I'm a growing more and more concerned with the intransigence of the Anglican hierarchy and their refusal to recognize full rights and privileges of the LGBT community.

I'm no schismaticist. I applaud the patient witness of the brothers and sisters advocating the continued life in communion with those who refuse to recognize the rights of LGBT community. I understand the Episcopal Church is a big tent religion but at what point do we say we cannot overlook a bifurcated church? We are either all in communion as one or we are not in communion as a single body of Christ.

Not to be dogmatic or simplistic but I have to believe that this debate must have some very strong parallels to the debate on slavery during the 19th century.

At what point can abolitionists continue in communion with slave holders?

Sorry for the warped analogy but it is a question that I continue to ask myself. I also believe that the Jesus Christ that I know would not accept or allow any of his disciples to be considered less worthy then others.

peace and prayers

jbm

SMILE! The Episcopal Church WELCOMES everyone.

When is it that +Rowan will start welcoming ALL of Gods human beings into REAL LIFE at all levels of Churchlife?

JUST SAY ¨TRUST GOD¨ and leave this tortured mess he has forced ¨to be.¨

I see little TRUST in God, or the Holy Spirit or in fellow humans as written in this latest GC09 snide ¨reaction¨ from Dr. Williams.

He´s been trying and been trying too hard!

What a shame, he could have been genuine leader.

I wonder if we have been looking at 2 tier so long that we don't hear 2 track as something entirely different to the ABC? Seems he is now suggesting that there is a track for those who buy the ABC as the center concept and and one for those who buy the autonomy concept? He seems to be saying there are 2 ways forward - one more hierarchical - one more collegial.

A couple of years ago I read a very insightful analysis (I'm sorry I can't remember who wrote it) comparing ++Rowan's handling of the conflicts in the Communion with Britain's strategies in withdrawing from parts of the Empire, particularly in the Indian subcontinent and in Palestine. In allowing the partition of India and the creation of Pakistan, the British government gave in to those constituencies in India which were motivated mainly by fear, prejudice, sectarianism and exclusionism. Mass murder and mass migration followed, with reverberations that are still being felt sixty years later. Pakistan was never a viable nation, split in two as it was with India in the middle. A united India would have been a far stronger nation with better opportunities for citizens of all faith communities.

This is what rings in my ears when I consider his latest musings about the possibility of 'two tracks'. It's better than two tiers, but it still smacks of a tragic failure of leadership that cannot have a fruitful outcome.

The archbishop is in a very difficult spot. Do we really believe that our decisions are without consequence? That's simply unrealistic. The real question is whether we believe that we are doing the right thing and everything after that is none of our business.

Good night. Turn out the lights when you leave. This is all too exhausting and so much B.S. Sorry, I can't follow the threads of this increasing rough and unappealing tapestry. I will focus on my parish and diocese. Its time for the colonies to break this thread. A church founded on a divorce, nourished by intolerance and colonization, class/caste, old school connections, etc,etc. RW's comments put me into a coma after the second paragraph.

If 'two-tier' Anglicanism is what it takes to help local Churches grow in faithfulness toward what God is calling them to, sign me up!

I would welcome being viewed as Anglican but somehow 'lower ... Read Morethan', somehow 'second class' or 'second tier'. To me, it fits well the idea that we are here to serve. Might it even, in the language of our ordinations, make us the 'deacons' of the Communion? (Without, of course, all that metaphor implies about obedience.) Here to serve- here to raise all the fuss about what the Spirit might actually be doing that's new in the world.

Because the one thing that I do agree with from +Rowans thoughts here is that the blessings we do make on same-sex couples do not carry the "authority" of the whole communion, or the church catholic. I, for one, don't want it either. It seems to me that the cost of our relatively isolated forward movement may justly be a new relationship to the global communion we are apparently grieving.

This statement is perfectly predictable, given his leadership since 2003. In Anaheim, he more or less signaled that this kind of response would be forthcoming if we didn't behave. We looked him right in the eye and said politely "Thanks but no thanks." Thanks be to God for our Deputies and Bishops.

I think Rowan has put his admirable gifts in the service of some questionable projects. He is well intentioned and is trying to do what he thinks is right, given what he takes his responsibilities to be. I have accepted that this is the best we can expect from him. May the Holy Spirit surprise us.

Mr. Williams's position, as always, is that tradition trumps equality. The church hierarchy, ecumenical partnerships, and so-called traditional readings of scripture are allergic to equality. Whether he really believes this is another question, given that there is much speculation that he is simply going through the motions to maintain the status quo in the Communion and relations with Rome.

He says it is unclear whether the church is free to bless same-sex couples and that we are outside the bounds of Christian marriage. His position is tautological because one cannot use tradition to defend tradition when the tradition itself is being scrutinized for its history of discrimination against LGBTs.

He admits the church was guilty in the past of going along with societal homophobia but that today it would be just as wrong to move along with the more liberal values of a secular society. His position strangely echoes some traditionalists in Africa who argue that they have maintained the faith brought to them by the missionaries and that they will not give in to the forces of modernity/postmodernity. He says theological work still needs to be done, whatever that is, as if one needed complicated theology in order to support equality. In any case, lots of work has been done for the past three decades but evidence doesn't impress this church bureaucrat.

Gary Paul Gilbert