SORRY POST AND COURIER, THE TIME FOR "COMPROMISE" HAS PASSED
The Charleston Post and Courier's editors have just issued an editorial calling for "compromise" in the South Carolina schism. Compromise? Really? This is a big change of tune for these editors who has consistently defended the breakaway side in the schism. Where has been the call for "compromise" for all these many years the schism brewed, occurred, and went into legal war? Strange that we have not heard anything about compromise before now. Today's editorial is entitled "No 'winners' in bitter Episcopal church dispute." Find it here .
The editors declared: "leaders of both church groups in South Carolina must work together toward a reasonable and fair execution of the state ruling." OK. No problem there. A reasonable and fair execution of the ruling is to carry out the supreme court decision as ordered. The 29 parishes and Camp St. Christopher belong under control of the Episcopal Church. That is what the ruling said. That is what should be enacted. That is reasonable and fair. To expect the Episcopal Church to give up what it has gained in court is not reasonable and fair. The editors went on, "there is still a chance for some measure of compromise." However, they give no suggestion at all of what the word compromise might mean. Then, they added, "It [the supreme court decision] must not be the final outcome of this difficult divorce." Really? Then, what should be the "final outcome"? The supreme court decision is final. It cannot be appealed, changed or ignored. It is the law of the land and the editors know that.
Compromise? There have been numerous opportunities for that. The schismatics took none of them. Perhaps the editors have forgotten about these:
---when the Episcopal Church adopted the blessing of same-sex unions it included a provision of local choice. Any bishop, priest, or layperson could opt out and plenty have.
---when Bishop Lawrence and his inner circle were preparing for schism in 2012, Lawrence refused to meet with the Presiding Bishop after Oct. 2 and refused the Church's offers of settlement by either a letter to the PB or an appearance before the House of Bishops. He quit TEC.
---at the schism there was no talk of compromise; in fact, a few weeks later, DSC went to court to sue TEC.
---in June of 2015 TEC offered a monumental compromise: to give independence and the property to the 29 parishes in return for the entity of the old diocese. DSC rudely and summarily refused. If they had accepted, there wold be no need for compromise today. St Philip's would be free of TEC control.
---from October 2017 to January 2018 the sides met in mediation ordered by the federal judge. DSC refused all offers and the mediation broke down.
Where was the Post and Courier at any of these opportunities at a compromise settlement? It is a bit disingenuous now to call for compromise after the supreme court has settled the property issue.
If anyone thinks the Episcopal Church diocese is going to give up any of these 29 parishes, they should think again. I listened in on the diocesan meeting at Grace Church Cathedral yesterday and I can tell you the diocese has every intention of returning all of these churches as Episcopal churches. On the very next Sunday after the keys are transferred, an Episcopal priest will be at the altar for prayer book services. There will not be a single Sunday break. Any local vestry person who refuses to recognize the authority of the Episcopal Church bishop will be removed from office. The diocese is well under way with plans for the transition to reconciliation of the 29 parishes. From all that I can gather, the Episcopal Church is not going to rent, lease, loan out or in any other way allow other denominations to use the 29 churches.
The 29 parishes are Episcopal churches. It is just a matter of time before the Episcopal Church bishop gets possession of them. Any clergy or layperson in the 29 parishes who has questions about what might happen should contact the Episcopal Church diocesan office at Grace Church Cathedral in Charleston. Start by reading the Frequently Asked Questions put out by the diocese. Find it here . You are also welcomed to email if you have questions or comments. My address is above.
The editors declared: "leaders of both church groups in South Carolina must work together toward a reasonable and fair execution of the state ruling." OK. No problem there. A reasonable and fair execution of the ruling is to carry out the supreme court decision as ordered. The 29 parishes and Camp St. Christopher belong under control of the Episcopal Church. That is what the ruling said. That is what should be enacted. That is reasonable and fair. To expect the Episcopal Church to give up what it has gained in court is not reasonable and fair. The editors went on, "there is still a chance for some measure of compromise." However, they give no suggestion at all of what the word compromise might mean. Then, they added, "It [the supreme court decision] must not be the final outcome of this difficult divorce." Really? Then, what should be the "final outcome"? The supreme court decision is final. It cannot be appealed, changed or ignored. It is the law of the land and the editors know that.
Compromise? There have been numerous opportunities for that. The schismatics took none of them. Perhaps the editors have forgotten about these:
---when the Episcopal Church adopted the blessing of same-sex unions it included a provision of local choice. Any bishop, priest, or layperson could opt out and plenty have.
---when Bishop Lawrence and his inner circle were preparing for schism in 2012, Lawrence refused to meet with the Presiding Bishop after Oct. 2 and refused the Church's offers of settlement by either a letter to the PB or an appearance before the House of Bishops. He quit TEC.
---at the schism there was no talk of compromise; in fact, a few weeks later, DSC went to court to sue TEC.
---in June of 2015 TEC offered a monumental compromise: to give independence and the property to the 29 parishes in return for the entity of the old diocese. DSC rudely and summarily refused. If they had accepted, there wold be no need for compromise today. St Philip's would be free of TEC control.
---from October 2017 to January 2018 the sides met in mediation ordered by the federal judge. DSC refused all offers and the mediation broke down.
Where was the Post and Courier at any of these opportunities at a compromise settlement? It is a bit disingenuous now to call for compromise after the supreme court has settled the property issue.
If anyone thinks the Episcopal Church diocese is going to give up any of these 29 parishes, they should think again. I listened in on the diocesan meeting at Grace Church Cathedral yesterday and I can tell you the diocese has every intention of returning all of these churches as Episcopal churches. On the very next Sunday after the keys are transferred, an Episcopal priest will be at the altar for prayer book services. There will not be a single Sunday break. Any local vestry person who refuses to recognize the authority of the Episcopal Church bishop will be removed from office. The diocese is well under way with plans for the transition to reconciliation of the 29 parishes. From all that I can gather, the Episcopal Church is not going to rent, lease, loan out or in any other way allow other denominations to use the 29 churches.
The 29 parishes are Episcopal churches. It is just a matter of time before the Episcopal Church bishop gets possession of them. Any clergy or layperson in the 29 parishes who has questions about what might happen should contact the Episcopal Church diocesan office at Grace Church Cathedral in Charleston. Start by reading the Frequently Asked Questions put out by the diocese. Find it here . You are also welcomed to email if you have questions or comments. My address is above.
