THE TWO DIOCESES AND THE CULTURE WAR

The 2012 schism in the Episcopal diocese of South Carolina was a local manifestation of the overall culture war in contemporary America. To recap, the culture war is the clash between two great historical forces, revolution and counter-revolution. The revolution developed in post-Second World War America. It brought democratic reforms of equality and inclusion for many social elements that had been marginalized or powerless, most importantly blacks,  women, and homosexuals. The social and cultural elements that felt most threatened by this, mostly white men who had virtually monopolized power in American history, created a counter-revolution aimed at preserving as much as possible of the pre-revolution white patriarchy. To simplify, the revolution promoted democratic reforms while the counter-revolution resisted democratic reforms. Adding to the white patriarchy's urgency in opposing democracy was the looming reality that American was becoming a multi-cultural society, that is, one in which white people would be another minority.

The schism in South Carolina was sparked by local resistance to the democratic reforms favoring homosexuals, and to some degree women, that had been championed by the national Episcopal Church. By 2012, TEC had affirmed an open and partnered gay man as a bishop, had elected a woman as the presiding bishop, and had adopted church blessings for same-sex couples. This was more than the leadership of the diocese would tolerate. They planned and carried out a schism and brought along the majority of the laity of the diocese. They established a new diocese that went on to institutionalize the counter-revolutionary agenda. In 2015 they adopted a Statement of Faith that condemned homosexuality. Then they joined a denomination devoted to opposing equality for women as well as gays. It forbade women from being bishops, that is, in having authority over men. The new diocese sealed its place in the counter-revolution of the culture war.

The victory of the white patriarchy in the new diocese can be seen clearly in the clerical make up of the Anglican diocese today. According to the ADSC website, by my count, there are 92 priests attending the 53 or so parishes and missions. Looking at the active clergy in the local churches: 

white male priests - 82 (89%)

black male priests -  4 (4%)

white female priests - 5 (5%)

black female priests - 1 (1%)

Thus, nearly nine out of ten priests in the ADSC are white men. 

What about deacons? 

white male deacons - 18 (67%)

black male deacons - 0

white female deacons - 10 (33%)

black female deacons - 0

Once again, white men dominate. They account for two-thirds of diocesan deacons. There are no black deacons at all in the ADSC.

Women have never been allowed to chair a major committee (as the Standing Committee) of the ADSC, nor have they ever had a majority of the seats of a major committee. Moreover, no woman and no African-American has ever been head of a large or medium parish. As of now, the only black woman priest is a chaplain at Porter-Gaud. Among the white female priests, one is associate at Holy Cross, two are heads of small parishes, and one is vicar of a mission.

Of the 4 African-American male priests of ADSC, three serve small, dependent, missions. One, the Rev. Fred Onyanyo, a native Kenyan, is listed as a priest at St. Paul's, of Summerville. His work is described as a liaison of local parishes in ADSC with the Global South.

In short, the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina is a bastion of the old white patriarchy. This is a not so insignificant victory for the counter-revolution in the culture war.

As one would expect, the picture is quite different in the continuing Episcopal diocese of South Carolina. There, blacks, women, and gays have found a far greater degree of equality and inclusion. This is to be expected in a denomination that long ago embraced the great democratic revolution of post-WWII America. Unfortunately, the EDSC lists only names of CLERGY of the diocese on its website. Anyway, from this, it appears that there are 68 priests of the diocese. Of these, 11 (16%) are women. Among the vocational deacons, 7 (50%) of the 14 are women.

At the time of the schism, most of the women clergy and most of the African-American clergy remained with the Episcopal diocese. They knew discrimination when they saw it. In fact, the only two historically black parishes stayed with the diocese as did numerous historically black missions. 

Women have excelled in the leadership of the ongoing diocese. Of course, everyone knows the diocese elected a woman as the new bishop. This was after the diocese had appointed a woman as archdeacon. Today, one of the large parishes, ALL SAINTS, of Hilton Head, lists an all female priestly staff, the rector and two associates. This is a first for South Carolina. There is another sizeable parish, ST. JOHN'S, of Johns Island, led by a woman. 

