That, of course is more easily said than done.

In a video interview Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan made it clear further meetings were redundant and that there would be no more of them. An unbridgeable "chasm" could not be closed by further talk. Clarity had been obtained once and for all.

In the interview he said the election of Bishop Jefferts Schori had confirmed ECUSA's decision to go its own way. "Our objection to the Presiding Bishop-elect is not that it is a woman in the role, but rather that this is a thorough-going revisionist, somebody who is contra-Windsor," he said.

The Network bishops said that anything that simply "took the heat off" the situation was insufficient, with Duncan saying that Resolution B033 was inadequate, that ECUSA had rejected the findings of the Windsor Report and that somehow The Episcopal Church "was in some sense absolved from the old rules, and there is a new ball-game."

He went on to say that the only way to bring about the changes was by a "divorce". "The work of every bishop is to guard the faith and guard the unity of the church. The [ECUSA] bishops tend to start from guarding the unity but not the faith while the Archbishop is trying to keep it together," he said.

When Canon Kenneth Kearon, secretary general of the Anglican Consultative Council, who facilitated the meeting said any process "should take as long as was needed", in order to find a way through their difficulties, he was greeted with a knock out punch by Ft. Worth Bishop Jack Iker who said; "I've had 20 years of process. This is the last meeting I intend to be present for to discuss anything." Kearon had offered the same line at GC2006 when he spoke to the House of Bishops saying any process could take eight years! Of course he needs the "process" because The Episcopal Church pays most of the ACC's budget, without which the ACC would probably cease to exist. Ever seeking, read "process", but never coming to a knowledge of the truth.

It must have been a defining moment also for Frank Griswold who, within a matter of weeks, steps down as Presiding Bishop to hand the leadership of the church over to a woman as liberal, or more so, than himself, and who will probably never be seated with the other 37 Primates!

All his tap dancing talk about "reconciliation," "going to a deeper place," and "the diverse center" which he has bandied about for years, suddenly went up in smoke. The word "divorce" was a mortal blow to his mitered head.

Furthermore any notion the Presiding Bishop-elect, Katharine Jefferts Schori, might have entertained about a "general commitment" to a further meeting later in the autumn to "continue to wrestle with the issues" also went up in smoke. "After 48 hours of conversation the true agreement was that there is an intractable division and no way through it or path forward within the American context," said Duncan.

There won't be any further talks, at least not with this group of orthodox bishops. They are done talking. When Griswold told the House of Bishops that Dr. Rowan Williams could not interfere in the internal workings of the ECUSA by offering APO, Duncan made it clear that's ALL they would accept. "Put someone in place of the Presiding Bishop under the ABC still honoring our constitutions and canons," intoned Duncan.

Any notion of "pastoral care" for the eight orthodox dioceses is also a non starter. They want ALTERNATIVE primatial oversight, nothing less. "Unless there is progress for APO there would be no future meetings," said Duncan.

A SECOND meeting on U.S. soil took place at Camp Allen, Texas at the invitation of Texas Bishop Don Wimberly. Some 21 Windsor bishops, that is, those bishops who accept and affirm the Windsor Report and endorse the recommendations of the Windsor Report, as supported by the Archbishop of Canterbury, for the development of an Anglican Covenant met under the watchful eye of two Church of England bishops sent by the Archbishop of Canterbury. They believe that the church should adhere to statements made at successive Lambeth Conferences, including the resolutions of Lambeth 1998 (among which is Resolution 1.10).

They issued a terse one-page statement which boiled down to this one paragraph: "It is our hope and prayer that through our fellowship we can contribute to the renewal of our Province's life within the Communion." You can read the full letter to the HOB here: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=4745

Now this writer has learned over the years that whenever you see a sentence that begins: "It is our hope and prayer....", "The common hope of those gathered here..."; "We believe that this process will lead too..."; "The Church needs to go to a deeper place...." that what you have is nothing more than fudge, Episcopal fudge.

Renewal of the Province! Not a chance. The Episcopal Church is 80 per cent run by liberals and revisionists and the orthodox are fast becoming a remnant church. Furthermore the New York City gathering of bishops have also nixed future talks.

