THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE DIOCESE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
THE DIOCESE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
AND THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
What's the difference between the Diocese of South Carolina and the Episcopal Church? That is the question at hand, and it is the one the 13,000 communicants in the 29 parishes must ponder as they face the choice of staying in the buildings and returning to TEC or leaving the buildings and staying with DSC. It is important to ask now, just what is it that separates the two dioceses?
Ever since the South Carolina Supreme Court denied a rehearing of the case, in November of 2017, DSC leaders have been working to prepare the 13,000 to vacate the buildings and meet elsewhere to continue as DSC churches. They know it will be very difficult for some people to leave behind their cherished old church homes. In order to facilitate the exodus, DSC began a robust public relations campaign to differentiate itself from TEC. DSC leaders conducted two lengthy "teaching" series, one on "theology" and one called "Different God, Different Gospel?" The point of both was to convince people that the difference with TEC is over religion, that TEC no longer believed in the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the Savior of the world and in the authority of the Bible. They labored to frame the difference as a vast and unbridgeable theological chasm. In simplistic fashion, they claimed to be right religion and TEC to be wrong. No one could miss the message. It's about God, not gays, they insisted. There can be no reconciliation.
I am not saying there was no theological element at all in the schism. After all, these are institutions that define themselves as religious entities. In fact, after the schism, DSC moved more and more in religious understanding toward fundamentalism. That being said, I go back to my point that the schism at base was not about religion. It was about social relationships in the context of religion.
I am not saying there was no theological element at all in the schism. After all, these are institutions that define themselves as religious entities. In fact, after the schism, DSC moved more and more in religious understanding toward fundamentalism. That being said, I go back to my point that the schism at base was not about religion. It was about social relationships in the context of religion.
DSC's public relations campaign this year was fallacious. In actuality, there is no basic theological divide between DSC and TEC. Both worship the same God in the same way, using the same prayer book, same creeds, same liturgies. In fact, TEC has not changed its religion. It is the same as it has been for generations on end. That would take acts of the General Convention which have not happened and certainly will not happen. In spite of what DSC asserts, TEC still believes in Jesus Christ as the Savior and in the Bible as the word of God, just as it always has. DSC's assertion that TEC has departed from the true faith is not true and its supporting arguments lack substance.
That there is no significant religious difference between the two begs the question of what caused the schism and what keeps the two sides apart. To be blunt, it is the issue of homosexuality. Let's cut to the chase and get honest. The reality is that this schism was about, and remains about, homosexuality. Everybody knows this even if he or she denies it. How is the church to interact with homosexual persons? Should the church condemn homosexual activity as sin? Should the church ordain non-celibate homosexual persons? Should non-celibate homosexuals be given equality and inclusion in the life of the church? It was the issue of homosexuality that drove the DSC to schism and it is still this issue that separates the two factions (for 300,000 more words on this subject, read my history of the schism). In short, DSC holds that homosexual activity is sinful and "practicing" gays should be excluded from equality and inclusion in the life of the church. On the other hand, TEC holds that homosexual activity is morally neutral and active gays should be given equality and inclusion in the life of the church. All this boils down to whether we accept gays as equal.
The schism occurred in October of 2012. Through the next two years, the focus of attention was not on homosexuality but on the litigation with TEC. DSC won a spectacular victory in the circuit court in February of 2015. However, by that time, the issue of homosexuality had arisen on the national stage as the issue of same-sex marriage arrived at the U.S. Supreme Court. Everyone knew there was a good possibility the court would recognize s-s marriage. The issue returned in South Carolina. In March of 2015, the diocesan convention approved the creation, under Bishop Lawrence, of a "Marriage Task Force" to formalize diocesan policy regarding marriage, i.e. to condemn s-s marriage. Lawrence appointed to the Force: Kendall Harmon, Peter Moore, Ted Duvall, Greg Snyder, Tyler Prescott, and Jim Lewis.
The Marriage Task Force quickly drew up four documents that were presented to and approved by the 2016 diocesan convention and then forced on the whole diocese. These documents collectively institutionalized the rigidly anti-homosexual-rights attitude longstanding in the diocese. The four documents can be found here , on pages 56-71.
If there was ever any doubt that the schism was about homosexuality, it was now gone. No one could serious doubt that the distance between DSC and TEC was over how to treat gays. The DSC attitude was this: it is OK to be gay, but it is not OK to act like it. Homosexuality is learned and not inborn. Homosexual acts are inherently sinful. Thus, homosexuals must live their whole lives in celibacy, that is, without physical intimacy with a person of the same gender. Only celibate gays can be allowed into Holy Orders.