Thus, the Episcopal diocese has a far larger percentage of women priests and deacons than does the Anglican side. (Nevertheless, EDSC has a long way to go considering that 40% of the clergy in the national TEC is female. 16% is not even half-way there.)

As the Anglican diocese has secured its place in the counter-revolution, the Episcopal diocese has gone a long way in embodying the democratic reforms of the revolution. 

There are still some people who want to insist that the schism was about theology and not culture. Nonsense. The historical record is very clear. If one still needs convincing, I direct you to my 500 page history of the schism. (This is not to say there are no theological differences between the two dioceses. There certainly are. The new diocese has veered into a highly vertical quasi-fundamentalism removed from the mainstream of classical Anglicanism.)

Given the overall conservatism of South Carolina, I find it somewhat surprising that the counter-revolutionary diocese has declined so rapidly since the schism. It has seen a steady decline in membership, a third of active members since the break. Obviously the public is not racing to join this new church.

Where the culture war goes from here God only knows. The center of gravity has turned to politics. What is going on in Washington today and what will happen over the next year and a half will tell us where the culture war is going. The clash between the revolution and the counter-revolution is about to get a lot more serious. It may be all but over in the old diocese of South Carolina, but it is far from over in the rest of the country.

Diversity in the Episcopal Church. Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, the first African-American PB of TEC. Bishop Ruth Woodliff-Stanley, the first female bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina. Of the 280 active and retired BISHOPS in TEC, 46 are women and 53 are people of color or open homosexuals.

Diversity in the Anglican Church in North America. How many women bishops? None. How many bishops of color? I count 3 of the 41 in the picture. How many white males? 38. 

 

CHANGES AT ST. JAMES'S ANGLICAN

The previous rector of St. James's Anglican Church, on James Island, Charleston, has apparently been removed from the parish. Last month, the vestry of St. James's asked the Rev. Toby Larson to resign as rector. On today, the parish WEBSITE  , deleted references to the Rev. Larson, and to the temporary priest-in-charge, the Rev. Timothy Surratt, of St. Michael's, Charleston. The only clergyman now listed for St. James's is the Rev. Richard Grimball, the associate rector. 

On last Sunday, Bishop Edgar visited St. James's to preside over the 10 a.m. Eucharist. The only priest attending him was the Rev. Grimball. Edgar told the congregation there would be more information about the parish situation "later." He refrained from saying anything more on camera. There was to be a parish luncheon after church, so perhaps Edgar talked with the crowd then about the changes in the clergy of the parish. It is hard to imagine what other purpose would explain his visit. A video of the church service is available on St. James's Facebook page.

Grimball is still listed as "Associate Rector" on the church website. Who has become, or will become rector, has not been publicly revealed.

So, from this bit of circumstantial evidence it appears that the vestry won its tug-of-war with the former rector. The issues and the handling of the matter have been equally covered in secrecy. I doubt that either of these will ever be publicly revealed. 

MEMBERSHIP TRENDS IN THE TWO DIOCESES

The Episcopal Church recently released its membership statistics for the year 2022. In the last decade, the baptized membership of the national church declined from 2,009,081 in 2013 to 1,584,785 in 2022. This is a fall of 424,279, or 21%. Find TEC's latest statistics HERE .

What about South Carolina? Let us look at membership in the two dioceses that emerged from the schism of 2012 as related in the official parochial reports.

THE EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

Baptized membership in the churches of the Episcopal diocese:

2013 - 5,781

2014 - 6,387

2015 - 6,706

2016 - 7,053

2017 - 7,309

2018 - 7,587

2019 - 7,763

2020 - 7,467

2021 - 7,254

2022 - 7,476

The figures show that in the decade after the schism, the Episcopal diocese gained membership of 1,695, or +29%. Unfortunately, the figures do not tell us how many of these people were new arrivals from off, refugees from schismatic parishes, or new local people.

To be sure, the South Carolina low country has boomed in population growth, particularly the Charleston, Myrtle Beach, and Hilton Head areas. The population of Charleston County grew from 361,815 in 2013 to 425,644 in 2023, a rise of 63,829, or +17%.

Thus, the growth of the Episcopal diocese is favorable to the overall population growth of lower SC.

