Here is what happened: the bishops and delegates elected the Rt. Rev. Katherine Jefferts Schori, bishop of Nevada, to be the next Presiding Bishop. She has been very clear about her theological position from the beginning of her episcopacy. She had voted to ratify the election of Gene Robinson, a partnered gay man to be the next bishop of New Hampshire, and she allows and promotes same sex unions in here diocese. She will continue the trajectory that presently exists in leadership of the Episcopal Church- meaning, as Presiding Bishop, she will continue to redefine both the core content and the behavioral implications of the Gospel Jesus gave us.

Two very recent examples will suffice: Regarding the core content of Jesus' Gospel: In a sermon she gave at a Eucharist for General Convention She declared, "Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation. And you and I are His children." Biblically this is wrong on several counts: Jesus is not a mother who gives birth: Jesus is the Word through whom creation was spoken, not birthed, into being. Jesus does not "birth" us. We are reborn by the Spirit and adopted as God's children. Jesus is not a mother who births us; Jesus is a Savior who redeems us. Her statement describes Jesus wrongly, creation's relationship to Jesus wrongly, and our relationship with Jesus wrongly.

I do not have the space to go into the theological implications of such a statement, but they are significant, not minor. While this might seem like nitpicking to some, it is not unreasonable to expect the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church to know her Bible and to teach it rightly. This is not her Gospel to change at will, nor is it our Gospel to change at will. This is the Gospel given to us by Jesus Christ, and we will all be judged by Him for whether or not we handled it rightly.

2) Regarding the behavioral implications of the Gospel, Bp. Schori is quoted in the New York Times as saying, "we're not here to argue about matters of sexuality. We are here to build a holy community;" as if sexual behavior and holiness before God and one another have nothing to do with each other! However, that sort of schizophrenia is the present position of many in the Episcopal Church.

Lastly it should be said that Bp. Schori's election is a provocative act that will further harm our already fragile relationship with the rest of Anglicanism. The note of greetings from the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, to Bp. Schori after her election reflected the concern for that harm. His public note to her after her election contained no offer of congratulations.

Instead, he offered his greetings, his prayers and stated circumspectly that her election "will undoubtedly have an impact on the collegial life of the Anglican Primates," meaning: the vast majority of Anglican archbishops cannot accept her as a legitimate Presiding Bishop both because of her heretical theology, and because most of Anglicanism does not accept the fact that a Presiding Bishop can be a woman!

While I, personally, do not oppose the consecration of women as bishops, I cannot see the wisdom of offering, presently, a woman as Presiding Bishop given the present state of Anglicanism. I could not, however, under any circumstance, and at any time, support the election of Bp. Schori as Presiding Bishop because her theology revealed thus far, bears little relationship to contents of the Scriptures. Public reactions from both Archbishop Gregory Venables of the Southern Cone of South America, and the Conference of African Archbishops raised similar concerns.

General Convention's response to the Windsor Report appeared to be an effort to appease the overseas Primates, and still do what we would like, regardless of mind of the rest of the Communion. The Windsor Report was specific in asking the Episcopal Church to "express regret" for "breaching the bonds of affection" with the rest of the Anglican Communion by consecrating a gay man to the episcopacy and approving the development of rites for same sex blessings. The Windsor report called for a moratorium on all future consecrations and all same sex blessings. The Windsor report affirmed, as the official position of Anglicanism, a resolution (1998 Lambeth 1:10) which stated that homosexual practice was incompatible with Scripture.

Convention's responses to these requests flip flopped. First, the House of Deputies defeated a resolution calling on the church to "refrain from" the consecration of bishops "whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church" and to refrain from any further authorizing of rites for same sex blessings. By defeating that resolution, Convention was expressing no interest in complying with the Windsor Report at all. Then, the very next day, and on the last day of Convention, the Presiding Bishop called for a joint session of Convention, suspended the regular rules of order, and with great coercion got the following resolution passed:

"Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, that the 75th General Convention receive and embrace The Windsor Report's invitation to engage in a process of healing and reconciliation; and be it further Resolved, that this Convention call upon Standing Committees and bishops with jurisdiction to exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion."

Such a resolution, which is nonbinding, does not express regret for our actions, it does not call for a moratorium on same sex blessings, nor does it affirm- as the teaching of the Episcopal Church- the Lambeth resolution stating that homosexual practice is incompatible with Scripture.

Reactions were swift on both sides of the theological aisle: the Anglican Communion Network, headed up by Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, called the resolution "inadequate" and promised- on behalf of the full Network- to fully abide by the content of the Windsor Report. Some liberal bishops also reacted sharply against the resolution. Bishop John Chane of the District of Columbia, supported by some 30 other bishops, read in the House of Bishops a "Statement of Conscience" declaring that they would "dissent" from this resolution.

WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN NEXT IN THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION?

1) The future structure of the Anglican Communion remains unclear, but it will undoubtedly change. There was a lot of conversation about a possible and global split between conservatives and liberals. Even the new Presiding Bishop spoke of "conjoined twins" who could not be separated "until both can survive." At this point, it is not at all clear what a split in Anglicanism would look like, but the observation of "two religions/one church" was ubiquitous in conversations at Convention from people across the theological spectrum.

2) There is presently no timetable or plan for such a global split. In the next 3 months there will be meetings of the leadership of the Anglican Communion Network, and also the Conference of African Archbishops. There will be a meeting of all of the Primates in February, 2007.

These meetings will help set the stage for who will, and will not, be invited to the global meeting of all Anglican bishops at Lambeth Palace in 2008. The invitation to Lambeth by the Archbishop of Canterbury is the most important invitation for a bishop in Anglicanism. The borders of Anglicanism are defined by who is invited to Lambeth and who is not.

If a bishop is not invited to Lambeth that Bishop cannot legitimately claim to be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury or be a part of the Anglican Communion, regardless of what that bishop might say. By the meeting at Lambeth, there should be some clarity about a new structure if it is to occur, including issues of who controls church property, under which bishop a congregation will serve, and how each jurisdiction will relate to each other and to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR US AT GOOD SAMARITAN? IT MEANS WE PRAY, PLAN AND BUILD FOR A BRIGHTER FUTURE:

1) Our own Diocese continues to be in turmoil and our local witness is important. Global Anglicanism shifts very slowly. In the mean time, we have a local responsibility to witness to the Gospel. In our diocese, there is an epidemic of denial over how desperate the diocesan financial situation is and how ill many of our congregations are. Present figures show that less than 20% of pledged income to the diocese has been received. Over 100 congregations (out of 155) are statistically in decline. The Standing Committee continues to call for the bishop's resignation.

Most of the diocesan staff has been let go for lack of funds; and yet if one goes to our diocesan council or listens to our bishop one hears the message that things are not that bad!

As our leadership fiddles while the diocese burns, it is critically important that we continue to speak the truth in love, and find congregations that serve Jesus faithfully, doing our best to lift them up. Whenever there is this sort of turmoil, who inevitably suffers first are the poorest. Our job as Good Samaritans is to mobilize our people to reach out to the lost and the least.

2) In the light of our situation both locally and nationally the call to grow, build and raise up new leaders is more important than ever. The Church of the Good Samaritan is one of the few Episcopal congregations in the northeastern United States (not just in our diocese) that is spiritually and numerically growing, expanding their facilities, and raising up young leaders for the future. People from all over our region continue to gravitate to the Biblical, historic and life giving witness God has given us. This is not a time to pull back, but to move boldly forward. It is clear that God has a future for His church and God is inviting us to be a part of it.

3) As Anglicans ourselves we are called to continue to support, serve alongside, and pray for our global partners. Quite frankly, were it not for the united witness and prayers of our overseas partners, I am not sure that the Church of the Good Samaritan could continue to grow and thrive the way it has. We humbly owe them an enormous debt of gratitude, financial support, missionary service and intercessory prayer. God has placed these partnerships in our lap and we have been given both the privilege and the responsibility to serve with them in the cause of the Gospel.

4) As parishioners who are serving in a time of stress and change, it is urgent that we continue to "walk in love as Christ loved us." Because everything is not clear, and we only have enough light for each day, the temptation to fear and the reality of battle/construction/transition fatigue could take us into dark places of selfishness. Also, among ourselves we do not always agree on some of the hot button issues that face us. We are doing our best to anticipate the future, but we do not have all of the answers.

We are taking this one step at a time! We are humbly asking, even begging, God to guide us. So we need to be generous with one another, laugh often, and celebrate. We need to stick closely to the Scriptures and stand with one another, making allowances for one another because these are fellow members of our parish family. We need each other, particularly when we are most tempted to walk away.

The international, national, and local landscape will continued to change. It could be rougher both locally and internationally before it gets easier. Much of the Christian world is watching our Communion, and many Christians locally are watching the Church of the Good Samaritan: praying for us, and waiting to see what we will do.

I am very confident that God will see us through. I have a lot of hope because I believe in a God who triumphs, and invites His people not only to crucifixion, but also to resurrection.

---The Rev. Gregory O. Brewer is rector of Church of the Good Samaritan in Paoli, Pennsylvania.He is rector of the largest parish in the Diocese of Pennsylvania