According to Bishop Waldo, this will be an in-house dialogue with no outside theologians offering any input. Participants will strictly be all clergy who are canonically resident or currently licensed in Upper South Carolina, Certified 2011 lay delegates, Certified 2011 youth deputies, Lay members and officers of Diocesan Executive Council, Lay deputies to General Convention, Convocational lay wardens, Postulants, candidates and seminarians, and 2011 senior and junior wardens.

In preparation for this Council, the bishop will send to all attendees reference materials that will assist in the dialogue on norms and on human sexuality. These materials will include readings from scripture, the Anglican Covenant, The Rule of St. Benedict, and the fall clergy conference norms.

So the question is this, can we expect this Council to have any objectivity given the diocese's liberal history and voting record and the personal positions and attitudes of Bishop Waldo?

The Rev. W. Andrew Waldo was elected the eighth bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina (EDUSC) on December 12, 2009, on the third ballot. He was the most liberal of all the candidates and a clear favorite among the laity and most of the clergy.

Waldo is from the ultra-liberal diocese of Minnesota. At that time, he said he would withhold the blessing of same-sex relationships blessings until such time as General Convention sanctions them. He will not permit such blessings, "until the Church has come to one mind." To date, the diocese has signaled that it will not give consents to same-sex blessings.

Research, by VOL, has revealed that Waldo is a friend of New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson, whom he describes as a "mentor" and a "friend". One blogger said that Waldo appears to have successfully bamboozled moderate folks at a recent diocesan walkabout and with his "march to the middle" ideas.

A series of sermons by Waldo that VOL has obtained reveal this choice line "how we as individuals and communities define the authority of scripture affects how we believe and act on the current Social Security debate, how we respond to poverty, the war in Iraq, questions around gay marriage, and within the church, how we view the ordination of my old friend and mentor, Bishop Gene Robinson."

In this single statement, he counts Robinson as both friend and mentor, which should tell you volumes about how he will vote in the HOB on sexuality issues. He is also a supporter of "open communion" wherein unbaptized persons may partake of Holy Communion.

Waldo is also divorced and remarried. In regard to his first wife, he argues, "I was not as in control of my life as I thought."

On same gender relationships, he has articulated a stance that might indicate he expects schism to occur and, if it were to happen, that he would stand with The Episcopal Church. He said this, "I don't know how the Church will ultimately articulate-in liturgy or in canon law-the status of same-gender relationships without some division."

He is either completely disingenuous or thinks the dwindling orthodox will find it in their hearts or be coerced into changing their minds.

Furthermore, it is clear that on matters of doctrine, Waldo sees the bonds of fellowship to weigh more heavily than the boundaries of sound doctrine. He has written, "The guiding principle for such dialogue at Trinity (his present congregation) has long been that 'It is more important for us to stand or kneel together as brothers and sisters around a common table receiving the Body and Blood of Christ than it is to be 'right' on a matter of doctrine.'"

So, what can one expect from this "first council"? Not a lot. Will the diocese, under Waldo, suddenly reverse itself on General Convention resolutions C051 on the Blessings of same-sex unions or C045 giving consent to a gay bishop C045) at GC 2003 or D025, which states "God has called and may call such individuals [those in same-sex relationships] to any ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church"? Will this council overturn Resolution D039, which recognizes those in life-long committed relationships, engaging in sex outside of marriage, or fornication by any other name?

The truth is it is not going to happen. Waldo wants to play it safe by saying ideology divides in order to keep conservatives in conversation. Ultimately, that will not work. Orthodox clergy are slowly leaving or are being hounded out of the Episcopal Church across the country from Philadelphia to San Diego with no let up in sight.

Neither Waldo nor his diocese would ever follow in the footsteps of Bishop Mark Lawrence of the Diocese of South Carolina. It will not happen. Waldo would not, nor could he stomach, a visit from Bonnie Anderson, President of the House of Deputies, He will not incur her wrath by daring to ratify a thoroughly biblical worldview on human sexuality going against these GC resolutions. His ecclesiastical life would be over.

His predecessor Bishop Dorsey F. Henderson voted yes on both resolutions D025 & C056.

Waldo will lead his church down what he believes will be a centrist path, but, as we learned long ago, that pathway is strewn with IED's, also known as roadside bombs. No one will walk down them anymore as too many orthodox priests have lost their ecclesiastical lives when they have done so.

The orthodox in his diocese, whatever is left of them, will quietly, over time, leave. If they try to take the parish out of the diocese, they will incur the inevitable wrath of Waldo, Jefferts Schori and David Booth Beers. That is a path Waldo will never take.

The first council of the church held in Jerusalem decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the Mosaic law, including the rules concerning circumcision of males; however, the Council did retain the prohibitions against eating blood, or eating meat containing blood, or meat of animals not properly slain, and against fornication and idolatry.

This council will be a mockery of the first council of the church and will achieve nothing that is not a forgone conclusion, especially as it will ratify fornication (D039), which the very first council of the church in Jerusalem steadfastly stood against.

END