THE ANGLICAN DIOCESE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

Baptized Membership.

2013 - 23,181

2022 - 18,130

A decline of 5,051, or -22% in the decade after the schism.

Communicants.

2013 - 17,798

2022 - 11,673

A decline of 6,125, or -34%.

Average Sunday Attendance.

2013 - 9,292

2022 - 8,353

A decline of 939, or -10%.

The ADSC has seen a severe fall in "communicants," or active members, less so in overall membership and ASA. Still, the ADSC suffered relentless decline in every metric in the decade after the schism of 2012.

CONCLUSION. 

The Episcopal diocese of SC has enjoyed a 29% rise in membership since the schism of 2012. Thus bucks the trend in the Episcopal Church of the serious decline in membership nationwide. Meanwhile, the new Anglican diocese has suffered significant decline in membership, made even more problematical in view of the booming population of coastal South Carolina.

Unfortunately, the statistics do not reveal the reasons for the steady decline of the ADSC. Surely it would benefit the diocese to make a study of its membership problem which percentage-wise is actually much worse than that of the Episcopal Church. At the rate the ADSC is falling, it will soon face an existential crisis. Where that would lead, no one knows. There is always the possibility the future remnant of the ADSC could melt into ACNA's Diocese of the Carolinas, based in Mt. Pleasant, a Charleston suburb.

Finally, the relentless decline of the ADSC membership makes one wonder about the connection of the schism and God's will. The ADSC leadership has always claimed that what they were doing was favored by God. Every time the ADSC won anything in court (but, not when they lost), their spokespeople proclaimed it as God's will. If the schism and the new diocese were God's will, would not there be some positive manifestation of that by now? Would not God's favor be tangible in some way? One certainly does not see such in the empirical data of the new diocese and given the clear trends, one should not expect to see such in the future.

 

ANGLICAN DIOCESE BUYING NEW CAMP SITE

On September 15, 2023, the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina announced it had entered into a contract to buy 80 acres of land for the development of a camp. The site is on "the north end of Lady's Island, in Beaufort County," and has a mile of waterfront on Broomfield Creek. Find the announcement HERE .

Lady's Island is just east of the town of Beaufort. No purchase price was given although one would imagine a multi-million dollar figure. Since the land is undeveloped, the diocese will have to raise, or borrow, a great deal of additional funds for the construction of camp buildings and infrastructure. Thus, the ADSC will have to tap its members to pay twice, for the land and for the buildings. The name ADSC has chosen is "Camp Jubilee."

Not too far away stands the Episcopal Diocese's Camp St. Christopher with its 314 acres and oceanfront expanse on Seabrook Island. The new Anglican diocese had occupied this property from the time of the schism, in 2012, until they vacated it, under court ruling, last year. Apparently, the ADSC did not pay any rent for the decade-long use of the Camp (nor for any of the other Episcopal property they occupied, as the bishop's residence). Nevertheless, they are expecting the Episcopal diocese to pay them for improvements in the properties of the seven parishes (the eighth parish was sold to the Anglican occupants) returned to the EDSC. This is the "betterments" suit in circuit court.

 

ARE BIDEN AND TRUMP TOO OLD TO BE ELECTED PRESIDENT NEXT YEAR?

The talk of the day on the national scene, at least in politics, is the issue of age, specifically whether Biden and Trump are too old for the presidency. Biden would be 82 when sworn in as president in January of 2025 and would be 86 at the end of his term. Trump would be 79 and serve until he age of 83. If age is an issue for Biden, it would have to be for Trump too since he is only three years younger than Biden. 

Only once before in American history was age a significant issue in a presidential race, that was with Reagan's election in 1980, at age 69. He easily beat Jimmy Carter. When Reagan ran for reelection, in 1984, at age 73, age was rarely mentioned and he went on to one of the greatest landslide victories in American history. Obviously no one thought age mattered then. He was the oldest president in office up to that time. Ever since Reagan, conservatives have promoted him to iconic stature. Interestingly enough, many of the people who worship Reagan are now loudly protesting that Biden is too old to be elected.

In retrospect, whether Reagan was too old to be reelected is a matter of debate but he did the job until the end although there were rumors of mental decline. In fact, he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's a few years after he left office and died of complications of the disease.