The DSC position, common among many socially conservative elements, is that God assigns gender to each person and it is wrong to question that, let alone change it. It is a person's duty to God to accept and follow one's assigned gender. As the Task Force said on page 57, "God wonderfully creates each person as male or female." The first problem with this assertion is that the Bible does not say that. The supporting verse is given as Mark 10:6. In fact, Mark 10:6 does not say male OR female. It says male AND female. There is a big difference in the meaning of those terms. The Task Force misrepresented the Bible to bolster their preconceived notions.
The second obvious problem with the idea that everyone is born with an assigned gender is that it simply is not true. Not everyone is born with a certain sexual identity to be followed throughout life. There are people born without genitals. There are people born with both sets of genitals, others with opposites, internally and externally. There are people who are born with physical characteristics so ambiguous that gender identity is difficult. There are people who are born with genitals that never mature, others whose genitals do not correspond with the make up of the rest of the person. See articles on intersex here and here . Then, how should we Christians regard people with gender identity "irregularities"? Should we say they are God's mistakes? Surely not. Surely everyone is created in the image of God regardless of one's physical and/or emotional make up. We dare not say that people different than ourselves are lesser beings. That would be putting ourselves in the place of God; and that was Adam's downfall. Thus, the neat little concept that God assigns certain gender to every person just does not hold up against empirical evidence and actually may cause us to contradict the Christian precept that all people are created in the image of God.
Now, back to the four documents from the Marriage Task Force of 2015. The whole point of these was to denounce homosexual marriage and to make sure the diocese and its churches never allowed it. The documents went to astonishing lengths to ensure this. The first was entitled, "A Statement of Faith Adopted by The Standing Committee of the Diocese of South Carolina October 6, 2015," pages 60-62. It said, "We believe all people are created in the image of God, who wonderfully and immutably creates each person as genetically male or female...Rejection of one's biological sex is in conflict with this created-ness and is inconsistent with our beliefs." Well, we have just seen the obvious problem with the claim "male or female." It is not always true. Then, the statement raises an interesting point, that marriage is a "lifelong union" of a man and a woman. Lifelong? Then why are divorced persons allowed to remarry in the church? Why are clergy allowed to divorce and remarry? Why are remarried people allowed to take the sacraments? The point is DSC was inconsistent in its view of sexuality. Quick to condemn homosexuality, it turned a blind eye to heterosexual adultery. This showed that the beef in DSC was not about sexuality. It was about homosexuality. In conclusion, the statement declared the bishop the final authority and required that all persons "employed in the Diocese in any capacity" even as unpaid leaders, submit a signed oath of loyalty to the Statement of Faith, that is, to vow publicly to reject homosexual marriage.
The second document was the same Statement of Faith to be sent out and filled in by the parish authorities. I am unaware of any parish that refused to do this.
The third document was an addition to the diocesan employee handbook. It required all employees to sign an oath of compliance with the Statement of Faith. It declared that the bishop could terminate anyone's employment at any time without explanation. In other words, every employee of the diocese had to oppose same-sex marriage publicly or be fired.
The fourth item was "A Facilities Use Policy." This required anyone using a church, as for a wedding, to sign a statement in advance recognizing the Statement of Faith, i.e. no same-sex wedding.
What all this adds up to is DSC's total opposition to equal rights for homosexual persons. This is the crux of the schism.
Now we know the DSC's position on homosexuality. What about TEC? In the 1990's, TEC adopted ordination for non-celibate homosexuals. In 2003 it approved a non-celibate gay man as a bishop. TEC adopted the blessing of same-sex unions in 2012 and same-sex marriage in 2015 with local option. No clergy person, no layperson, is required to support this.
A message to the 13,000 communicants: You will soon have to choose between DSC and TEC. The differences between the two essentially rest on their views of homosexuality. If you honestly believe that homosexual acts are sinful and that the church must denounce such and ban non-celibate gays from Holy Orders, then you should stay with DSC. DSC has made its stand against homosexuality very clear. If, on the other hand, you are willing to respect the rights of others to have different views on homosexuality, even to allow them to have same-sex marriage, then TEC should be your home. TEC has also made its interface with homosexuality very clear: all people are made in the image of God. All of God's children are due dignity, respect and equal rights.
