A member of the Windsor Continuation Group (WCG) has stated that the body’s proposal for a “retrospective” moratorium on same-sex blessings means that dioceses such as Vancouver-based New Westminster “will be asked to reconsider and withdraw that right.”

The words “retrospective moratorium”, which has the potential to affect a number of Canadian dioceses, has caused confusion among Canadian bishops attending the decennial Lambeth Conference here. Archbishop Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, said this, along with other proposals put forward by the WCG, was a matter that the house of bishops and the Council of General Synod ”“ the church’s governing body between General Synods ”“ would have to discuss.

Bishop Victoria Matthews, a member of the WCG and bishop of the diocese of Christchurch, New Zealand, said with the retrospective moratorium, “it isn’t just from here on there will be no new ones”¦”

Read it all.

As the Lambeth Conference tackles the controversial issue of gay bishops, two Anglican leaders give their views.

The Rt Rev Stacey Sauls, Bishop of Lexington has been attending the conference; the Most Rev Benjamin Nzimbi, Archbishop of Kenya, has not.

Watch it all.

Many Third World bishops wanted the same sort of space and freedom that some of us in the West want. As one bishop stated it, due to his cultural context we Westerners simply cannot send in teams to video the witness of gay and lesbian African Anglicans and share that video with the Western world; it is an arrogance similar to us Westerners trying to mold every nation in the form of our own elected democracies. But this same bishop said that he had been to America and had requested to go to the house of partnered gay people, where he said his eyes had been opened to the cultural and missiological context of the West.

Another bishop said that he wanted to go home with the trust of his fellow bishops, the trust that he could make the appropriate decisions in his own setting. I was a bit more specific. I asked to be able to go home with the Communion’s understanding that the Episcopal Church and I as one of its bishops can make pastoral and leadership decisions in our own church on a case by base basis as we try to see the risen Christ reflected in the individual faces and circumstances of the people in our pews and members of the clergy. The shaking of heads around the room indicated that some concurred and some did not.

It may be that one old assumption that turned out to be wrong is that in some sense the Church of England was and would continue to be the hub for the Communion. That model may be breaking down, and a wheel with some new set of spokes and connectors might emerge. Or perhaps a totally new image will find its place as a way to describe how we are connected. The archbishop’s attempt to strengthen the hub may turn out to be an old solution to a new problem that requires a different architecture.

Read it all.

One American traditionalist, Bp. Peter Beckwith of Springfield, IL, has recently characterized his dealings with The Episcopal Church (TEC) as “inter-faith relations”. This sound-byte conveys the deep sense among American traditionalists that, in the American Church at least, the notion that the innovators share with them the common ground of standing under Scripture is illusory.

While innovators may speak of broad themes which are indeed Scriptural, such as “justice”, for instance, they do not seem to traditionalists to take such words to mean what they mean in Scripture and the Tradition. And indeed TEC innovators are actively involved in initiatives which in traditionalists’ eyes seem to amount to reducing “religion” to what all religions hold in common. In consequence, that which is specifically Christian appears to be treated as simply part of the way in which “religion” has worked itself out in our particular culture; and it likewise seems that anything contrary to “religion”, anything, for instance, which might seem to divide or engender conflict, must be dropped.

Traditionalists in North America, too, seem to have gone farther than the Archbishop seems to recognize. Over the years they have perceived the innovators as saying one thing, but either not acting on it or going back on it. As the innovators’ perceived control of church structures and attacks upon their number have increased, traditionalists have developed alternative structures in conjunction with traditionalist leaders and provinces in the wider Communion. Not only individuals, but congregations and dioceses have decamped, or seem poised to do so. Their alienation, not only from TEC, but from a Communion which has proved unable to protect them and its historic faith, is profound.

Traditionalists feel that they have been betrayed. And this is not true only in North America. At the beginning of July, the Church of England’s General Synod voted to proceed with the consecration of women as bishops in a way which not only denied traditionalists of the structural protections they consider necessary to the integrity of their position, but will strip them of some of the protections they presently have, such as the ministry of the Provincial Episcopal Visitors – protections they were promised would be permanent.

Words may be spoken of the “honored place” of traditionalists in the Communion and its churches: but actions have belied those words, destroying whatever trust was left. And while, as a member of the press, one has been very much on the fringes of this Conference, one must question whether the process of encounter and listening which has been at its heart could suffice to restore that trust.

