Good words from Dr. Radner, to be heeded by all. I generally agree with his assessment of the approach +++Rowan has taken. His primary goal is to keep the Communion together if at all possible. A historical parallel can be found in Lincoln’s presidency during the Civil War. His overriding aim was to preserve the Union even in the face of division. He was often criticized on all sides within the Union, but he absorbed the criticism and kept his eye on the prize. I think the ABC is taking a similar tack.

The ABC said, “There is no ‘ultimatum’ involved,” and “We are inevitably in the business of compromise.”
Dr. Radner when members of my parish read these words they felt that the ABC’s words were “outright destroying the Gospel” and they will be leaving TEC.

George—remind them that +RDW is wary of appearing to his own CofE constituency as ‘demanding things’ apart from the actual future consultative actions of the primates. So he soft-peddles things like this, mindful that hard decisions will have to come if the communion is to survive. Many are calling for his scalp if he overreaches in his role. Do I believe that an actual adjudication of DES is now forfeit? Not in the least, and it is because of that that the language is (to my mind) overly cautious. And I can have that mind: I am not the head of the CofE and the AC.

The above was in response to a posting by myself where I again reviewed the consistent and persistent undermining of the DeS communique from even before its inception to this latest “no ultimatum but just a starting point” subversion and the consistent and persistent downplaying of the actions of the ABC in this regard.

Chris Seitz wrote about how he was “surprised at the level of despair” in the reactions to this latest failings of the ABC to which I responded here. In particular, I said

As Christian pastors, you are charged with maintaining the health of the flock. Listen to the anguish and don’t compound it. Tell them to expect no discipline from the ABC and not to place their trust in him. He is simply not trustworthy. The TEC will continue in its reckless, perfidious path. Don’t expect otherwise.

Ephraim talks about “moving on with what God has given us in one another within this difficult situation.” He is absolutely correct. The good Lord in His providence has given us Gene Robinson, Katherine Jefferts-Schori and Rowan Williams in this time of crisis of the Anglican Communion. I am quite convinced that He will lead the faithful of the AC through these trying times and that the dross will be consumed and the gold will be refined.

So, in the end, Schori et alia are correct and we have a “Windsor process” and a presumably a Dromantine process and a Dar process to go along with it.  Oddly, all of these processes seem to flow into one where TEC sticks its thumb into the eye of the rest of the Anglican Communion, tells them to walk east until their mitres float and does what it jolly well pleases.

Is it me, or is there more than a little self-deception going on amongst the reasserter set these days?

George I would hope that the parishioners of which you speak do not depend on +Rowan or any other leader to strengthen their resolve to be faithful to the Church. For the Church remains and has always remained, although her presence is often obscured and sometimes almost obliterated by the antics of those “crossing the stage” at a moment in time, or by the issues and passions “locals” thought so vital, but which, in hindsight, after their solution may have been largely forgotten.

I speak not of some invisible entity, nor of some alternative construction, but of the Church which over and over again seems close to the gates of hell, but which is over and over again preserved by our Lord’s promise.

Who knows what temporal resolution, suggestion, plan or scheme may seem to rescue the Church we celebrate in Word and Sacrament, in place and mission day by day and week by week? When that momentary solution arrives, after misery valley, those who are faithful will be amazed and shout, “It is the Lord’s doing and it is marvelous in our eyes.”

I realize that this sounds “pie in the sky”, but the Faith is other, and it is to otherness we should look, rather than to the strategies and solutions presented by ecclesiastical politics. There is Gospel in Ephraim’s and +John’s suggestion and that Gospelness is in the suffering and self-oblation it suggests. The Cross and the Resurrection are the only solution however hard we seek to avoid pain and loss, for only in death to everything is life possible. Isn’t this Gospel?

WVParson - I agree pretty much with you.  But I’m not sure that what you posted will mean much to many commentators here.  Believing that the Gates of Hell will not prevail won’t mean much to those who believe only in an “invisible” church.