A Divorce the Church Should Smile Upon

Published: March 1, 2007

Los Angeles

THE decision of the global Anglican Communion to threaten the Episcopal Church, its American affiliate, with expulsion is about much more than the headline issue of homosexuality. Yes, the impending divorce has been precipitated by the decision of the Episcopal Church to consecrate a gay bishop and to allow individual congregations to decide whether or not to allow gay marriages. But as so often in religious history, the deeper issue is one of church governance. In effect, the Episcopalians left the Church of England more than two centuries ago.


Numerically, the 2.3 million Episcopalians [sic: this is inflated rhetoric!!!] do not loom large among 77 million Anglicans. Symbolically, however, given the global importance of the United States, the departure of the Americans will leave the archbishop exposed as a quasi-colonial, quasi-papal figurehead heading a church made up, anachronistically, of Britain and her mostly African and Asian former colonies. This will be an awkward state of affairs, and portends further fissures along the same logic that underlies the impending departure of the Americans.

There is, finally, a quintessentially 21st-century implication to this quite likely split. A solid majority of American Episcopalians [i.e., those liberals who have been elected to vote at General Convention–NOT all the members] supports their church’s stance on homosexuality and gay marriage. A minority disagrees, and some of these members have even sought to pull out their congregations from the Episcopal Church and affiliate with one of the Anglican churches in Africa that have been most vehemently opposed to the Episcopalians’ decisions on homosexuality.

The flip side of such threats is that, along the same lines, any British or Canadian or Australian congregations that wished to disaffiliate from their local forms of Anglicanism might well affiliate with the Episcopal Church. In fact, a few have already signaled their readiness, though in the hope of preserving Anglican unity the Episcopal Church has not encouraged them.

I pass over, for the moment, the many legal complications involved in such rearrangements, the surrendering of church property that is entailed and so forth. The broader point is that communications technology makes new forms of church organization possible, and geographically distant congregations can easily join together. Rather than voting with your feet, you may now vote with your mouse, perhaps the most amicable form of religious divorce.

A generation from now, when we look back on the breakup of the Anglican Communion and on the status of homosexuals within the churches of the world, what may we expect to see? An old proverb holds that “God writes straight with crooked lines,” and at this juncture, the Author of Liberty, as a venerable American hymn names him, seems to have taken pen in hand.

Jack Miles is a senior fellow for religious affairs with the Pacific Council on International Policy and a scholar in residence with the Getty Research Institute.


2 Responses to “A Divorce the Church Should Smile Upon”

  1. A Free Spirit Says:

    I just read an article on CNN.com regarding unity in the Catholic Church without cultural uniformity (i.e., as Anglican congregations join while retaining their rites). The Catholic Church views this “homecoming” as the work of the Holy Spirit. I then wrote a post about the relationship of unity and doctrinal uniformity. In general terms, does unity require uniformity?

  2. dpc+ Says:

    welcome free spirit! A very astute question. Unity doesn’t require uniformity (thus, for example, the Western Rite in the Eastern Orthodox Church). What unity requires is Conformity. Which is a horse of a different color. I once likened this to the issue of the episcopal church’s understanding of autonomy. Autonomy can, in the most helpful, wholesome and healthy ways, be understood as “self governing.” That is the mutuality that different national/ethnic churches have in the Orthodox Church. One faith, expressed in culturally relevant and individual contexts. That is also supposed to be the understanding of the provinces in the Anglican Communion. It is an ancient and honored principle of the Church. However the episcopal church has chosen to understand autonomy as “a law unto themselves.” This has never been acceptable in the life of the Church.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: