It was interesting to see how the Swedish church, after the controversial decision to bless same-sex partnerships (not formal marriages), was criticised by fellow-members of the \u201cPorvoo Agreement,\u201d\u009d namely the Church of England and the Church of Finland, for not letting them be more involved in the discussion. Bilateral critique like this follows from the premise of mutual accountability! And unless our agreements take such a shape, they run the risk of being little more than small-talk.<\/p>\n
From my point of view there is much at stake in the Anglican Communion\u2019s attempts to reshape itself, since it stands at the crossroad of many traditions. If it manages to find a new form of its own communion, it might be able to act as mediator between different strands in the Church; if not, it will still bear consequences for the whole Church, albeit negative ones. The question, as I understand it, pertains not only to the decisions that will be made but also to how seriously the different churches will take the debate\u201d\u201dand each other\u201d\u201dthroughout this time of decision-making; or, to return to my initial reflection: it is a question not only of articulating an appropriate compromise but of the readiness to find oneself\u201d\u201dand Christ\u201d\u201dthrough the encounter with the other.<\/p>\n