John the Baptist made the same criticism of his contemporaries, who presumed upon their "institutional" connection with Abraham rather than a heartfelt commitment to do the will of God. What today we call "religious institutionalism" or "nominalism" is as old as the Bible.

Let's substitute another term for "temple of the Lord" and see if any new instances of pernicious religious institutionalism come to mind.

"This is the Episcopal Church, the Episcopal Church, the Episcopal Church." Is it conceivable that an "institutionalism" by this name might usurp the place of God in today's covenant community?

Every one of us intimately knows the experience of Episcopal pride. If we're rich Episcopalians, we're proud of our country club connections. If we're poor Episcopalians, we're proud of the fact that we're no longer Baptists or Methodists or whatever we were before we became Episcopalians. Today as much as ever membership in the Episcopal Church means social mobility.

There are other familiar forms of Episcopal pride. We're proud of our incomparable traditions, good form and good taste. We're very proud that we have higher IQ's than the average person in the street. Our new Presiding Bishop is proud that we have fewer children than the average trailer park American.

Some of the things we're proud of are very unintelligent and we even know it. Since the 1970s, Episcopalians have been called "trendier than thou", and we all know how well deserved a title that is. We even laugh about it! We're smart enough to know that political correctness is not the same as moral superiority, but it passes for that, and we're vain enough - and insecure enough -- to go along with it.

There's nothing new about any of this. What is new is to see institutional pride -- I should say, the pretense of institutional pride -- as a hallmark of the revisionist movement within the Episcopal Church. I don't think revisionists are sincere in their commitment to the institution. If they were, they'd be willing to be honest about the consequences of 40 years of revisionism. Their commitment is to taking over the institution by whatever means necessary. Honesty, even with themselves, only gets in the way.

There is something ironic about today's revisionists posing as the Establishment. When it comes to social morality, revisionists are the campus radicals of the 60s, invoking the indignation of the antiwar movement, feminism, and whatever else they can recycle from that era. The impulse of wounded righteousness is what validated them then, and today they're very aware of the need to keep that wound open and bleeding.

Today it's more than a little ironic that they're the first to cry "my church, right or wrong." With the global primates threatening to break fellowship with the American church, we hear revisionists talking about "the Episcopal family" and how "outsiders" have no right to interfere with it. Diocesan conventions typically feature legislation to bolster commitments to the Episcopal Church over against the Anglican Communion. In describing recent events involving departing congregations, diocesan bishops refer to the remaining members as "faithful" or "loyal" Episcopalians. This is the language of circling wagons, but it is not a defensive posture. It is a covert offensive tactic.

Today I consider myself a conservative. Thirty years ago I did not. I grew up during the cultural upheaval of the 1960s. One of the lessons I vividly remember from that period is how easy it is to wrap oneself in the flag. I remember it as a blatant, morally vacuous act of self-congratulation.

But now, look who's wrapping themselves in the flag!

Yesterday I attended our diocesan convention in Central Florida. There were a number of controversial resolutions before the house. The revisionist front as the party of apple pie and motherhood was en parade and would have been comic if it weren't transparently deceitful. I know that many people are truly grieved at the demise of the Episcopal Church, among them Episcopalians on the liberal side of the aisle. Still it's very different to pose as a "loyalist", upholding democratic principles and Episcopal family values while hiding a dagger beneath one's coat. The intent is to institutionalize permanent changes in the institution without letting on.

One of the ploys of this new "loyalist" movement is to insist upon the rule of law in the Episcopal Church. The reason why they do this is that conservatives fall for it every time. Conservatives are the ones who believe in the rule of law. Revisionists are the ones who break the law calling it a movement of the Spirit, and then enforce new legislation to institutionalize their lawlessness.

What the "loyalists" never tell us is that the rule of law only goes one way. For example, when Gene Robinson was elected bishop of New Hampshire and everyone in the world pointed out the obvious -- that this would "tear the fabric of the Communion at its deepest level" -- the argument was made that New Hampshire was competent to choose its own local leadership.

When South Carolina elected Mark Lawrence as its next Bishop, Standing Committees and grass roots organizations across the Episcopal Church mobilized to block his confirmation. Apparently the people of South Carolina are not competent to choose their own leaders in the same way that the people of New Hampshire are. However, they are expected to uphold the law. They are expected to be faithful to the institution, even if it kills them.

On the floor of our convention yesterday there emerged a new concept I call "Windsor fundamentalism". Bishop Howe and others spoke of the importance of observing both points of the Windsor document: not only calling the Episcopal Church to "show regret" for its sexual innovations, but also denouncing foreign primates who cross diocesan boundaries to establish orthodox missions. The Bishop did this for all the best reasons - out of his sincere desire to be faithful to the Windsor process and to set an example of faithfulness for liberal and conservative alike.

Revisionists delegates on the floor echoed the Bishop's language, as if they were equally intent upon maintaining the full intent of the Windsor Report. Of course they're not, but saw this as an opportunity to denounce the primates and link this denunciation to the notion of "good order" in the Episcopal Church. And of course they did it to showcase their loyalty to the national church as a "family". A number of these same delegates are members of Via Media, a national group which met over a year ago to plan strategies to forcibly remove bishops like John Howe. So much for family values.

The rule of law today is weighted toward the extinction of orthodoxy in the Episcopal Church. What will happen to dioceses like Central Florida when their orthodox diocesan bishop retires? What provisions are made under the rule of law to guarantee orthodox jurisdictions the right to choose their own leaders? The rule of law in the Episcopal Church means that conservatives must consent to their own destruction, because when you come down to it, the only good orthodox cleric is a ruined one.

What is the ruse by which orthodox sheep are led to their own slaughter? "The Episcopal Church, the Episcopal Church, the Episcopal Church." This is the old religious institutionalism elevated to use as a political weapon, not only against orthodox "schismatics", but even more against those in the "murky middle", the classic nominal Episcopalians who instinctively trust their leaders and desire to keep "church politics" out of their Sunday fare. It's a ruse to bind consciences in a mistaken loyalty.

The essence of evangelical Christianity is to uphold the institutions of the covenant out of faithfulness to the Lord of the covenant. If we love the Episcopal Church more than the Lord of the church, we will lose both the Lord and the church.

If we love the church more than the Lord of the church, we will end up with the church we deserve.

-- The Rev. Canon J. Gary L'Hommedieu is Canon for Pastoral Care at the Cathedral Church of Saint Luke, Orlando, Florida. He is a regular VOL columnist.