A Recipe for Schism

Canon Kevin Martin, of Christ Church Plano (Texas) has offered a proposal to “reduce the level of conflict” in the Episcopal Church.  In effect, his proposal would allow any parish, by vote of the vestry and 60% of its congregation, to switch dioceses. Any such parish could migrate from its existing bishop to another of more congenial views, or personality, or whatever.

Canon Martin’s proposal is well-intentioned — and a recipe for schism.  If it gets implemented, eventually ECUSA will end up like the various ethnic flavors of Orthodox churches:  one church in name only.

Self-Sorting at the Parish Level

Let’s look at some analogous history.  Remember that in the old days, many if not most parishes used to be organized along geographical lines.  If you lived within the geographical boundaries of St. Whosis, that was your parish.  Some parishes were high-, low-, or broad church, but even so, for the most part you were thrown in with everyone else who happened to live within the parish boundaries, and you were expected to live your church life with them.

It doesn’t seem to work that way any more.  Individuals and families routinely shop for parishes and even denominations.  Some dynamic parishes attract worshippers from all over the city, with parishioners driving in from miles around.  Other, less-gifted parishes lose potential worshippers to more-attractive competitors.

This self-sorting process is definitely not without its advantages.  But in these days, ideology takes the process up several notches.  Worshippers who are passionate about their church ideology can and do gravitate to parishes more to their liking.  Because of their passion and commitment, they often end up in leadership roles. As a result, the “personalities” of parishes gradually tend to become more pronounced.  Some parishioners find themselves uncomfortable, and wind up emigrating to more-congenial congregations.

My own parish may be a good example.  In the 20+ years that my wife and I have been there, the parish’s reputation as one of the most conservative in the diocese has intensified.  Our clergy and parishioners are wonderful people; many are among my closest friends.  But there’s no escaping that these days, almost all of our clergy and most of our lay leadership are outspoken champions of orthodoxy; many are also evangelicals.  Our adult-ed program has come to be completely dominated by the traditionalist / evangelical faction.  Our special-event speakers appear to be drawn exclusively from traditionalist- and evangelical ranks.  Several parishioners have recently commented, both privately and publicly, that there’s now a real reluctance to voice opinions that differ from the parish’s party line.  I personally know several modernists who
have emigrated, and others who are seriously thinking about doing so.  Conversely, I’ve also met a number of traditionalists who have immigrated from
other parishes.  Both factors are contributing to our becoming still-more orthodox.  In January of this year I completed a three-year term on the vestry; I doubt I’d even be electable today.

Parish Mobility Could Do the Same to Dioceses

It’s not hard to envision the same thing happening at the diocesan level.  Let’s play out one possible scenario:

• The intensified self-sorting pressure arising from the current controversy isn’t going to go away.  Especially on the traditionalist side, but not exclusively, the feelings are just too strong, and the ideological certainty too invincible.

• The self-sorting pressure will cause many parishes to become increasingly dominated by their partisans. 

• More and more, parishioners’ day-to-day church associations will be with like-minded people.  As a result, Episcopalians will have fewer and fewer routine, personal interactions with fellow church members who hold different views.  This
is already happening — and it’s not a good thing:  If I  disapprove
of someone else’s views, and I don’t know him (or her) personally, it’s
too easy to unconsciously slip into denigrating or even demonizing
him.  One of the reasons I haven’t moved on
from my own parish, and also one of the reasons I participate in
traditionalist forums such as TitusOneNine, is the opportunity to buck that trend in a small way.

• In some parishes, the (partisan) leadership will decide that they are unhappy with their existing bishops, and will look for a more-congenial diocese. 

• As such parishes migrate, diocesan conventions will gradually become more and more like echo chambers — dominated by delegates of like mind, and lacking anything like a true cross-section of views. 

• And as time goes on, various dioceses’ General-Convention delegations will become
increasingly homogenous in their views.  As a result, General
Conventions will become even more fractious than they are now.

• Eventually, ideologically-aligned dioceses and parishes will come to see themselves as less and less joined by "bonds of affection" with their opponents.  For example, AAC / Network dioceses and parishes will start thinking of themselves as not being part of the same church, or even the same religion, as their adversaries.  (This is already happening, it seems to me.)

Then what?

(Hat tip to TitusOneNine.)