Read it all.

As he sat on the grass tucking into his burger, Bishop Bruce Caldwell, of Wyoming, told The Times that the discussion had been polite. “We passed an umbrella to the person speaking. We heard from people we hadn’t heard from before. It was more respectful than in 1998 when hard words were said that caused problems for gay and lesbian people.”

The Lambeth Conference of 1998 published a covenant taking a strong stand against homosexual practice. Since then the Episcopal Church in America has ordained the first openly gay bishop, the Right Rev Gene Robinson.

But what was decided upon on the pivotal day of the 2008 Lambeth conference yesterday?

Well, not a lot. This year is unique and there will be no resolutions, only reflections.

Bishop John Hiromichi Kato, from Japan, said: “Sexuality is too big an issue to decide at something like this.” Bishop Ismail Gibreil Abudigin from Sudan said that it had been good to talk about the “dilemma” of homosexuality. But he said that nothing had been decided as a result. “The majority think it [homosexuality] is an abnormality. I agree with that view.”

Read it all.

Read it carefully and read it all.

Is it possible that relationships among members of the Communion would actually improve if the Communion did not exist? That is what I am starting to wonder.

-Jim Naughton

In his second Presidential address this week, Archbishop Rowan Williams pleaded for Lambeth participants to

at least ask the question : ”˜Having heard the other person, the other group, as fully and fairly as I can, what generous initiative can I take to break through into a new and transformed relation of communion in Christ?’

So: which of the nonparticipant leaders has taken the most “generous initiative” to help the communion, Martyn Minns who has stayed away as requested and been very quiet and self restrained, or Gene Robinson who has come to Lambeth to be on the outskirts of the conference, and where he has received more media attention than almost all Lambeth bishops who are at the actual event itself? KSH.

I will consider posting comments on this article submitted first by email to Kendall’s E-mail: KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

IN LIEU of any other indicators, the “preliminary observations” of the Windsor Continuation Group were seized on on Monday as a sign of how the Anglican Communion might patch up its divisions.

The group, chaired by the former Primate in Jerusalem & the Middle East, the Rt Revd Clive Handford, calls for moratoriums on blessings for same-sex unions; on the consecration of anyone living in an openly gay relationship; and on any cross-border acts and interprovincial claims of jurisdiction.

It also recommends the swift formation of a “pastoral forum” at Communion level to engage “theologically and practically” with divisive situations that might arise. It would be “a body that could respond quickly to pressure points in the Communion”, Bishop Handford said.

The forum would be responsible for addressing “those anomalies of pastoral care arising in the Communion against the recommendations of the Windsor report. It could also offer guidance on what response and any diminishment of standing might be appropriate where any of the three moratoria were broken.”

Read it all.

All this has the ring of history, of the great debates of the past. Indeed, the Lambeth conferences in 1998 and 2008 are the only occasions I know of in which international Christian leaders have debated the contentious issue of homosexuality.

It seems unlikely there will be a compromise at Lambeth. Williams has proposed a “covenant” in which the provinces of the Anglican Communion agree to certain principles and a tighter discipline, but the bishops are not rushing to embrace it.

Williams sounded a hopeful note, appealing to “the heart of God out of which flows the impulse of an eternal generosity which creates and heals and promises.” It may be a hope that is only realized after Williams is entombed beside his honored predecessors.

Read it all.

Unlike many drearily pontificating prelates whom I have met over the years, Gene Robinson stands out as a charismatic figure in his own right. He is friendly, not aloof.

Small and neatly dressed, he speaks clearly and winningly in the language of every day discourse, not in heavy theological jargon. Unlike many other senior churchmen too, he does not duck hard questions which he constantly relates to his religious beliefs as a devout biblical-based Christian. If it was not for his sexual orientation, he would be regarded as a completely orthodox churchman.

When I interviewed him recently in Dublin on his way to Kent, where the conference is being held, he admitted that he was personally disappointed that he alone of the Anglican Communion’s 800 bishops had not been invited by Archbishop Williams to take part in the Lambeth talks.

However, he said that he understood that some of the more conservative national churches would have objected to his official presence. Indeed, almost a quarter of his fellow bishops have refused to attend the Lambeth proceedings and are on the brink of breaking away from mainstream Anglicanism. Bishop Robinson is no stranger to verbal abuse from his colleagues and congregation members.

