Allan Haley—Diocese of South Carolina Fed up with General Convention

Posted by Kendall Harmon

...The bulk of the deputation to the House of Deputies from the Diocese of South Carolina has left General Convention one day early, following the actions of the Convention thus far to (a) add transsexual persons to the list of people who cannot be denied work at any level in the Episcopal Church (USA); (b) adopt a rite for the blessing of same-sex unions, in violation of both the Book of Common Prayer and the ECUSA Constitution; and (c) refuse to act at this time on the proposed Anglican Covenant....

I shall not speculate on the response(s), if any, that those in ECUSA's leadership might make to this development. (I have done that once too often, and they have always managed to equal or exceed my worst expectations.) I shall note here only that there is no Church Canon, or Constitutional provision, mandating a Diocese to participate willy-nilly in the proceedings of General Convention, or mandating a Bishop to attend sessions of the House of Bishops.

It is evident that it is far more important to the leaders of the Diocese of South Carolina to attend to their dispirited flocks than to signal that everything remains normal, after such extraordinary and illegal moves by the Church's General Convention. Many other Bishops may not be aware of it just now, but they are going to face plenty of storms in their own dioceses after they return.

Read it all.

Filed under: * Anglican - Episcopal • Episcopal Church (TEC) • General Convention • --Gen. Con. 2012 • TEC Bishops • * South Carolina • * Theology • Anthropology • Ethics / Moral Theology • Theology: Scripture

5 Comments
Posted July 11, 2012 at 7:24 pm [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. MichaelA wrote:

“Many other Bishops may not be aware of it just now, but they are going to face plenty of storms in their own dioceses after they return.”
I hope and pray that proves correct.

July 12, 2:11 am | [comment link]
2. CBH wrote:

MichaelA,  I wish there would be storms, too.  However, in many churches I fear there is pressure not to speak at all about this from the clergy themselves.  I feel so sorry for the dispirited in dioceses where free speech is no longer available above a whisper.  Yes, the clergy will speak among themselves, but what of the individual in the pew.  What are they to hold onto?  Quiet faith in our Father in Heaven, I suppose.

July 12, 8:22 am | [comment link]
3. Laura R. wrote:

It seems to me that the storms happened in 2003.  This latest travesty is only another step in the ongoing process that probably seems inevitable to many.

July 12, 2:53 pm | [comment link]
4. MichaelA wrote:

CBH, I understand. 

I hope they can at least find their way to diverting their tithes to other ministries.  Unfortunately, the orthodox in the pews are usually the largest givers in a church (by a long way).  It burns to think that these liberal revisionists who have rejected Christianity grow fat on the contributions of the faithful.

July 12, 6:59 pm | [comment link]
5. Martial Artist wrote:

It is my experience, from before I departed to Spanish-Roman (i.e., Dominican) ecclesiastical precincts, that it will be the rare Bishop who will permit redirection of the flock’s tithe away even from 815, let alone from a theologically heterodox diocese. As a consequence those who are under the care of faithful parish clergy in the diocese of a markedly heterodox Bishop will likely soon face a choice between their parish and their conscience.

Methinks the sheep are being separated from the goats, and it started some years, if not decades, ago.

Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer

July 14, 1:01 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.



Next entry (above): From the Morning Bible Readings

Previous entry (below): Resolution C029 on Communion for the Unbaptized Passes House of Deputies on a vote by orders

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)