With all due respect to Archbishop Sentamu, and for all his noteworthy desire to keep the "Communion-as-we-have-known-it" together, I fear this will fall on deaf ears. The primates of the "Global South Steering Committee" have couched their determination in just the terms Archbishop Sentamu uses. When Archbishop Akinola said some time ago, "We know the road the heaven does not lie through Canterbury," he articulated a clearer desire to be Christian by his understanding than to continue in the "Communion-as-we-have-known-it." The recent statement by the Global South Steering Committee, with its citation of concerns about Canada, and primates' recent reaffirmation of "The Road to Lambeth" echo this. Archbishop Sentamu's reiteration of the Canadian position that human sexuality is not of "core doctrine" is explicitly denied by the recent GSSC statement.

I appreciate that the Primate of England would like the conservative primates to step back from the brink. I can't see how they can, inasmuch as in word and deed they have already stepped over.

Marshall Scott

I actually find this statement troubling. Showing to Lambeth or not should not itself be communion-breaking. After all, there have been few Lambeth's where all bishops are present. Allowing space and cooling off rather than more ultimatums seems more appropriate and healthy; upping the ante only makes matters worse. Can we not see it in ourselves to let one another alone for a bit? ++York has overreached IMHO.

I agree with you here Christopher. I'm not sure that any of this saber rattling is having any good effect.

If I was trying to mediate this dispute, I'd probably call a break at this point.

Those asserting they will not attend "unless" are pressuring Rowan. Sentamu is pressuring back. In line with what Chris is saying, Rowan can instead ignore the threats not to attend. It might be healthy to take a break from each other. The stakes are high only if there is something special about a high turnout.