Read it all.

The bishops are discussing the setting up of a Pastoral Forum to tackle disputes within the Anglican Communion; the proposals are due to be debated by the Anglican Consultative Council in Jamaica in May 2009. Cindy Kent asked the Archbishop whether people in the outside world wanted to see answers and solutions much earlier than that.

Dr Williams replied: ”˜They do, and that only works when you’ve got a highly centralised, highly organised top-down organisation where somebody like the Archbishop of Canterbury can just snap his fingers and say ”˜let it happen’

He admitted that he sometimes wished he was able to do that; but ”˜not very often.’

”˜But not a lot of the time because it’s not the church I belong to. And deeply frustrating as that is it is the price we pay for being decentralised.

”˜We’ve probably paid too heavy a price in the last few years for that and the question is can we just draw things together; can we have a more coherent way of operating can we have a bit of a better clearing house for our problems. But, as I say, we’re not the kind of organisation where a chief executive just says “do it”’.

The Archbishop admitted that this coming weekend was ”˜make or break’ for certain levels of the Communion and added: ”˜We’ve got to come out with something about our problems with some steer for the way forward; but that being said there remains the question how do the Christian relationships of understanding and co-operation that have been created here survive. And I think they will, whatever happens in the next few days. And it’s not as though I feel entirely cosy about the next few days – it’s going to be very hard work. But also I’m aware of the depth of what has already been achieved.’

Read it all.

Bishop Clive Handford, a former primate of Jerusalem and the Middle-east, struggles with describing how the working group he chairs is going to find a way to hold the Anglican Communion together.

This is hardly surprising, because there is much about the Anglican Communion that defies description. But Bishop Handford manfully struggled for suitable analogies in the sweltering briefing room at the Lambeth Conference in Canterbury.

The Windsor Continuation Group, which sounds like the team which renovated the Queen’s castle but is charged with finding a way to unite Anglicans, has produced some preliminary observations which propose a Pastoral Forum (again, perhaps a little rose garden where the Great Hall burned down) and a “safe space” where those who can’t accept openly homosexual bishops ”“ to take a completely hypothetical circumstance at random ”“ can find sanctuary, while remaining inside the Communion.

Read it all.

It is both a moral and pastoral responsibility to bring closure to a disciplinary issue for the sake of the flock. The nature, intensity and duration of the disciplinary response can be mitigated by various factors, but to fail to exercise them is a failure of pastoral leadership. Vicars of parishes know this only too well. There can be a lot of listening and pastoral understanding, but the continual viability of a community is dependent on the proper exercise of this moral and pastoral responsibility.

Dar es Salaam held the most promise. It was Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates, speaking in one voice. Or at least, it appeared so initially. How has it been followed through? Kyrie Eleison, repeating the closing words of our dear Archbishop of Uganda’s latest public address. We can’t help but ask, “If that Statement did not do much, what will these WCG observations accomplish?”

We may need to retrace our steps ”“ back to Dar Es Salaam ”“ if there is any hope for healing.

Those who are quick to judge the Lambeth absentees need to know that these very same ones have worked tirelessly to heal the torn fabric these past five years. Leadership means sticking your necks out, being misunderstood and criticised, and this is the price which many of them have paid. Some have felt that they are now relegated to the category of those who ”˜are deeply exercised over matters which they have no control.’ And so, they stayed away. For the record, even the Province of Southeast Asia is not fully represented. A bishop and assistant bishop chose to absent themselves to protest that ”˜all is not well and it cannot be business as usual.’ After all, the ”˜impaired communion’ SEA Province Statement still stands.

In this context, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Second Presidential Address is deeply disappointing. Once again, the crisis is seen as a family squabble. Whatever the background whispers may be and personal insight one may have on the Archbishop of Cantebury’s real intentions (and I have deep admiration for his spiritual commitment, exemplary devotional life and theological wisdom), we can only respond to him based on his public communication and leadership actions.

Read it all.

Canon Paul: The program today is al little altered. There is another Reflection at 2:00pm and then they will go back into their indaba groups for a second session. This is not their usual pattern.

The 1:30pm conference will feature ++Drexel Gomez and ++Trevor Mwamba from Botswana to speak about the Covenant process.

As far as I know any outstanding questions have been answered. If you have more please let me know afterwards

As a guest this morning we have Gregory Cameron, the Deputy Secretary of the Anglican Communion Office

Read it all and our thanks to Matt for all his hard work in making this available.

