Thou Shalt Not Make Unto Thee Any Graven Image: ECUSA Idolatry After Gene Robinson’s consecration, I solemnly took down the Episcopal shield sticker from my car window. Once a source of pride, it had become a source of embarrassment and shame. As I look back on that incident, I recall former Presiding Bishop John Allin’s words that he loved the Episcopal Church more than he loved her Lord. Alas, I must make that confession too. I had been so enthralled with the Episcopal Church, I had been willing to make all too many compromises. The Episcopal Church had become an idol to me. As I reflect on the current situation in ECUSA and the mainlines in general, idolatry is the one word that comes to mind. No, they aren’t running around with little goddess statues (ok some probably are!). Remember, anything can be an idol: money, relationships, and even those little wooden goddess statues. Even those things sanctioned and blessed by God can turn into idols if God or his grace is somehow removed from them. This is the current state of the Episcopal Church in the USA and the Anglican Church in Canada. It is also, in my view, the current state of many of the USA “mainlines.” In the Episcopal Church we have all the necessary elements of catholic faith and order: the creeds, the liturgy, the sacraments, the Scriptures, the three church orders, the historical episcopate, etc. We even have those lesser things that complement the catholic faith: vestments, ornate buildings, smells and bells, seminaries, etc. ECUSA has a valid claim to catholicity based on the externals. In other words, from a catholic perspective we look good on paper. But, what lies behind the externals? In many quarters in the Episcopal Church that right now is very little. We’ve fallen into idolatry. First, take the creeds. The creeds are summaries of the catholic faith and their belief is required for catholicity. We have clergy and bishops who openly deny tenets of the creeds and many attack the creeds themselves. Yet, these people continue to say the creed at services they lead. They say: “we believe” and “I believe” about truths they don’t really believe and even mock. Would the majority of the church, if polled, be able to honestly affirm the creed? Without crossing their fingers? Probably not. And this is also reflective of the belief of the leaders. Would a leader who doesn’t believe in the creed instill a genuine belief in it to her parishioners? Answer: she won’t. Yet, the creed is recited every week in every Episcopal Church (in theory anyway). The true intent of the creed as a statement about God, as a marker of the bounds of orthodoxy is gone; it has become an idol, a Marcus Borg like historical document. We might as well read from the Constitution of the USA on Sunday morning. In ECUSA, we have the liturgy and a beautiful one at that. I personally like the 1979 Prayer Book (although would be more than willing to relegate it to an ASB), finding it more dignified and sublime than most other denominational prayer books. Yet, the liturgy often falls victim to the same problems as the creed. Although the prayers of the 1979 BCP are generally orthodox, there are many clergy who say them and lead them while actively teaching contrary to the beliefs of the Prayer Book. The liturgy becomes not a life changing expression of praise from our hearts to the living God, but instead is simply a literary masterpiece, a collection of beautiful English, no more life changing or theologically important than watching a Shakespeare play. And many leaders no more believe in the substance of the liturgy than they do the creed. Reciting “Christ is Risen” while openly denying the resurrection in the adult forum after the service turns the liturgy into an idol. Even beautiful things can be idols; in fact, they make the most alluring idols. The Episcopal Church, in my opinion, does have validly ordained ministers and thus valid sacraments. In regards to the Eucharist, many of our churches have beautiful tabernacles holding the host of Christ. But, in many of these same churches, heretical views of Christology are taught. How can one have a tabernacle, which implicitly affirms the Real Presence of Christ, and yet deny that Christ was divine or that he was bodily resurrected? Perhaps it’s because a tabernacle looks nice; it’s pretty. We like pretty things in the Episcopal Church. We have baptism with water in the name of the Trinity, but many clergy don’t even believe in the Trinity or don’t think that there even is a need for regeneration. Also, we are fast losing the ancient connection of baptism and Eucharist since large groups of ECUSA clergy are rabidly pushing for open communion of the unbaptized. We require people get wet and confess faith in Jesus before partaking of our holiest mysteries. That is hardly oppressive, yet open communion advocates will never be placated with anything short of Unitarian Universalism. We have the Scriptures and until recently our church has been faithful in keeping those Scriptures as the foundation of our theological life. This has changed in the past 20 years. And it’s not just on the issue of homosexuality. We have priests and bishops who openly deny the bodily resurrection, the divinity of Christ, the miracles of Christ, and many other issues in the Bible that are very clearly taught. Many mock the Scriptures, especially the works of St. Paul, while downplaying or abandoning the authority of the Bible. We also have crypto-Marcionites in the church, who feel they can pick and choose as to what is the “real” word of God. The bishop of Pennsylvania even said the Church could change the canon of the Bible because it gave us the canon. Perhaps that is true in theory of the Church as a whole, but when attempted by a tiny, tiny, tiny minority of American Christians, it is nothing short of arrogance. We have the historic episcopate and apostolic succession, but it has become little more than a purple club. Bishops are supposed to be in charge of defending and guarding the catholic faith. In ECUSA, we have bishops like Spong, Bennison, and Chane who not only do not defend the Faith, they openly deride and attack it. They have never been censored by the House of Bishops or forced to conform to catholic Christianity because the chief virtue in ECUSA has become “niceness,” not upholding the Gospel. By contrast, in many dioceses, so-called successors