WHAT NOW?

Mediation started, and ended, yesterday. No deal. So, where does that leave the schism now? Where do the two sides go from here?

In the immediate picture, the matter returns to Judge Edgar Dickson, of the circuit court. He is the one who ordered the mediation in hopes the two sides would settle their differences so he would not have to do so. Dickson has two big issues before him 1) the disposition of the 29 parishes and Camp St. Christopher, and 2) the Betterments suit. The parishes and the camp are covered in the South Carolina Supreme Court decision of Aug. 2, 2017. The SCSC recognized these as property of the Episcopal Church side. The SCSC remitted its decision to the circuit court for implementation in November of 2017. Dickson has not implemented the SCSC decision on these two points. Obviously he hoped mediation would settle these. It did not. 

As for the Betterments suit on Dickson's desk, this can proceed only if the breakaways recognize that the property in question belongs to the Episcopal Church side. So far, they have adamantly refused to do so. So, it seems counter-intuitive for the ADSC to demand reimbursements on property they insist they own.

When I awoke this morning I was feeling a little disappointed at the quick and complete collapse of the possibility of a compromise settlement. Then, as I was running through my usual website check list, I burst out laughing when I reach one. I needed the levity. The headlines blared: "Mediation between the historic Anglican Diocese of South Carolina and the new TEC Diocese results in Impasse." After I stopped laughing, I turned a bit sad and wondered just how far from reality the secessionists had gone and just how uninformed they think their readers are. If I have learned anything from having a blog it is that my readers are very well informed and often know more of what is happening than I. So, memo to all bloggers:  On September 19, 2019, the United States District Court in Charleston declared the Episcopal Church diocese to be the historic diocese, founded in 1785, and the holder of all the titles and emblems of it. The breakaway side can make no claim to being the historic diocese. In fact, what is now called the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina came into being at the schism, in 2012. My advice to Internet bloggers: do not insult the intelligence of your readers. 

Speaking of the federal court decision, this should change the picture for the circuit court judge. The federal judge made it very clear that the SCSC decision was the law and must be followed. He also made it very clear that the Episcopal diocese is historic. This would negate the breakaways' outlandish claim in the Betterments suit that they deserved reimbursement for the entire value of the parishes. When the circuit court returns to work on this case, Dickson will be under the shadow of the federal court that has ruled very strongly and clearly in favor of the Episcopal Church. Maybe this will spur him on to implement the rest of the SCSC decision.

Another issue out there is the return of the properties and other assets of the old diocese. The federal court only addressed the ownership of the historic diocese, not the assets. As an aftermath of the failure of mediation, I imagine the Church side will now take action to recover the pre-schism diocesan buildings, lands, accounts, furnishings, and archives. For instance, Bishop Lawrence, now officially not the Episcopal bishop, continues to reside in the multi-million dollar Episcopal bishop's residence in downtown Charleston. I expect the Church will move to effectuate the Sept. 19 decision in regards to diocesan properties.

I imagine a lot of people join me in being disappointed at the failure of mediation. However, none of us should be surprised. The secessionists have rejected time after time offers of compromise settlement, most famously the June 2015 offer to swap the diocese for the parishes. So, the question at hand is, Why is it seemingly impossible for the two side to agree on a settlement?

Part of the answer is baked into the nature of the schism. The break of 2012 was an audacious event of huge import. The people who made the schism did not do so lightly. They were deeply committed to their perceived cause. Apparently, they remain so. Even when a cause fails, it is against human nature to admit a mistake, to assume blame, and to accept defeat (my own theory is this is particularly hard for men as society still presses on them never to show weakness). And, so it appears the breakaways may be retreating into ever more unreality as a defense against the obvious. The question I have is how much longer will the ordinary people-in-the-pews keep supporting the failing choices of their leaders? How long will they fund this floundering cause? How long will they put up with their leaders intransigence against a compromise settlement? That is up to the 12,000 communicants still in the secessionist churches. I think the leaders of ADSC would make a big mistake to underestimate the intelligence and awareness of their own people. They are also taking a big risk in continuing this war of attrition. ADCS has lost a third of its active members since the schism and continues to decline steadily. EDSC on the other hand has added members steadily.

Too, we have to understand the emotional commitment of each side to its "cause" in the schism. The breakaways are committed to Biblical truth which they understand as condemning homosexual behavior and keeping women under men's authority. The Episcopal side is committed to rights for and inclusion of open homosexuals, the transgendered, and women in the life of the church. Thus, each sides sees this as not just an institutional disagreement, but a full cultural war for fundamental truths. Deeply entrenched as this, each side is naturally averse to concessions to the other.

Another part of the answer is the nature of the religion held by the secessionist side. I grew up in a thoroughly fundamentalist church. If I know anything at all it is the mindset of fundamentalists. I would characterize the ADSC as fundamentalist-leaning, or near-fundamentalists. Fundamentalism sees the universe in Manichean terms of clashing dualities. Everything is oppositional black and white. It is God or Satan. It's the saved or the unsaved. There are no shades of grey. It is either right or wrong. So, if we are right, then everyone who disagrees with us is wrong. If we are good, our opponents must be evil. In a world of black and white, there is no room for compromise. It is better to go down fighting for good than to give in anything to evil. These were the messages I heard in the first 21 years of my life. So, I understand where the officers of ADSC are coming from. We should expect them to fight on to the bitter end, not giving in an inch. Mediation was always a non-starter.

Now, it is back to court. Judge Dickson did not get his wish, that the two sides would settle things on their own. Now it is up to him to implement the SCSC decision. As I have said, whatever he decides will probably be appealed to the SC Court of Appeals. There, we can expect the SCSC decision to be upheld without hesitation. 

Everyone is tired of this long-running schism and ensuing legal war. Nearly seven years is a long time to stay in battle. Combat fatigue is a common malady in SC. Nevertheless, the good church people of South Carolina are called to keep on going. Back in the courts, time drags. Who knows how long it will take Judge Dickson to act again? He is under no time constraint. What is more, the SCSC refused to lean on him to act.

So, we can be disappointed that the two sides did not settle their differences and bring peace and closure of this scandal. Alas, this was not to be. Both sides now move on propelled by what they think God would have them do. I still believe the end of the legal war is in sight, it is just a bit more distant on the horizon that I had hoped it would be this time yesterday.

______________________________

A NOTE TO READERS. I need your help. I cannot find a single South Carolina newspaper mention of Judge Gergel's ruling of September 19, 2019. To my knowledge, there has been nothing about it in the Post and Courier and The State. This was a landmark ruling as the first federal court decision on the relationship between the Episcopal Church and its dioceses. Moreover, it was handed down in Charleston. Yet, I cannot find one South Carolina newspaper that even mentioned this enormously important court ruling. The news blackout is both mysterious and troublesome. Why would all SC newspapers refuse even to mention one of the most important court decisions ever concerning church and state?

If anyone has seen any item in any SC newspaper about Gergel's decision, please let send link or address to me. This apparent news self-censorship should not be left unexamined.