Monday, 15 June 2026
The Commemoration of Evelyn Underhill
To the Faithful of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina,
Grace and Peace to you from God our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Beth and I are in Tulsa as we begin meetings of the College of Bishops today and tomorrow and then Provincial Council meets Wednesday evening through Friday at noon. We have a strong delegation from the diocese—Canon Bob Lawrence, John Benson, and Justin Johnson—making the trip to Tulsa as well, and I write to ask your prayers for us as we head into these meetings. There is also an upcoming specially called Provincial Assembly which will be held as a Zoom gathering on Thursday, June 25. Again, we have a strong delegation for that meeting, including a strong Youth Delegation. The people representing our diocese at that gathering will be clergy delegates, Canon Laura Bowman, John Burwell, Claudia Carucci, Dean Shay Gaillard, Ryan Landes, Cindy Larsen, Canon Jim Lewis, Zach Miller, and Hamilton Smith; lay delegates, John Benson, Janis Breazeale, Anna Bruner, Katherine Cannon, Dr Ashley Bryant Harbin, Joy Hunter, Cathy Jacobs, Justin Johnson, Jessica Smith; and youth delegates, Elliott Arscott, Gabriel Collier, Edward Hart, Ben Shelton, Amelia Cannon, Cole O’Keefe, and Julia Dubay.
Title IV Revisions
There are three significant issues to be dealt with by the Provincial Council, which, if passed there, would go to the specially called Assembly for ratification in order to take effect. The first is the well-publicized and widely discussed Title IV revision, really a complete overhaul, of our disciplinary canons. The result of this process is a set of disciplinary canons addressing everything from making it easier to bring a charge against a bishop or a priest (the current ACNA canons make it unbearably complicated) all the way to clearly defined and canonically required procedures for how the courts must conduct their business. Such canonical requirements, absent until now, contributed to the level of distrust and frustration marking our Province today. I completely support these revisions, and have been impressed with the rigorous and transparent process undertaken by the Province to get us to this point—a year-long process with several cycles of revision and feedback that was open to the entire Province and resulted in thousands of suggestions that were considered and resulted in significant improvements from revision to revision.
Winston Churchill once said, about architecture: “First we shape our buildings. Afterwards our buildings shape us.” Similarly, I am hopeful to see how these new canons will shape us in the days to come into a stronger and more transparent Province.
Title I Changes
A second change, again necessitated by the weakness of our current canonical structure, concerns the succession of authority when an Archbishop is unable to carry out his duties for any reason, health, or, as we have been enduring, inhibition from ministry due to disciplinary proceedings. This change will clarify not only who is next in line to take on the responsibilities of that office, but who is next after that; this is precisely the situation we have recently had to deal with, and our Canons were not helpful. This change will clarify that process, as well as the scope of authority that accompanies the succession, and, again, I am fully supportive of it.
Ratification of the Provincial Constitution and Canons Committee
It’s the third proposal about which I have some concern, and I ask your prayers for God to be at work, guiding all of us who will be voting. This proposal involves changing—more precisely ratifying a first vote of a change approved by last year’s Provincial Council—to our current Governance Task Force (GTF), making it a Provincial Constitution and Canons Committee, ensconced in the Canons, and not simply a policy of the Province. My concern is that this is being done by this Provincial Council—well and good—to be ratified by the specially called Zoom Assembly (mentioned above).
When the College of Bishops voted to hold this specially called Assembly, the understanding was that the purpose of it was simply to ratify the Title IV revisions (again, see above) so they could take effect immediately and correct the many problematic aspects of the current canons. In the past few weeks, this Assembly has been laden with more than that. I worry that we, as a Province, have not had enough time to reflect on, and perhaps, offer constructive feedback, to these proposed changes. What was the great strength of the process of Title IV revision, has not been as robust for this revision.
Resolutions Proposed By the ADOSC
In addition to these Canonical changes, our diocese has proposed two resolutions for Provincial Council’s consideration and vote. One is a call to have the transcript of the court proceedings in the recent trial of Bishop Ruch released publicly (with necessary redactions to protect witnesses as needed) and the other is to have the final report of the Lathrop investigation—looking into the whole investigative process leading up to that trial—released publicly as well, when it is complete. Our goal in proposing these resolutions is simple: we hope to see trust that has been deeply eroded over the past few years restored in the Province as it continues to navigate challenging waters.
As we head into these meetings, I am aware that we, as a diocese, have not been afforded the luxury, as most other dioceses have, of thinking of these things in the abstract. People in our diocese have been directly affected by the insufficiencies in our current canons and have been negatively affected by them.
So, I’m writing to ask you to pray, to give you some important insight into what you can be praying about, and to let you know how I, as your bishop, am processing all that we are facing in these upcoming two weeks. Pray that God’s will be done, and that, however the matters are resolved, the witness of the Province to the gospel of Jesus will increase and grow, and that the Church would be strengthened.
Blessings,
(The Rt. Rev) Chip Edgar