of the apostles have pressured orthodox parishes and priests into toeing an heretical line to the extent of closing parishes and defrocking priests as punishment. In New Westminster, Michael Ingham violated the canons by doing same sex blessings, yet the bishops pursued Bishop Terry Buckle of the Yukon for violating the canons by intervening on behalf of the orthodox. The house of bishops is really “swell:” getting together, dressing up, discussing issues, drinking fine wine and eating really well. But the substance is gone; they have abandoned their duties when people like Spong and Bennison can remain bishops. It is no surprise that the canons are not enforced or selectively enforced: like defending the catholic faith, they too are optional and invoked only when harassing orthodox believers. We have some gorgeous churches, beautiful vestments, and shiny gold chalices and crosses. I’ve heard it said that the Episcopal Church has “style.” That we do! But unfortunately we lack much of the substance behind the style. Take the Washington National Cathedral for example. That church is beautiful beyond words. One of my favorite areas is the Resurrection chapel. It is ironic that the bishop of that diocese does not even believe in the orthodox understanding of the resurrection. Our stain glass windows have scenes from the life of Christ that in our reductionist thinking couldn’t have even happened and are occasionally derided as absurd. We in ECUSA do “pretty” very well, but we lack the True, the Good, and the Beautiful. I have often heard orthodox believers defend the Episcopal Church in its social justice ministries, an area, admittedly where conservatives are often weaker. There was a T-shirt available in an Episcopal Women’s publication that said (not an exact quote): “Social Justice is Orthodox.” Not entirely true. Saying “orthodox Christianity must always have a social justice component” would be more correct. Just doing “social justice” isn’t always orthodox. I want to emphasize again the importance of social justice because the early Christians always worked to literally fulfill Christ’s commandments regarding peace, the homeless, the poor, the naked, etc. But today, much social justice is done, not on the basis of one’s faith, but out of a spirit of activism. Consequently, liberal causes are assumed to be God’s causes (in fairness, many conservatives do the same thing, like thinking God wants lower taxes for Fortune 500 CEOs.). The early Church followed Christ literally because they believed he was the resurrected Son of God, whose words and deeds were vindicated by the Father. I don’t want to malign those who are doing good work in the Episcopal Church, but too often we don’t have the social Gospel, we just have social work. The Gospel is divorced from the equation and the church functions more like a government aid institution. Many Episcopal and mainline ministries do not even allow the sharing of the Gospel in their social ministries. Once again, we have something that is a good service, but the Christian substance is gone. Our greatest idol over the years in the American Anglican and Episcopal Churches has been our unity. Yes, even unity has been an idol. We have been so concerned with keeping everyone happy and everyone together, that we have abandoned biblical and catholic Christianity except on paper (and sometimes not even there). Christian unity has never been about simply staying together for the sake of peace without real substantial unity. True Christian unity is a unity of both the catholic faith and mission. At the most recent General Convention, the Episcopal Church voted on a motion to affirm some of the most basic teachings of Anglicanism (and even Christianity!). It failed 84-66. If these bishops cannot affirm the most basic elements of our faith, then we have no real unity in faith with them. Some bishops have endorsed the view that the Church should not try to evangelize people of other faiths, while others hold to beliefs that all ways lead to God. How can this be reconciled with those Episcopalians who believe in the Great Commission and seriously follow it? Thus, we have no basic unity in mission either. Some of the newest calls for unity from more liberal leaders base this unity on “diversity” and “inclusion.” This approach is not classically Anglican and certainly not catholic and it will never lead to true unity, just an empty, hollow shell that the revisionists can praise in the name of diversity. However, for catholics, evangelicals, and charismatics it can be nothing but an idol. I must confess my personal role in the current crisis. I, like many orthodox Episcopalians, have been content to sit on the sidelines, promoting “niceness” and “politeness” while our leaders have been gutting the Church of its substance. Many conservatives, myself included have been the real latitudinarians, while the liberals have been promoting their unified vision for the Church. Not wanting to make waves or rock the boat, we have stayed on the sidelines while ECUSA has been transformed in a non-catholic, barely Christian institution. Many of my friends ask (correctly): why the furor over Gene Robinson? After all, what about Spong and Bennison and Pike and other rogue bishops? Robinson, unfortunately for him, has become the symbol of all the frustration of orthodox believers over the years. His consecration is not an isolated incident that a few reactionaries are steaming over. Rather, it is the last straw for many faithful people who have stuck it out over the years in a Church where they no longer can find a home. I am one of those people. I joined the Episcopal Church in 2000 because I was attracted to the Anglican faith. I loved CS Lewis and the Church Fathers, and in my estimation, the Anglican Church was the best example of their faith in practice. But instead, in ECUSA, I got the faith of Bennison, Spong, and others, cloaked in the ceremonial. I fell in love with Episcopal Church in 2000 and it seemed like a great home. But it was not the Church I thought it was (barely even Anglican) and all my rationalizations (like there is a silent orthodox majority that will rise up) were just vain attempts to cover up the truth. I was always fond of telling my “story” of becoming an Episcopalian, but no more. Upon examination, it is with great sadness that I must confess: I was in love with an idol.