Second, where is the reflection on false teaching, eucharist, and authority? I find it remarkable that in a report on communion, there is insufficient attention paid to the sacrament of communion, which is central to the life of Christians.

Third, while I value the discussion of "things indifferent" (adiaphora), why was it not placed in the context of the development in this doctrine among Western Anglicans in the past 100 years? Anglicanism in its core is the form of Christianity founded on Meldenius's famous dictum: in essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity.

Over the past century in North America, there has been a steady growth in matters that are alleged to be non-essentials, and a parallel decline in matters that are deemed essential. On the blessing of non-celibate same-sex unions, these two trends have reached crisis point: it would have been helpful for the report to have placed this in the context of this historical development.

Fourth, does the report consider all the correct categories in wrestling with communion? We have much to learn from the sociologists who insist that we consider the category of power. Lambeth 1998 was really the first assertion of the growing power of the global South. It produced a counter-reaction in North America by those who felt their power threatened (one bishop said of Lambeth 1998: "The Holy Spirit was not there").

New Westminster and Minneapolis were the fruits of this counterreaction. In a meeting in 2002 in New Hampshire, an Episcopal Church leader made the statement: "In order for us to grow, some of us will need to go." To what extent is this type of power-push in play in the current crisis? How has money played a part?

Fifth, despite the report's welcome affirmation that "scripture has always been recognised as the Church's supreme authority" (paragraph 52), I have to ask: do its recommendations reflect this primacy? Has the report really applied the resources of the scriptures as they apply to this crisis? In the context of doctrinal crisis, is the New Testament's primary concern one of seeking to persuade? Is it not rather to warn, and, when necessary, to discipline? Is reconciliation possible without repentance?

WHILE we wrestle with these questions, let me conclude by suggesting that the report provides only the beginning of a path toward which we could move together. If the North American Anglican leadership will adopt the suggested moratoria on same-sex blessings and ordinations; if those who participated in the New Hampshire consecration, such as the Most Revd Frank Griswold, remove themselves from the international councils of the Communion; and if there is an expression of deep regret about what transpired in Minneapolis - these actions will represent a movement in the right direction.

The clear statements of the Presiding Bishop, the Bishop of New Westminster, and the Bishop of Vermont in response to the Windsor report, however, reveal a deep desire for continued defiance. The Anglican Church worldwide is running out of room and time, but I will pray and seek a stepping-back from false teaching, so that real communion in truth among Anglicans may continue.

---The Rt Revd Robert Duncan is the Bishop of Pittsburgh and the Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network.

http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/churchtimes/website/pages.nsf/httppublicpages/D 810AE7D5133EDC580256FA20012353A