A LETTER TO THIS EDITOR

Many of my readers send me emails, and I appreciate every one of them (the good, the bad, and the ugly). Today I received one that states very well the thoughts and feelings of a lot of people caught in the terrible schism. It is so outstanding that I wanted to share it with you which is what I am doing now with the permission of the author. I could not have stated this as well, so here it is:

__________________________________________

Dear Ron: 

I am sure you saw this letter to the editor in yesterday's Charleston paper, outlining the putatively insurmountable theological differences between Episcopalians and Lawrencian "Anglicans." Sigh. It appears that nothing coming from that quarter is genuinely thoughtful---this letter, like its predecessors, consists largely of either direct quotations or wretched paraphrase of the DSC website's FAQ's.

One of the things that is most striking, and most dismaying, is how much they continue to make of Katharine Jefferts Schori's 2006 "putting God in an awfully small box" statement. Someone really needs to call them on this, on the following grounds:

1) The Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church does not have anything even remotely akin to papal infallibility (neither does the pope, of course, except in very specifically and narrowly defined circumstances, but that's another matter). Episcopalians are not, nor have they ever been, obliged to agree with or "believe" everything that comes out of the PB's mouth. When KJS made this statement, 12 years ago, some Episcopalians enthusiastically agreed, others were appalled; others thought it was an interesting and valid perspective but not one entirely in line with their own beliefs. All three of those responses, and no doubt, many others, would still be found among Episcopalians today. So the idea that a single statement, made by a single presiding Bishop, 12 years ago, defines the Church more than what we all say and do at every celebration of the Eucharist, is simply ludicrous.

2) Katharine Jefferts Schori is no longer the Presiding Bishop. What real sense does it make to insist on defining the church by way of a single statement by someone who is no longer in office while maintaining what appears to be an absolute silence vis-à-vis any and all statements made by Michael Curry, the current Presiding Bishop? What does he have to say about Jesus? And why do they never quote any of those statements?

3) If they truly believe that Episcopalians do not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, how do they explain the fact that the Creed is recited at every Eucharist? And the Gospel read? And what about the language in the prayer of consecration? And, for that matter, the language throughout the BCP, which is after all the book that both they and we have been using all along? Perhaps they should be encouraged to attend a service at one of "our" churches, to see what the liturgical practices are and what language is being used and then decide if they honestly believe that we no longer believe in Jesus Christ. Among many others, a particularly compelling example might be Solemn High Mass at the Church of the Holy Communion, where it is vividly, abundantly and explicitly made clear that the celebration is not only only of the divinity of Jesus Christ, but in fact of his Real Presence in the sacrament. Do they actually believe that the people who show up faithfully for that celebration every Sunday morning do not fully ascribe to the divinity of Jesus Christ? If not, on what is their skepticism based---a statement by Katharine Jefferts Schori 12 years ago? Really?

I suppose it it neither healthy nor productive to engage in an ongoing tit-for-tat exchange with them in the local paper, but it does seem to me that someone needs to point out some of the above, in an attempt to set the record a bit straighter. If you know anyone who might be so inclined, please let him/her know that he/she is more than welcome to borrow any of the ideas or language above.

P.S. There is so much bad faith of course in all of this. They don't actually believe that we don't actually believe in Jesus Christ. They are using that falsehood as a smokescreen, as a means of avoiding the embarrassing admission that their primary "theological" motivation is homophobia. And misogyny as well---the treatment KJS receives at their hands is directly comparable to that endured by everyone from Marie Antoinette to Eleanor Roosevelt to Hillary Clinton.

______________________________________

I say Bravo! Bravo! to this writer. I would add only one thing---Marie Antoinette to Eleanor Roosevelt to Hillary Clinton to Kaye Hearn.

If you too would like to share your thoughts and feelings about the schism in South Carolina, please send them to me by email. I will get your permission before quoting and allow you to remain anonymous if you wish.

I continue to be amazed by the number of people who read this blog. About 1,000 people access it every day. In the month of June, this blog received 40,000 hits. I encourage everyone to add your voices in this difficult time. It will be good for all of us. Send me your thoughts and, if appropriate, I will post them, always with your agreement.

Unfortunately, I cannot allow open comments following my blog posts, as some blogs do, because I am not able to monitor the site 24/7.

Send remarks to:

ronaldcaldwell1210@gmail.com


____________________________________
Disclaimer: The views expressed in the Letters to This Editor on the blog are the letter author's and do not necessarily reflect those of the blog owner. This applies to all of the Letters to This Editor to appear on this blog.