The once-a-decade gathering of the world’s Anglican bishops in Canterbury has been described as inadequate by those attending it, who yesterday recommended that a smaller group meet every three years.

It is thought that a “mini” Lambeth would allow bishops to have more frequent contact and discussions when attempting to resolve disputes over issues such as the ordination of gay clergy.

The suggestion was one of several to come out of an ongoing process, called Reflections, designed to gain consensus from group meetings involving the 670 bishops who have been in Canterbury for more than a fortnight.

Read it all.

he global Anglican Communion got through its scheduled day of reckoning over homosexuality yesterday with Toronto Bishop Colin Johnson giving credit to the Holy Spirit for avoiding an open split between liberal and conservative bishops.

Less bullish observers of the church’s decennial Lambeth Conference in Canterbury, England – attended by more than 600 bishops – chalked up the absence of rift to a boycott by 230 prelates who say homosexuality is against God’s will, and a conference structure carefully crafted to rule out decisions being made.

Bishop Johnson, acting as spokesman for fellow liberals at the closed talks, said he couldn’t speak for any bishops having changed their minds during the one day scheduled for discussion of sexuality but “I think probably some have nuanced their positions. … The conversation continues. We are continuing to engage.

“The third party in the conversation is the Holy Spirit, and in listening to one another and the Holy Spirit we can have an encounter and be transformed.

Read it all.

On Monday afternoon I spoke during the hearing before the Windsor Continuation Group. There were 300 or more bishops in a stuffy sweltering hot room. I was one of the first at the microphone””feeling that we on the conserving end of the church were caught off guard at the first hearing. The thrust of my argument was that there was a profound amnesia among some of my fellow bishops in The Episcopal Church regarding the prior resolutions of Lambeth Conferences and I recounted some of these resolutions from 1968, ’78, ’88, and ’98. That to suggest these resolutions now were not relevant to our life in TEC was specious”” a failure to face the facts and even more sadly, an obstacle to the global mission of the Anglican Communion. A failure to face the facts because a majority of the Bishops of TEC voted for these resolutions that established the ACC and the Primates Meeting (and their enhanced role in mediating crisis), and that even a quick review of the math will show that even a majority of TEC Bishops voted for Resolution 110 itself. To suddenly now take refuge in our provincial polity and resist the Instruments of Unity as they attempt to mend the bonds of affection””strained and broken by the actions of TEC””is bad enough. But more grievous still, to resist the covenant is to thwart the Anglican Communion’s appointment with a God-given destiny. Such retreat into provincialism is the wrong response to this present crisis”¦.To embrace the covenant will not only strengthen the bonds of affection, it will further our mission in Jesus Christ””helping us to live respectfully and responsibly with one another. It brings the inspiration that comes from a godly responsibility freely embraced”¦. Well I won’t give my entire speech but you get the drift of it. What such speeches accomplish beyond getting certain thoughts registered with the Windsor Continuation Process, and getting something off one’s chest, who knows….

There are those who do not want us to make any resolutions whatsoever at this Lambeth. There are also those of us who think that to leave this Conference with no resolution on this crisis before the Anglican Communion will be worse than if we had never come. By the time you get this ENewsletter our Friday Sessions will be mostly over and we will have only Saturday to do whatever hard work we can do to bring some clarity on these matters that affect us all, causing some 250 bishops out of conscience, and representing millions of Anglicans, not even to attend.

The Archbishop has urged us all to grant one another a generous love. A noble thought that few would argue with. Please forgive me, however, if I raise the concern that we may not have left at this Lambeth 2008 such a generous amount of time to exercise such generous love as is necessary to mend the fabric that has been torn. Yet still I trust that our times, as is our love, are in His hands.

Read it all.

Wonderful stuff.

The Rev. Canon Philip Groves, the facilitator for the Anglican Communion’s Listening Process, told ENS that the goal of the day was for the bishops to have “safe space” in which “to genuinely talk and share what’s on their heart” and “genuinely sharing in one another’s dilemmas and struggles.”

At the beginning of the day’s discussions, the bishops also watched a 10-minute film of people from all over the communion answering the first question from their perspective. About a third of the film’s audio was played for reporters. In that segment, among the opinions expressed were that homosexuality is an abnormality according to the creation story in Genesis, that “these people are also human,” and that “the marginalized of the most marginalized are welcome in the kingdom of God.”

