3 of 3

There is a real likelihood of permanent separation. It hasn't been either increased or diminished by this statement, only postponed.

What does this portend for individual parishes and individual dioceses? The statement seems to give some wiggle room for conservative parishes and dioceses.

Yes, I think it does. And this links up with what I was saying a moment ago about my expectation that in some dioceses, the kind of action that we took for conscientious reasons in the diocese of New Westminster will be matched.

And of course, at the moment in the U.S. there is a great deal of talk, you could say almost agitation, about forming a new conservative, explicitly Bible-based Anglican province of a nongeographical sort, consisting of parishes that have explicitly rejected the gay lifestyle. And such a diocese could be a North American diocese, which includes Canadian as well as American Episcopal church parishes.

I don't know; we wait to see. I don't think the document rules that out.

Is it significant that the document says that minorities within dioceses and parishes would have the right to seek alternate oversight under the guidance of the archbishop?

I hope it's significant. I hope it is seriously met. I hope the words won't be treated as a kind of dead letter in the life of real dioceses over this next 12 months.

I would hope that this is so not because if words are not to be taken seriously, it's better that they be not used at all. Smokescreen wording doesn't honor God any more than it benefits people.

Furthermore, if nothing is done to acknowledge the legitimacy of dissent, 12 months down the road, the dissenters will be more angry than ever.

And what to you is the next key meeting or event or circumstance that we should be watching for?

First, the continuing process of interchange between the dissenting parishes and dioceses—especially the situation in New Westminster—and the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Second, what is done in the way of continuing planning, organizing, talking, discussing, and exploring possibilities by those of the Episcopal Church, especially those many assembled at Plano, Texas, one week ago, who have declared themselves totally opposed to official sanctioning of the gay lifestyle.

And third, the production, the production of this report within a 12-month period, and the next meeting of primates after that.

It's a moving situation and a complex one.

Copyright © 2003 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

See also Packer's January article, "Why I Walked | Sometimes loving a denomination requires you to fight."

Christianity Today's other recent articles on the Anglican primates' meeting includes:

Dispatch: Conservatives Just Got Clobbered | Last week's American Anglican Council meeting in Texas announced victory prematurely (Oct. 17, 2003)

Anglican Leaders Criticize Episcopal Church, Canada's New Westminster Diocese on Homosexual Actions | Future of the Anglican unity "in jeopardy," they say, but don't break communion—yet (Oct. 16, 2003)

Anglicanism's Communion of Saints | Under the somber portraits of their predecessors, Anglican archbishops will discuss the fractious issues of the church and homosexuality (Oct. 15, 2003)

Weblog: Where Else to Go for News and Analysis of the Anglican Primates' Meeting | The best (and worst) articles and sites monitoring the breakup of the world's third-largest Christian body (Oct. 15, 2003)

For more on the Anglican crisis, see our Church Life area.

first page |  3 of 3

share this page

October (Web-only) 2003, Vol. 47