The Diocese of Central Florida has joined the list of those appealing to the Archbishop of Canterbury for "alternative primatial oversight"--which Father Jake has nicknamed "ALPO."

I am still trying to understand what is being requested. People who understand the canons and constitution of our Church better than I do inform me that the Presiding Bishop doesn't exercise "oversight." The General Convention does. So in asking for alternative oversight, is one asking to get out from under the PB, or the GC. If the first, these requests seem pointless. If the second, they seem incoherent, because it is hard to understand how an organization that didn't accept the authority of the Convention could continue to be part of the Episcopal Church, as at least one or two of these dioceses seem to want to do. (And remember, I am not necessarily opposed, as many of the folks I usually agree with are, to dioceses eventually negotiating some kind of arrangement with other provinces that allows us all to move on in mission while maintaining some level of fellowship. I just truly don't understand the nature of these requests.)

Another thing that puzzles me about the appeal from Central Florida is the explicit disassociation from the resolution that General Convention passed urging “municipal council, state legislatures and the United States Congress to approve measures giving gay and lesbian couples protection[s] such as: bereavement and family leave policies; health benefits; pension benefits; real-estate transfer tax benefits; and commitments to mutual support enjoyed by non-gay married couples” and opposing “any state or federal constitutional amendment that prohibits same-sex civil marriage or civil unions.”

The confusing thing here is that Central Florida has requested alternative oversight from the Primate of a Church of which it would seem to be in significant disagreement on the issue of civil unions. The United Kingdom permits civil unions. While the Church of England has been at pains to emphasize that its acceptance of such unions does not change its traditional teaching on the nature of marriage or sexual intimacy, it does permit its clergy to enter into such unions. And it does not oppose extending to gay and lesbian partners the types of benefits enumerated in the legislation from which Central Florida has disassociated itself. (The CofE's House of Bishops' pastoral letter on this issue is here.

One blogger worth watching as the Central Florida story unfolds is the Anglican Scotist, a member of that diocese. He has posted on this issue here and here.