Williams encouraged the bishops to “go deep,” saying “we need to look at what we believe about human nature, human relationships and about God, God’s nature [and] God’s relationship with us.”

“And we need dispassion, not in the sense of being cold and analytical about it but actually trying to see the question whole; not letting our emotions, our prejudices immediately dictate not only a conclusion, but also an attitude towards other people,” he added.

Read it all.

Like most explosions , however, this one was unfocused and it soon spread into chastising the Episcopal Church for creating all the disagreement in the Anglican Communion and keeping it going. The Episcopal Church was repeatedly charged with not responding to the Windsor process. The actions of our General Convention 2006 in responding to Windsor are not well known and are often received as new information.

The Episcopal bishops in my Indaba received this critique in respectful silence, without defensiveness, and responses actually came from other churches. The gist of the responses was that all of us are shaped in our ministries by the people and culture of our communities. Each of us is struggling to be faithful as God has given us the light. So there were voices of support, but it was a long session.

At hearings and other meetings today, there were calls to reaffirm Lambeth 1:10 or to state that the Windsor moratoria must continue. The Archbishop of Canterbury has said that there will be no voting or legislation. Rather the work of the Indaba groups will be drawn into a final statement that will be refined by an ongoing process of review in our groups and in hearings. Other processes, such as the Windsor Continuation process and the Anglican Covenant process will continue beyond this meeting. For me, the best part of this Lambeth has been the frank, respectful, and sometimes profound conversations of the Bible Study and Indaba groups. I hope we’ll find ways to continue these conversations without forcing a decision now.

Read it all.

Check it out.

We in the Global South believed the Primates’ Meeting had this authority – the 1988 Lambeth Conference urged the Primates’ Meeting to “exercise an enhanced responsibility in offering guidance on doctrinal, moral and pastoral matters” and the 1998 Lambeth Conference reaffirmed this.

So, it was appropriate, after the American decision in 2003, that the Archbishop of Canterbury convened an emergency meeting of the primates to address the biblical and ecclesiastical crisis into which the Americans had plunged the Anglican Communion. The primates, including the American primate, unanimously advised that the consecration should not proceed. Nonetheless, two weeks later, the primate in America presided at the consecration as bishop of a man living in a same-sex relationship. This was a deep betrayal.

Since that meeting there have been numerous other “betrayals” to the extent that it is now hard to believe that the leadership in the American Church means what it says. They say that they are not authorising blessings of same-sex unions, yet we read newspaper reports of them. Two American bishops have even presided at such services of blessings. Bishops have written diocesan policies on the blessings of same-sex unions. It is simply untrue to say they have not been authorised.

That such blessings continue and seem to be increasing hardly demonstrates “regret”, let alone repentance, on the part of the American Church. So, when the Archbishop of Canterbury invited these American bishops to participate in the Lambeth Conference, against the recommendations of the Windsor Report and the Primates’ Meeting, and in the face of the unrelenting commitment of the American Church to bless sinful behaviour, we were stunned. Further betrayal.

It was clear to me and to our House of Bishops that the Instruments of Communion had utterly failed us.

Read it all.

Update: George Pitcher has comments in response here.

Anglican bishops have been discussing Bible teachings on homosexuality at the Lambeth Conference in Canterbury.

The debate took place among a group of about 40 bishops, but there was no formal resolution on an issue which has frustrated Church traditionalists.

The subject has driven the Communion to the brink of a permanent split.

Members of the Lesbian and Gay Christian movement held a protest and unfurled a banner outside a sports hall where the delegates were meeting.

Read it all.

Listen to it all.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

I have just come from a specially scheduled session billed as a time to think concretely about “moving forward.” It was clear there is absolutely no consensus as to how we are to do that – or even what it means.

HOWEVER, I think a few things can be said at this point. At least, these are my impressions.

First, positions taken ten years ago have not significantly changed. The great majority of the Bishops here would still agree with Lambeth 1:10, and indeed, the Archbishop of Canterbury was very clear in repeatedly saying, “We are not here to revisit Lambeth 1:10; it is the position of the Communion.” At the same time, there is a strong minority position, held not only in the US and Canada, but by some in nearly every part of the Communion, that believes it is a justice matter, a “gospel imperative” to work for the “full inclusion” of all people, particularly “LGBTs”.