BUT, another voice from a person (not a bishop) who was at Camp Allen, offered VOL an entirely different perspective on what happened there. Asking to remain anonymous, here is what he wrote: "I was there and it was spectacular. The dove tailing between Camp Allen and Kigali (Rwanda) is the perfect set up and everyone is on board to force those who have walked apart to hit the road. The Primates were given the critical mass they needed with a broad coalition that had to expand beyond just the network that they can now work with, and it is the primates with whom Rowan himself must work to have the right authority to call it like it is. All the pieces have now been put in place for the way forward. New York failed, so the internal attempt at a solution box has been checked. Camp Allen yielded the broader group that will quickly grow. Not only did we not lose anyone like [Bishop Jack] Iker, but we added people like [Bishop Geralyn] Wolfe. Their statement said exactly what they were asked to say. Over half the primates [in Kigali] then extended their hand with a language which was within their own authority to speak--and gave us already in a sense the outcome of the February meeting. Goodbye Columbus (GC2006)." He also proffered the view that Katherine Schori will never make it to a Primates meeting. She is toast. We shall see.

Were they simply saying the same thing as the Network bishops, but in a more muted way? Time will tell. One thing is certain, these bishops do not want to be thrown out of the Anglican Communion nor do they want not be seated at Lambeth 2008, and neither do they want to leave The Episcopal Church. They want their cake and eat it too. Can they have it? They recognized that GC2006 was inadequate in its response to the demands of the Windsor Report, but they are equally reluctant to break ranks with The Episcopal Church.

One could proffer the view that the Windsor bishops struck a more conciliar and catholic note while the Network bishops struck a more schismatic note. The Network bishops demanded action, albeit unilateral but not so the Windsor bishops. But all this begs the question, how does one handle orthodox parishes stuck in revisionist dioceses like Pennsylvania, Central New York, Florida and Connecticut, to name just a few. The revisionist sledge hammer has been unrelenting on these poor priests and their parishes, many of whom have been driven to leave.

The third meeting took place in Kigali, Rwanda where some 20 African primates took a major leap saying that it was now time to take initial steps towards the formation of what will be recognized as a separate ecclesiastical structure of the Anglican Communion in the USA. "We have asked the Global South Steering Committee to develop such a proposal in consultation with the appropriate instruments of unity of the Communion," they said.

What they actually said was that THEY the (Global South Primates) were going to set up a new structure and not leave it to the Episcopal Church to make up its mind. They are going to try to collaborate with Lambeth, but they may well move beyond Lambeth Palace and forge their own more perfect union. There is a lot of quiet diplomacy going on as well, said an American Anglican leader who was there.

Then they gobsmacked The Episcopal Church. "At the next meeting of the Primates in February 2007 some of us will not be able to recognize Katharine Jefferts Schori as a Primate at the table with us." Others will be in impaired communion with her as a representative of The Episcopal Church. Since she cannot represent those dioceses and congregations who are abiding by the teaching of the Communion we propose that another bishop, chosen by these dioceses, be present at the meeting so that we might listen to their voices during our deliberations."

They said that Primatial oversight should be provided for those American dioceses who want it. "We have asked the Global South Steering Committee to meet with the leadership of the dioceses requesting Alternative Primatial Oversight, in consultation with the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Network and the 'Windsor Dioceses', to investigate their appeal in greater detail and to develop a proposal identifying the ways by which the requested Primatial oversight can be adequately provided."

Said the African leaders: "We understand the serious implications of this determination. We believe that we would be failing in our apostolic witness if we do not make this provision for those who hold firmly to a commitment to historic Anglican faith."

An American Anglican observer who was present at the Kigali meeting with the Primates said it was really good. "There was a sweet spirit; great cooperation. Though people may think the language is a bit muted, it is in "English understatement" style. The whole thing boils down to two main things. First the Global South coming into its own with the theological work better than anything coming out of the West, and the practical stuff is Gospel centered. Secondly; trying to help Rowan succeed in handling the crisis while making sure that the faith goes on in North America."

"The ECUSA has colored outside the lines for too long and totally blew it at General Convention. I think 815 will try to spin that this meeting has "No Authority" to act in another province, but..."

Reaction to the Primates communique was swift. The Anglican Communion Network welcomed the statement by the leaders of more than 70 percent of the Anglican Communion, confirming their support for orthodox Anglicans in North America.

