Guest commentary: A solution for the Episcopal Church

By Paul Valliere, June 29, 2007

[Episcopal Life] The decision of a group of historic Virginia parishes to leave the Episcopal Church deserved the national publicity it received. The exodus is the latest evidence of a process of disintegration that threatens the existence of the Episcopal Church as a significant force in American and world Christianity. The irony is that the Episcopal Church is an unlikely candidate for the kind of conflict that is consuming it. The large majority of Episcopalians are religious moderates with little interest in divisive theological polemics.

The leadership of the church is a large part of the problem. The current crisis was not caused by gay activism in the church, or even by the election of a non-celibate gay man as bishop of New Hampshire, but by the assent to that election on the part of the church's supreme governing body, the triennial General Convention. Meeting in 2003, the General Convention had full authority to reject the result of the New Hampshire election but chose not to do so. By the time of the next General Convention, in the summer of 2006, the extent of the damage done to the church and the worldwide Anglican Communion was clear. World Anglican leaders had publicly spelled out the minimum steps required to restore the good standing of the Episcopal Church. Yet the General Convention still refused to moderate its position, sparking the surge in the number of Episcopalians running for the exits late last year.

Can anything be done to mend the peace of the Episcopal Church? The answer is yes, but to imagine it we need to look beyond the church's existing governance structures. They are mired in the syndrome Max Weber identified long ago as an affliction common to large organizations: the displacement of charisma by bureaucracy, of spirituality by legalism, of leaders by organization men -- and nowadays, organization women.

To find a way out, Episcopalians should consult church history. How did the Christian church in other times free itself from the demoralizing grip of discord? For the most part, it did so by practicing conciliarism -- that is to say, by convening regional or worldwide councils to address the causes of discord and reaffirm the bonds of community. Regional councils were the primary means of preserving the unity of the church as early as the second century. Worldwide councils began to be held in the fourth century after the Christian church was granted legal rights in the Roman Empire.

In the Middle Ages, a highly developed theory of conciliarism exercised a check on papal power in the Roman Catholic Church and, contributed to the rise of constitutionalism in the secular realm as well. In the 20th century, the conciliar idea inspired some of the most important gatherings in modern church history, such as the Second Vatican Council of 1962-65 and the Russian Orthodox Council of 1917-18, the greatest Eastern Orthodox assembly since ancient times. In short, there is a rich record of conciliar theory and practice for Episcopalians to consult as they look for a way to reunify their church.

A council is not a routine convention but an extraordinary gathering. Councils work when the issues are clear-cut and the unity of the church is in the balance. The essential questions are perfectly clear: Does the Episcopal Church wish to remain part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, and if so, will the church do what is necessary to restore its good standing, such as declaring a moratorium on the consecration of non-celibate gays and lesbians to the episcopate? A representative Episcopal council would in all likelihood answer both questions affirmatively. By reaffirming their unity with Anglicans around the world, Episcopalians would also renew the spirit of unity in their own church.

Critics will argue that councils achieve unity at the expense of minorities in the church. But this is a false stereotype. Councils are about self-discipline, not repression. Conciliarism does not reject creative initiatives in Christian life, but it does insist that such initiatives, whether they come from minorities or majorities, be realized in ways that do not lacerate the body of the church. Far from stifling creativity, conciliarism deepens it by challenging innovators to practice Christian love rather than sectarianism.

-- Paul Valliere teaches religion at Butler University and is a senior fellow of the Benter for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University. To respond to this commentary e-mail Episcopal Life at commentary@episcopal-life.org. We welcome your own commentaries.