Episcopal Church is “Ripe for schism?" No more than the Roman Church

A Roman Catholic publication called Our Sunday Visitor recently conatined an article by a Dennis O'Connor’s contending the Episcopal Church is “Ripe for schism.” It is worth a read for nothing more than a good example of the man who can't see the log in his own eye but can clearly see the twing in his brother's eye.

Mr. O'Coonr's text reflects a kind of media hysteria that is most unbecoming a publication that is supposedly Christain in nature. For the rrecord, Mr. O’Connor, Episcopal dioceses are not “dropping out like flies.” There are only eight dioceses that have raised the possibility of finding “alternative oversight,” and that is a small minority of the total number of Episcopal dioceses in America. Further, it is far from clear that the Archbishop of Canterbury will actually break with the traditional geographical basis of our denomination’s organization. Organizing the church based on geography has made sense since the earliest days of Christianity. You claim our church has, since Henry VII, “been strewn more with controversy and dissent than miracles.”

Well, as for controversy, a quick look at Roman Catholic history for this same period shows just as much controversy as in the Episcopal Church. Yes we have had our chare of conflict, that’s what happens when you let the people in the pews elect their own bishop. Democracy does lead to diversity of opinions being reflected and expressed at high places. The traditional strength of our church has always been the breath of our diversity, not the adherence to a single view.

As for dissent, we in the Episcopal Church do not ‘silence’ our dissenters. If we did Episcopal Bishop Bob Duncan of Pittsburg would be very, very quiet. Clearly, this much dissent s would never arise among Roman Catholic bishops: popes tend to remove from office those who dissent. The option of removing dissenting bishops is not available to either the Archbishop of Canterbury or the primate of the American Episcopal Church. If it were, this carefully orchestrated conservative maneuver would never have made it tot the news media.

As for miracles, well a look back at Roman Catholic history of the past 500 years shows an equally perplexing mix controversy, dissent, and miracles as one finds in the Episcopal Church. Unless, of course, you maintain that only Roman Catholics really experience miracles. That’s what is most disappointing in your article: you into hyperbole and almost appear to gloat at the problems cause by Henry VIII’s schism.

This approach works both ways. Episcopalians could claim that Roman Catholic prelates have consistently been more interested in limiting financial loss than in healing those who have been abused by priests. We could claim the papacy lost it’s moral authority by cooperating with the Nazi regime. We could point to the conflicts over church closing in urban areas, claiming the Roman Catholic leadership cares more for suburban whites than inner city people of color. There’s more than enough controversy and dissent to go around. Or perhaps we should both try not to cast the first stone unless we, and our church are blameless?