"We are deeply humbled by the care shown for us by our Fathers in God in the Global South, said Bishop Robert Duncan, moderator of the Anglican Communion Network. In many places they and the Anglicans they pastor face poverty, disease and persecution for their faith on a scale that goes far beyond anything that threatens us here in North America. In fact, just this week, Anglicans in Nigeria saw their cathedral in Dutse burnt down by rioting Muslims. Yet, in the midst of dealing with these massive issues, they continue to offer us their support and guidance."

The American Anglican Council called the Kigali Communique "bold" and noted that the Global South Primates pledged intervention at a time the Panel of Reference had done nothing. "The Kigali Communiqué is an action plan attesting to the Global South's visionary leadership in a time of chaos and crisis in our beloved Communion," said the Rev. Canon David C. Anderson, American Anglican Council (AAC) President and CEO. "It is sure to inspire and encourage biblically faithful Anglicans in North America-this is what we have hoped and prayed for since 2003."

Church Society General Secretary David Phillips (UK) also welcomed the Primates' proposals saying: "We welcome their clear signal that the Episcopal Church of the United States and the Anglican Church of Canada have effectively put themselves out of the Anglican Communion and that steps should now be taken to encourage and formally recognise those groups and Dioceses which have taken their stand against the errors which ECUSA and ACC have espoused."

NEGATIVE reaction was just as swift. Integrity, the gay and lesbian Episcopal organization blasted the Kigali Communique with president Susan Russell saying that the most troubling part of the communique for her was that some archbishops will not recognize the TEC's new Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, at the February 2007. "This unprecedented declaration by members of our wider Anglican family is a blow to those working for reconciliation within the Communion. How are we going to discuss and resolve our disagreements if there are those who are not willing to come to the table," she cried? She further ripped the communique adding, "that the represented provinces are determined to pursue a .separate ecclesiastical structure for conservative Episcopal dioceses and parishes in the United States. This can only drive us further apart rather than bring us closer together."

She then pled for the Archbishop of Canterbury to hold it together, "to preserve both the unity and the integrity of the Communion."

But it wasn't just Russell who saw the Episcopal Church coming unglued, Southern African Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane of Cape Town distanced himself from the communique saying he was not consulted on the document, with parts of it "not consonant with the position of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa". In particular, Ndungane dissociated the Southern African Province -- one of 12 Anglican Provinces in Africa -- from proposals to develop alternative church structures in America, and to sideline Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who will become Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in November.

But the editor of The Christian Challenge magazine, Auburn Traycik spoke with Southern Cone Archbishop Gregory Venables, who told her that he found it hard to believe that Archbishop Ndungane would not have known about plans to issue the communique because it was noted on the agenda and in early sessions at which the Southern African primate was present (he left early, Venables said). Moreover, he said the communique was the "completely consensual" result of a "very united meeting." It was plainly evident that the participants "were happy and in agreement with what was written."

Venables also questioned the consensus calling for a "two-church solution." Taking up Ruth Gledhill's story, which may have left the impression that the plan was for two parallel, Canterbury-recognized Anglican jurisdictions in the U.S., one liberal and one conservative, Archbishop Venables agreed that the exact status of TEC remains to be determined by the Primates' Meeting. However, he said the consensus among the primates at Kigali was that General Convention actions and inactions demonstrate that TEC "has decided to walk apart," and that a separate structure must therefore be provided for those in the U.S. who do not wish to walk apart. "We're going to work in collaboration with the Archbishop of Canterbury and the primates, but we're clear that [TEC] is going to walk apart," he said. This does not suggest to me continued inclusion of TEC as a full member of the Communion, said Traycik.

AT the end Williams punted. He announced the appointment of the Archbishop of the West Indies, the Most Revd Drexel Gomez, to chair a group that will design a covenant statement between Churches of the Anglican Communion: a Windsor-report recommendation elaborated upon by Dr Williams in a reflection after the General Convention meeting.

Dr. Williams warned against any tendency to think that the matter was straightforward: "I continue to hope that colleagues will not take it for granted that there is a rapid short-term solution that will remove our problems or simplify our relationship for good, and all without the essential element of personal, probing conversation."

END