TOWARD A RESOLUTION

Part VI

(First posted on Jan. 15, 2018).
In this, the sixth installment in our series "Toward a Resolution" of the schism in South Carolina, we turn to our fifth question on out list (see Part I, Jan. 5):

DID THE ISSUE OF HOMOSEXUALITY CAUSE THE SCHISM?

In other words, what caused the schism? Why did the majority of clergy and laity of the Diocese of South Carolina leave the Episcopal Church in 2012?

Let us look first at DSC's explanation of the causes.

For years before the schism, the DSC leaders frequently reiterated the theme of three problems that they saw between DSC and TEC: theology, polity (church government), and morality (sexuality). Bishop Lawrence expounded on this in nearly every address he made between his consecration in 2008 and the schism in 2012.

After the schism, the leaders revised the official line to proclaim that the schism had almost nothing to do with homosexuality. It was caused, they said, by theological differences and prompted by polity. They dropped off the third of the three reasons from pre-schism days. The Rev. Jim Lewis, assistant to Bishop Lawrence, posted an article in The Charleston Mercury on Oct. 2, 2013, "The Real Story Behind Our Split with the Episcopal Church." He insisted the Episcopal Church had abandoned true religion and the diocese had to break away to preserve "orthodox" faith. What prompted this was the Church's supposed attempt to remove Lawrence as bishop. In this view, homosexuality was only an unimportant side concern.

So, what is the truth? Did the issue of homosexuality cause the schism?

I have written extensively about this problem on this blog (see my three posts "What Caused the Schism in South Carolina?" May 1, 2017) and in my recent A History of the Episcopal Church Schism in South Carolina (Eugene OR: Wipf and Stock, 2017. 527 p.). The book contains 300,000 words. Space here does not allow a full, or even lengthy recounting of the issue of homosexuality in the history of the schism. Thus, a summary will have to do for now. I recommend you read the conclusion of the book (p. 495-512). It summarizes the information laid out in great detail in the book and solves the problem at hand.

Summary:

1. As all significant historical problems, the schism had underlying, direct, and immediate causes. The underlying cause was a division between TEC and DSC that I simplified as horizontal and vertical religion. (Horizontal is social, the application of the gospel to society--to improve conditions in this world. Vertical is individualistic, one person and one God,--to save souls for the next world.) 

The direct cause came out of this underlying cause. It was the issue of homosexuality. This issue really had two aspects: morality and ordination. On the first, the question of whether homosexual acts were immoral, TEC moved to the position of moral neutrality while DSC insisted that homosexual acts were always immoral. On the second, TEC agreed that non-celibate ("practicing") homosexuals could be ordained deacons, priests, and bishops. DSC rejected the validity of these ordinations.

The events that initiated the schism were made by the DSC leaders in the aftermath of the General Convention of 2012, from August to October of 2012.

2. Homosexuality was a highly contentious issue in the Episcopal Church in the 1980s and 1990s. In the same period, the diocese of South Carolina became increasingly conservative (vertical). Rising criticism of TEC centered on homosexuality. In 1985, the DSC convention passed a resolution "we do not approve the ordination of practicing homosexuals" (p. 49). 

The time of decision on the issue of homosexuality in TEC came in 1990-1997. In that period, the GC adopted a canon protecting homosexuals' rights to ordinations, a church trial declared that there was no impediment to the ordination of homosexuals, and the church started a process for exploring the possibility of a liturgy for the blessing of same-sex unions.

3. On the heels of the pro-homosexual decisions of the 1997 GC, the first significant schismatic movement occurred. It was the First Promise meeting in Pawleys Island, SC, an ultra-conservative collection, including some clergy of DSC. FP declared TEC to be in error and in need of replacement. Out of this came, in 2000, the Anglican Mission in the Americas, under the Anglican primates of Rwanda and Southeast Asia, and the consecration of two bishops for this entity. One was the Rev. Chuck Murphy, host of First Promise and rector of All Saints, Pawleys Island. In 2004, All Saints declared its independence from DSC. This was validated by SC supreme court in the All Saints of 2009.

4. In 2003, GC approved a non-celibate gay man as a bishop. This caused an explosion in DSC. DSC leadership vowed non-recognition of this and called a special convention to condemn the church action and appeal for foreign intervention in America. This set a permanently hostile interface between the DSC and TEC. In 2004, DSC was one a dozen ultra-conservative (rejection of the validity of the ordinations of homosexuals) dioceses to form the Anglican Communion Network (morphed into the Anglican Church in North America, in 2009). The ACN demanded foreign primatial oversight for their dioceses.

5. In 2006, TEC elected a new presiding bishop, a woman, who happened to be a strong advocate of homosexual inclusivity in the church. DSC leaders condemned her election. Four dioceses moved to vote secession from TEC.