But secondly, the atmosphere in which those differences are held is vastly different than it was a decade ago. Today, in some of the Indaba groups there was a real willingness to listen to and appreciate the convictions of those holding opposite views on issues of human sexuality. (This, I think, was true of those who worked together in the sub-section on Sexuality last time; but it certainly was anything but true of the Conference as a whole.)

Thirdly, there is no question that those who are here care deeply, even passionately, about the Anglican Communion. They want it to continue, to be healed and robust, and they want to be part of it.

Some will say, “Yes they want to be part of it so long as they can be part of it on their own terms.” And there is an element of truth in that, for “their own terms” are positions held tenaciously by all sides.

Most of the GAFCON folks have stayed away. My sense is that most of them – not all, thank God – have given up on the Communion, and they are working toward a “new ecclesial structure.” But those who are here do not see that as a Communion solution; it will be another basically protestant denomination (or denominations) with quasi-catholic ceremonial.

Those who are here are wrestling with the Archbishop’s pointed question of two nights ago: “What sacrifices are you willing to make for the good of the Communion?”

Two days to go, and then the wrap-up on Sunday. It has been a very long nearly-three weeks. Don’t stop praying.

Warmest regards in our Lord,

–(The Right Rev.) John W. Howe is Bishop of Central Florida

We believe in that sure and certain hope that God will create us anew. Newness implies change. “We shall be changed.” We have no right to ask God to reserve certain sections of our existence and keep them the way we like them. Daring to die is the greatest “risk” in living. Daring to die to our greatest and most informed beliefs and aspirations, not because they are necessarily wrong, but because they must be transformed by and in grace is that necessary action some have institutionalized into what is called “conversion.” For us it means Baptism but a baptism done once but lived into daily.

+Rowan is asking our bishops on our behalf to risk such a death. Ironically it is the province which makes the most of Baptism which seems less able to penetrate the radical nature of the sacrament. The very systems we have adopted in the church by which to make decisions imply that some will win, will hold on to what they want, and others will lose and even lose the things they most cherish. +Rowan has challenged all sides in the present war to dare surrender at the Cross as the way to renewal and revival. Perhaps he could have said more. Perhaps he said enough!

Read it all.

(ACNS) Organisers of a recent conference in Woking, Creating a Safer Church, talked to us about their work and what they hope their subsequent participation at the Lambeth Conference has achieved.

Helen Blake is a relationships counsellor and also lectures in pastoral care and counselling at St Mark’s Theological College in Canberra. Her husband Garth Blake is a senior Sydney barrister and Chair of the Professional Standards Commission of the Anglican Church of Australia. They were present at the Lambeth Conference to offer their expertise to others seeking resources on how to tackle the abuse of power in their provinces and dioceses.

They hope to establish an international network within the Anglican Communion to deal with issues around the abuse of power.

What is your role here at the Lambeth Conference?

Garth: My wife Helen and I took a seminar looking at caring marriages and preventing abuse in marriage. We were recently at international conference at Woking near London, looking at abuse issues. We had a very helpful and encouraging conference that really fed into today’s theme of the abuse of power in relationships, marriage, and within the church.

What was the driving force behind the conference at Woking?

Garth: It came from the Australian General Synod in 2004, where it was suggested an international network be developed. It’s taken a while to get here.

Read it all.

Although today is billed as global Anglicanism’s high-noon shootout over homosexuality, the issue likely will get sidestepped again, exasperating both conservative and liberal Canadians who belong to the world’s third-largest Christian church and are fed up with the dispute.

More than 600 Anglican bishops assembled for the decennial Lambeth Conference in the ancient English cathedral city of Canterbury are to meet in indabas – a Zulu word for “purposeful gatherings” – to talk all day about homosexuality, which has threatened the church with imminent schism over the past five years.

But they are to pass no resolutions, make no declarations.

Rather they are to be limited to “reflections” on a proposal from the church’s spiritual leader, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, to create a “pastoral forum” for the 77-million-member church, the mandate of which would be to keep the homosexual debate frozen in place and prohibited from going anywhere.

Read it all.

Today the Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops will discuss the contentious issue of homosexuality and the church. Almost a quarter of bishops boycotted the Conference in protest at the appointment of gay bishop Gene Robinson, who says he was not invited but has come to Britain to argue his case from the fringes.

Listen to it all.