The schism in South Carolina was at its core, and still remains, a social event, not a theological one. It is part of a great culture war going on in contemporary America, indeed in the world. Conservative church people had opposed but grudgingly accepted civil rights for African Americans and equality for women, but would not do the same when it came to gays. The question remains to this day, how should the church treat homosexual people? Should the church include them wholly, or marginalize them? That is the choice the 13,000 communicants of the 29 parishes now have to make.
All this boils down to a fundamental issue. Should we stand in judgment on others and condemn the ones we believe are wrong, or should we love our neighbors as ourselves and leave the judgments to God? This is what you in the 13,000 have to consider. If you are people of faith, and we all know you are, you will bear in mind the two great commandments, love God and love neighbor. So, in a way it is all about about religion after all. It is about how we live our lives as we understand our relationships to the divine and to the human. We all have to make choices in life and live with them. The time of choice is at hand for the 13,000.
Now, back to the four documents from the Marriage Task Force of 2015. The whole point of these was to denounce homosexual marriage and to make sure the diocese and its churches never allowed it. The documents went to astonishing lengths to ensure this. The first was entitled, "A Statement of Faith Adopted by The Standing Committee of the Diocese of South Carolina October 6, 2015," pages 60-62. It said, "We believe all people are created in the image of God, who wonderfully and immutably creates each person as genetically male or female...Rejection of one's biological sex is in conflict with this created-ness and is inconsistent with our beliefs." Well, we have just seen the obvious problem with the claim "male or female." It is not always true. Then, the statement raises an interesting point, that marriage is a "lifelong union" of a man and a woman. Lifelong? Then why are divorced persons allowed to remarry in the church? Why are clergy allowed to divorce and remarry? Why are remarried people allowed to take the sacraments? The point is DSC was inconsistent in its view of sexuality. Quick to condemn homosexuality, it turned a blind eye to heterosexual adultery. This showed that the beef in DSC was not about sexuality. It was about homosexuality. In conclusion, the statement declared the bishop the final authority and required that all persons "employed in the Diocese in any capacity" even as unpaid leaders, submit a signed oath of loyalty to the Statement of Faith, that is, to vow publicly to reject homosexual marriage.
The second document was the same Statement of Faith to be sent out and filled in by the parish authorities. I am unaware of any parish that refused to do this.
The third document was an addition to the diocesan employee handbook. It required all employees to sign an oath of compliance with the Statement of Faith. It declared that the bishop could terminate anyone's employment at any time without explanation. In other words, every employee of the diocese had to oppose same-sex marriage publicly or be fired.
The fourth item was "A Facilities Use Policy." This required anyone using a church, as for a wedding, to sign a statement in advance recognizing the Statement of Faith, i.e. no same-sex wedding.
What all this adds up to is DSC's total opposition to equal rights for homosexual persons. This is the crux of the schism.
Now we know the DSC's position on homosexuality. What about TEC? In the 1990's, TEC adopted ordination for non-celibate homosexuals. In 2003 it approved a non-celibate gay man as a bishop. TEC adopted the blessing of same-sex unions in 2012 and same-sex marriage in 2015 with local option. No clergy person, no layperson, is required to support this.
A message to the 13,000 communicants: You will soon have to choose between DSC and TEC. The differences between the two essentially rest on their views of homosexuality. If you honestly believe that homosexual acts are sinful and that the church must denounce such and ban non-celibate gays from Holy Orders, then you should stay with DSC. DSC has made its stand against homosexuality very clear. If, on the other hand, you are willing to respect the rights of others to have different views on homosexuality, even to allow them to have same-sex marriage, then TEC should be your home. TEC has also made its interface with homosexuality very clear: all people are made in the image of God. All of God's children are due dignity, respect and equal rights.
The schism in South Carolina was at its core, and still remains, a social event, not a theological one. It is part of a great culture war going on in contemporary America, indeed in the world. Conservative church people had opposed but grudgingly accepted civil rights for African Americans and equality for women, but would not do the same when it came to gays. The question remains to this day, how should the church treat homosexual people? Should the church include them wholly, or marginalize them? That is the choice the 13,000 communicants of the 29 parishes now have to make.
All this boils down to a fundamental issue. Should we stand in judgment on others and condemn the ones we believe are wrong, or should we love our neighbors as ourselves and leave the judgments to God? This is what you in the 13,000 have to consider. If you are people of faith, and we all know you are, you will bear in mind the two great commandments, love God and love neighbor. So, in a way it is all about about religion after all. It is about how we live our lives as we understand our relationships to the divine and to the human. We all have to make choices in life and live with them. The time of choice is at hand for the 13,000.