Then, of course, South Carolinians would be well aware of Strom Thurmond who served as senator until his late 90's and died at age 100. Age was often mentioned but obviously was never a serious issue in his repeated landslide reelections.

This is not to say that age should never be a factor in politics. Senators Mitch McConnell (age 81) and Diane Feinstein (age 90) are painful to watch on the news. McConnell has blanked out twice on camera and Feinstein sometimes has to be told what is going on. These two should collect their gold watches and ride off into the sunset.

Age by itself should not be the deciding factor in any election. There are people who function quite well into their 80's and even 90's. What should be considered is the condition of the person. Do Biden and Trump have the mental and physical health and stamina necessary for the position of president? That is the question of the day, and a fair one, but unfortunately it is addressed in the context of politics. 

Time is of the essence. The first caucus is only four months away and shortly afterwards will come a torrent of primaries. So far, no one has seriously challenged Biden or Trump, and neither man has shown even a glimmer of hesitation. Unless a strong contender appears very soon, both Biden and Trump will win their nominations.

Mainly thanks to Republicans, age has been injected into the campaign. As an issue, it will not go away. If nothing else, Fox News will see to that. Many Democrats are terrified that Biden's age could become the focus of the race rather than Trump's vast record of alleged criminality. It is possible that the Republicans will succeed in making Biden's age the overriding question of the election.

To assess whether Biden is too old, one should consider his record in his present term. In fact, he led the country out of the worst pandemic in a century. His list of accomplishments is long and impressive. Age has not been a factor since his election except in the eyes of his opponents. In fact, his long history of experience has paid off in major ways. This is what people ought to consider before they vote. Consider the man before the age. 

The presidential election of 2024 is lining up to be the most important since the Civil War, more than a century and a half ago. The two candidates are very well known. With Biden we get a continuation of the evolution of the egalitarian democratic republic. With Trump we get a fascist dictatorship and the end of the Constitution and the American experiment in democracy. So, the impending election is fundamentally not about a man's age. It is about something far, far more important, the future of the country.

 

THE TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THIS BLOG

Today, September 11, 2023, marks the tenth anniversary of this blog. The first entry was on Sept. 11, 2013. My original purpose was twofold: to inform the public of interactions of the two entities post-schism, and to update the public on my progress in writing a history of the schism. I had never had a blog before, and I really had no idea of how things would unfold. Still, I felt it important enough to play it by ear and see how matters occurred after the "divorce" of 2012. Looking back, I am astonished at what happened after the schism, how it happened, and its effects.

It has been a wild roller coaster ride, and one I could never have imagined beforehand. I have always said it is best that we do not know the future. There were two big issues coming out of the schism: who owned the old diocese and who owned the local churches. On the diocese, at first the breakaways insisted they owned it. They got a ruling and injunction from the circuit court to support this. Then, six years later, the federal court said no, the old diocese was the exclusive property of the Episcopal Church. The judge even issued an injunction against the separatists and then twice found them in contempt of court over their violations. On the second issue, local churches, 36 went to court against the Episcopal Church claiming the local properties. The circuit court agreed. Then, the state supreme court said no, 29 of the 36 in question actually belonged to the Episcopal diocese. And then, the lower court said no to that, all local churches owned their own properties. A couple of years later, the state supreme court said no both to itself and the lower court and ruled that 15 of the 36 actually belonged to the Episcopal Church, and then turned around and said on third thought, only 8 of the 36 really belonged to TEC. Perhaps Mr. Toad's Wild Wide would be a good analogy. 

As we know now, the diocesan leadership planned the schism. It was not a spontaneous accident. In fact, they had been laying the groundwork within the diocese for many years. In that time, the anti-Episcopal leadership had a virtual monopoly over the public message in the diocese and it was unrelenting in its criticism of the national church. Nevertheless, the pro-Church party in the diocese, although a nearly ignored minority, did not remain silent. Two forces fought back against the increasingly obvious aims of the leadership. The Episcopal Forum tried its best to defend loyalty to the Episcopal Church. The indomitable Steve Skardon provided the only exposure of the shenanigans of the anti-Church leadership. For years, his blog was the sole source of information not controlled by the diocesan leadership. He has not received enough credit for his hard and long work for truth. The next time you see him, give him a big "Thank You."