6. 2005-07, DSC conducted a search for a new bishop. The search committee sought Mark Lawrence, well-known as opponent of the ordination of non-celibate homosexuals and proponent of secession from TEC. Lawrence won the election in SC after publishing two essays advocating schism from TEC and the submission of TEC to the (anti-homosexual rights) majority of the Anglican Communion but insisting he had no "intention" of leaving TEC. 

7. 2008-2012, Lawrence emphasized the theme of three differences with TEC, theology, polity and morality, but most often gave more time and emphasis to the last, i.e. homosexuality. (Even after the schism, he devoted more time in his public discussions to homosexuality than the others combined, as in his talk to Old St. Andrew's parish in 2013 during its discernment.)

In July of 2008, Lawrence attended the Jerusalem meeting that produced the Jerusalem Statement condemning homosexuality and rejecting the authority of Anglican provinces that allowed ordination of non-celibate homosexuals, e.g., USA. A few months later, the DSC Standing Committee adopted the Statement, thus rejecting the authority of their own church because of homosexuality.

8. The 2009 TEC General Convention set up a study for the development of a liturgy for the blessing of same-sex unions.

DSC exploded in rage against TEC. Lawrence railed against "indiscriminate inclusivity" (equal rights for homosexuals and transgendered) in his addresses. In 2009-2010, DSC conventions voted to withdraw from governing bodies of TEC at will, to declare the sovereignty of the diocese, to set aside a resolution expressing compassion for homosexuals (The Rubric of Love), to make the bishop the final authority on church law, to revoke accession to the canons of TEC, and to remove references to TEC in the corporate charter. This amounted to virtual declaration of independence from TEC.

9. In 2011, tensions rose as the Disciplinary Board for Bishops investigated Lawrence for possible charge of abandonment of the church. The DBB eventually voted not to charge the bishop. At the same time, Lawrence issued the quit claim deeds in disregard of TEC's Dennis Canon.

10. By the start of 2012, everyone knew the GC of 2012 would almost certainly adopt a liturgy for the blessing of same-sex unions. On a new, heightened wave of homophobia, the DSC leadership planned the last phase of the schism.

After GC, DSC took willful, deliberate, and secret steps to remove the diocese from TEC: an ultra-secret meeting on Aug. 21 apparently planned out the action; on Sept. 21, the Standing Committee asked the bishop for guidance on how the diocese could leave TEC; on Oct. 2, Lawrence delivered a letter to the Standing Committee advising them they could "disaffiliate" the diocese from TEC. The Committee passed a resolution to remove the diocese from TEC if TEC took any action against Lawrence. This was a set-up for post-event rationalization for the pre-planned schism.

On Oct. 15, the Presiding Bishop placed a restriction on Lawrence. The DSC leadership self-declared, in secret, a "disaffiliation" of the diocese from TEC. They announced this to everyone on Oct. 17. The special convention of Nov. 17 affirmed this and changed the canons to remove references to TEC.

The events of August-October were direct results of TEC's adoption of a liturgy for the blessing of homosexual unions.

One common question about DSC and the issue of homosexuality was whether the leaders were only using it as a wedge to pry the majority of the communicants away from TEC. Were they only cynically using it as a ploy, or were they sincerely driven by the issue?

There is absolutely no doubt the DSC used the issue of homosexuality to rally the diocese against the church they had come to see as apostate. They obviously used it as a wedge issue. However, this does not mean they did not believe in it themselves. On the contrary, there is a good deal of evidence they were profoundly moved by indignation at TEC's approval of the moral neutrality of homosexual acts and equal access to ordination in the church. 

This became clear in 2015. After the schism, DSC leaders mostly ignored the issue of homosexuality through 2013 and 2014. This changed in 2015 when they passed through the diocesan convention a series of resolutions recognizing only heterosexual marriage and by extension condemning same-sex unions. (The U.S. Supreme Court was about to rule on this, and did legalize same-sex marriage in July of 2015.) The leaders set up the "Marriage Task Force" that went on to draw up four crucial documents: 1-Statement of Faith, condemning homosexuality, 2-parishes to adopt the Statement, 3-employment policy requiring employees to adhere to it (and giving the bishop the right to fire anyone at will), 4-facilities use policy requiring anyone using DSC property to sign an agreement to the Statement, i.e., no same-sex weddings. The 2015 Statement of Faith, that was adopted by the Standing Committee and the parishes, defined DSC as a strictly vertical, fundamentalist-leaning and overtly anti-homosexual rights institution. This was the conclusion of the schismatic process that had been going on in DSC for thirty years, ever since the 1985 diocesan convention had first condemned the ordination of homosexuals.

Short answer:

The evidence is overwhelming that the issue of homosexuality was the direct cause of the schism in South Carolina.