina and they are not in the Anglican Communion. So, what are they? Where are they?

---DSC and its leaders have a jarring way of declaring to know God's Will. This implies that any differentiation is not God's Will. It is presumptuous to dare to speak for God.

---An authoritarian process has settled into the life of DSC. The DSC convention was little more than a Duma that rubberstamped decisions already made. Two votes were unanimous, the rest "overwhelming." DSC is solidly under its leadership.

---The DSC has put absolute faith in its bishop. The diocesan conventions have surrendered all rights to the bishop who now has authoritarian power to govern DSC (see the other resolutions). He alone can interpret the Constitution and Canons. Vestries and standing committees have been reduced to insignificance.

---The primatial Council is entirely uncertain. Its relationship to DSC is equally unknown. The history of the relationships of the other splinter groups from the Episcopal Church with overseas primates is not good. There is no reason here to think otherwise.

---The logical future course for DSC is to join the Anglican Church in North America. All of the other four seceding diocese joined it. For some unknown reason Lawrence refuses to join ACNA. This leaves DSC in a quandary of where to go as an "Anglican" diocese. 

THE INDEPENDENT DIOCESE AND ITS IDENTITY CRISIS

By Ronald Caldwell, PhD, Professor of History Emeritus

In October of 2012, I was one of a hundred attendees at a local parish forum with Bishop Lawrence. He had just been "restricted" by the Presiding Bishop. Lawrence opened the meeting by declaring boldly, "I am no longer an Episcopalian!" The adoring audience murmured its approval. An hour later, after hearing everything that was wrong with the Episcopal Church, one man arose to ask a final question, "Shepherd, where will you lead us from here?" It was the best question of the day, simple and direct. The crowd grew still in expectation of some great words of wisdom from their esteemed leader. Lawrence responded hesitatingly, well, maybe here, maybe there, or perhaps over there. He failed to give a coherent answer to a simple question. It did not matter to the crowd. They gave him a standing ovation. In a nutshell, that is the history of the independent Diocese of South Carolina in the past few years. Neither here nor there. The DSC has a major identity crisis. Its bishop does not.

As the DSC convention of the 15th was closed to the public, we still do not have a full picture of its proceedings, only three pieces of information: a press release by the "administrator," Lawrence's address, and a newspaper article (P & C, 3-15). I think we can safely assume that all of the proposed resolutions passed easily and without discussion, as R-3.

Earlier posts here have described the resolutions. They fall into three categories:  1-primatial oversight. Lawrence and his good friend Anis have concocted a strange scheme to give DSC a "council" of primates, but with the provision that DSC can back out whenever it wishes. This is a transparent charade meant to convince the good people of South Carolina that they are authentic "Anglicans";  2-authoritarian control. The bishop alone can: -appoint the members of the "Discernment" committee, -remove a parish or mission from the diocese, -dictate what liturgies can be used in churches, -appoint and dismiss clergy at will, -control all parish properties through the rector who was given "authority" over the properties, -require worship to follow only the Episcopal Church services. There is much more to these resolutions than meets the eye.

For reasons still not apparent, Lawrence refuses to join the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). All of the other four departing dioceses have joined ACNA and are dioceses in it. He and Bob Duncan, the archbishop of ACNA, have a long and close history going back more than two decades when Lawrence was a rector in the Diocese of Pittsburgh and Duncan was canon to the ordinary then bishop of the diocese. Lawrence's refusal to join ACNA certainly does not stem from unfamiliarity. And perhaps that the point--too much familiarity. It is interesting to note than one of the resolutions, C-5, required that only Episcopal Church liturgies be used in DSC services. Others have to have the express approval of the bishop. This precludes use of the newly published book of services of the ACNA. Is this a slap at Duncan and Keith Ackerman, head of the committee that drew up the new liturgies?

In the convention, apparently there was no talk of the 800 pound elephant in the room, litigation. Even so, it is entirely possible that this is in fact the issue propelling everything going on in the DSC these days.

Given the recent court rulings on church properties, there is a good chance that the Episcopal Church and its diocese will regain the church properties now held by DSC. In spite of all their bluster about the Dennis Canon being dead in South Carolina, the DSC leadership is obviously anxious about their legal future. The supreme courts in nearby Virginia and Georgia have overwhelmingly recognized the Episcopal Church and its dioceses as the owners of church properties, even of ancient parishes. This is bound to impact on South Carolina.

Lawrence knows very well that DSC will be in for a major crisis if the courts finally rule for TEC. In the first place, a certain number of DSC communicants will stay with their ancestral shrines and family graveyards. In the second place, the wayward clergy can easily return home as they have been only released and not defrocked. When the DSC leaders are removed from the presently occupied churches, they will have a whole new set of daunting problems.

This returns us to the original problem, identity. What the DSC convention was all about was building identity. Lawrence's peculiar arrangement of a primatial "Council" run by the Global South, but at the discretion of DSC, is meant to develop a patina of legitimate Anglicanism. It will not work. On the other hand, refusal to join ACNA will not build Anglican identity either. That begs the question of what will work.


The DSC has been separate from TEC for well over a year now. In that time two co-dependent factors have become clear: it has joined no larger group, and the bishop has expanded his authoritarian power.


It is crucial for the future of the independent diocese that it develop a distinct identity. This is the only way it can survive the shock of losing in court. However, Lawrence is not succeeding in making a certain identity for his diocese. So we return to where we started. "I am no longer an Episcopalian!" Okay. A year and a half later the good people of South Carolina are still awaiting a coherent answer to their pertinent question, "Shepherd, where will you lead us from here?"