Slow to catch on at first, my blog gradually became the second favorite read on the ongoing status of the schism, after Skardon's. In the ten years, there have been over a million hits on its one thousand posts. It proved to be in such demand that after I published my history of the schism, in 2017, I decided to continue the blog to help people stay informed of the still unfolding saga of separation. Here are then ten most popular blog posts:

1-CHRONOLOGY. 15,200 hits. A detailed listing of significant events concerning the schism in time order. 

2-CERT DENIED. 12,400 hits. June 11, 2018. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to accept the appeal of the separatists challenging the SC Supreme Court ruling of 2017.

3-THE BEGINNING OF THE END. 6,850 hits. Aug. 26, 2017. I, along with everyone else, assumed the SCSC decision of Aug. 2, 2017 was final. 

4-A REMARKABLE BISHOP, A REMARKABLE THREE AND A HALF YEARS. 5,310 hits. Sept. 1, 2016. Showing the strength of the Episcopal diocese in the first few years after the break.

5-A NEW LETTER TO THIS EDITOR. 2,710 hits. July 2, 2018. The Rev. Rob Donehue won the blue ribbon with the most popular letter to the editor.

6-BREAKING NEWS!! SC SUPREME COURT RENDERS DECISION. 5,310 hits. Aug. 2, 2017. After five years of litigation, the SCSC handed down a "decision." No one could know this was not a final decision. 

7-SEPTEMBER 10, 2018--LETTER TO THIS EDITOR. 2,240 hits. Sept. 10, 2018. Wayne Helmly's eloquent letter was the second most popular letter to the editor.

8-SOURCES. 2,240 hits. 2017+. A bibliography of the primary and secondary sources of the schism in SC.

9-SPIN CYCLE. 1,800 hits. Aug. 1, 2018. Compilation of first hand accounts of Bishop Lawrence's talk in Sumter. At the time, everyone assumed 29 of the 36 local churches would be returned to TEC.

10-GOING OUT. 1,640 hits. Mar. 14, 2018. Report on Bishop Lawrence's somber address to the diocesan convention when everyone thought 29 parishes were to be returned to TEC.

Since the SCSC decision of 2017 turned out not to be final, I thought about compiling a second volume of the history of the schism to bring the story up to date over the past six years or to revise the original history to add new material. However, I doubt seriously that I will be able to do either. Age is catching up with me and my eyesight is probably not up to the hours of pouring over small print that would be required. In a way this is a shame because I have faithfully collected all the public documents of events all these years. My house is bulging with stacks of paper. However, I am not closing the door. Perhaps the Holy Spirit has other ideas.

Meanwhile, my history of the schism is still in print and easily available on Amazon. So far, the publisher has kept the book in print, for six years, but they could take it out of print at any time. If anyone else wants a copy he or she would be wise to go ahead and get it.

Likewise, I have no control over the existence of the blog. This blog space is provided free to me by Google. They own the space, not I. I suppose at any time Google could decide to eliminate my blog. It would be their right. Therefore, people who are seriously interested in the events of the schism should print out "Chronology," at least from Aug. 2, 2017 (the end of the book) because it is a detailed listing of litigation, and other matters, up to the present day. If Google should remove my blog they would be removing Chronology too.

"Sources" is a bibliography of the source material of the schism. It needs to be edited and brought up to date since it is six years old. I will work on that the next time I go to the duPont library at Sewanee. It has been a while since I have driven the couple of hours to "the mountain."

It is interesting to note that readership of my blog has fallen off sharply in the past few months. This is understandable since the bulk of the schism has been settled. I suspect the general feeling among the public now is to accept the reality and move on. Most people passed the point of exhaustion with the schism long ago. I have considered discontinuing the blog but there are still people who want to read what I have to say and, besides, I cannot resist a "classroom." I signed my first contract to teach in college when I was 22 years old.

