The Lead

The mainstream media is South Carolina have spilled a great deal of ink on a special convention to be held today in the Diocese of South Carolina. I am not sure why. As nearly as I can tell, the five resolutions being considered will have almost no effect on the life of the diocese or the Church.

The resolutions amount to a lengthy exercise in gesture politics. But you'd never know that from the aura of manufactured drama that surrounds the convention. Note that is closed to the people of the diocese. Note that it is closed to the media. Note Bishop Mark Lawrence's call for prayer and fasting before the resolutions are considered. And note that Kendall Harmon, a member of the diocesan staff, has worked himself into a lather about the fact that Bonnie Anderson, the President of the Episcopal Church's House of Deputies has written to members of South Carolina's deputation expressing concerns about whether they will continue to participate in the life of the house. In Harmon's book this is meddling. In my book his complaint is another example of the preciousness and exceptionalism that seems to have gripped South Carolina's leadership.

The authors of these resolutions are solipsistic even when they are trying to be magnanimous. Here is the payoff of resolution 5:

Resolve that this Diocese will not condone prejudice or deny the dignity of any person, including but not limited to, those who believe themselves to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered. Nevertheless, we will speak the truth in love as Holy Scripture commends for the amendment of life required of disciples of Christ. It is love of neighbor and the abiding concern for their spiritual well being that compels such honesty and will never allow us to remain silent.

It takes a special kind of arrogance to believe that millions of gays, lesbians, bi-sexual and transgendered people misperceive their sexual orientations, whereas the Episcopalians of South Carolina, know that this condition exists entirely in their minds. This resolution denies that certain kinds of people exist because their existence would be inconvenient. Solipsism is the kindest, but not the most accurate word for this kind of thinking.

For coverage of the convention check in during the day with the Episcopal Forum of South Carolina.

Comments (9)

Their attitude does condone prejudice and does deny the dignity of LGBTs, no matter how much South Carolinians say that's not their intent.

Too bad there isn't a blood test or throat swab for bigotry, so prejudiced people could face their denial, stop arguing with their test results and take their medicine.

Posted by Josh Thomas | October 24, 2009 10:11 AM

If they truly are withdrawing from all things TEC, are they withdrawing from the pension plan? As in, are they going to maintain their integrity or try to play both sides of the ball? Their arguments are childish, and incredibly mean-spirited. I wonder, too, if they realize they are dancing dangerously close to heresy in determining that they know more than God about God's beloved children. My prayers are with them and all the people of SC today.

Posted by laurenstanley | October 24, 2009 10:19 AM

And why the Wyoming Standing Committee did not vote to confirm Lawrence- predictable behavior from someone training by John-David Schofield

Posted by Ann Fontaine | October 24, 2009 10:37 AM

Hang in there my sisters and brothers in the Diocese of SC. Your strength is that you can insure that sanity prevails.

Posted by Bruce Garner | October 24, 2009 11:05 AM

In response to laurenstanley, I'm concerned about all such positions as espoused by the Communion Partners. The convention last week in my own Diocese of Dallas has me wondering about the course of events here.

Posted by E H Culver | October 24, 2009 11:57 AM

What about alternate pastoral oversight for those who believe it is morally and ethically wrong to discriminate against LGBT people? Are conservatives in a sea of liberals the only people who need special arrangements? There's got to be Episcopalians in South Carolina who believe this to be repugnant and wish to stand with the larger church on these issues. The same goes with Dallas, Albany, etc. Is there any pastoral provisions for these good folk?

Posted by Clint Davis | October 24, 2009 2:10 PM

Just a heads up - the state of SC consists of the Diocese of SC and also the Diocese of Upper SC. Upper SC covers the area from Columbia (the state capital) up to the northern and western borders. This convention is in the lower part of the state (i.e. the Diocese of 'lower SC').

Posted by karen eshelman | October 24, 2009 4:51 PM

Thanks, Karen. I think most of us are aware of that, but it can't hurt to mention it.

Posted by Jim Naughton | October 24, 2009 4:57 PM

To echo @laurenstanley:

In Resolution #2: "Resolved that this Diocese authorize the Bishop and Standing Committee to begin withdrawing from all bodies of the Episcopal Church that have assented to actions contrary to ...."

Is the Church Pension Group not by definition a body participating is whatever it is the DofSC objects to? If not it's not obvious, it would be great if the CPG so stipulates that it is? The hypocrisy of the Diocese of South Carolina needs to be called out.

Posted by John B. Chilton | October 24, 2009 6:44 PM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

CATEGORIES

Organizations