Too, the schism is not over. There are still loose ends to be wrapped up, and who knows when all of this will occur? There is still an active court case, the separatists suit against TEC for payments for "betterments," that is, improvements the occupants made on the properties returned to the Episcopal diocese. It is not a strong case and I expect it to be tossed out, but this has not happened yet. Moreover, the circuit court is sitting on the Remittitur from the SCSC to effectuate the SCSC ruling on the local parishes and the other decisions.

Then there is the question of what is to happen to the Church of the Good Shepherd, in West Ashley, Charleston. The separatists there appealed to the SCSC but the court rejected the appeal and ordered the property to be handed over to the Episcopal diocese. The breakaways have left the property. On yesterday they started meeting at the Northbridge Baptist Church, on Sam Rittenberg Blvd. I have not seen any announcement from the Episcopal diocese about what they plan to do with the now vacant property. I have seen nothing about an Episcopal clergyperson to develop a congregation. In fact, the original worshiping group of West Ashley, that went by the name of St. Francis, has dissolved as the members have moved into nearby Episcopal parishes. These people were mostly refugees from Old St. Andrew's. So, we are all awaiting word from the diocese about what is to happen to the Good Shepherd buildings. It is a desirable location, near the entrance to Charles Towne Landing.

In looking back over the last decade, it would be easy to despair. The ruins of a once great diocese, one of the original nine that founded the Episcopal Church in the 1780's, are still smoldering. The original goal of the anti-Episcopal movement in the 1990's was political. Deep-pocket right wing forces resolved to destroy, or at least severely wound, the Episcopal Church in order to diminish its "liberal" influence in American life. In South Carolina, they found willing allies in the diocese who were pushed by evangelicalism and its parallel socio-cultural conservatism. Spurred on by homophobia and misogyny in defiance of the general movement of the national church, the leaders of the Diocese of South Carolina resolved to remove the bulk of the diocese from the errant larger church. They told their followers they could take the diocese with them, they could keep their local properties, and they could remain in the Anglican Communion. None of this was true. But,  that did not matter to most people in the new diocese either.

Not only did the promises turn out to be false, but it quickly became evident that the schism would not be popular. Every metric of church membership in the separatist diocese has shown significant decline in the decade of the schism. Baptized membership dropped from 23,187 in 2013 to 18,130 today. Active members fell sharply from 17,798 in 2013 to 11,637 today. Average Sunday Attendance has declined from 9,292 to 8,353. All of the large parishes, except Church of the Cross in booming Bluffton, have witnessed falling numbers of active members. St. Philip's, of Charleston, went from 2,677 communicants before the schism to 1,249 today. At nearby St. Michael's, the numbers fell from 1,847 before the schism to 747 now. Budgets in the new diocese struggled to keep even, actually declining significantly accounting for inflation. The new diocese joined the Anglican Church in North America which, in spite of its name, is not in the Anglican Communion. It is a separate and independent Christian denomination, and one explicitly formed to keep women and gays from equality and inclusion.

The human and other cost of all this is something even I do not want to contemplate today. I estimate the cost of the litigation has been in the neighborhood of $10m. We will probably never know the true amount since neither side is forthcoming.

So, after all is said and done, what good came from the schism? How is anyone better off? It is imperative the we find some good or we will simply drift off into endless despair. I suppose the good we see will depend on where we stand. Just speaking for myself, I see an Episcopal diocese that is brimming with a remarkable zest for human rights. Such a thing was unthinkable in the diocese before 2012. All around I see good church people fighting for the rights all all, gays, women, blacks, the handicapped, you name it. We are called to love one another, not to stand in judgment on them. This I see in wonderful abundance in the new flowering of one of the oldest of all dioceses. This is a new day. This is a new birth. This is the good legacy I see of the schism.

Where do we go from here? We go on doing what we believe is the right thing to do. I regret deeply the choices of the majority of the clergy and laity of the diocese in 2012. They brought needless pain and disruption in the Body of Christ. However, I do not question their motives. One can never know what is in another's heart. I question their choices. We can all see the destruction they have caused.

What will happen in the next ten years? God only knows. It is best we do not. We are called to go on to the end keeping the faith and fighting the good fight. The Episcopalians of South Carolina did not ask for the schism, did not deserve it, but when the hour came, they did not shrink from doing the right thing even when it was very hard to do. They are my heroes and this blog is for them.