While researching something else, this, from a post I made in the wake of TEC’s GC 2006:
There is no question that most of the Anglican Communion will not stomach the election of a woman Presiding Bishop, especially one that supports homosexuals the way she does. There is also no question that the Episcopal church has put Rowan Williams and the Church of England in a tight place, since they are in the middle of their own debate over women bishops along with all of the other controversies the Communion is convulsed with. The 2006 General Convention is a watershed for the Episcopal church, one that has been coming for at least four decades but which has arrived in a way that no one can miss. (Personally, I’m surprised it took this long. But that’s just me.)
The Episcopalians could have fudged on many of the issues in front of it. They’re good at that. But the GLBT people and other radicals smelled total victory, and they could not resist having it all. (They’ll screw up the 2008 election for the Democrats if they do the same thing at the Democrat National Convention they just did at this gathering.)
But now they must face up to the consequences of that bold move.
When liberals operate in our society, they generally do so incrementally, and they generally try to assure themselves that they have the covering of the legal system and/or bureaucracy when they make their move. In this way they can force their opponents to submit to the law or at least dissuade them through high legal fees.
They also prefer to appropriate to themselves existing institutions rather than creating new ones to displace the old. The classic example of this is gay marriage, where they are attempting to redefine marriage rather than abolishing it. Their attempt to force the Boy Scouts to allow homosexual scout masters rather than to start a new scouting organisation (or eliminate scouting altogether) is of a similar ilk.
Up until now they have been reasonably successful in both in the Episcopal church, albeit at the loss of a large portion of the membership. But now they are faced with forces and institutions beyond their control, specifically the “Global South” provinces which have no use for either North American sexual adventurism or economic elitism (don’t count out the power of the rage that causes.) Their attempt to roll the Global South has hit the wall at every turn. They are coming to realise, even in their arrogance and pride, that there are some things they cannot do and many people they cannot win over, crush or ignore.
This may explain why the institution known by its acronym of ECUSA is wanting to go simply by “The Episcopal Church.” Hard as it is on the Boomer leadership of the church, they have to swallow the fact that they cannot “have it all” in this case. They must choose between being something they cannot stomach and breaking away from people who cannot stomach them. Being forced to choose the latter will mean that the Episcopal church will henceforth represent a “spirituality” that is consciously other than Anglicanism, something they have been doing for a long time but until recently have not had to admit.
What we may end up with then is a communion of one (or two, if the Canadians decide to throw their lot in with their American counterparts.) The liberals would then have to convince the rest of us that their church, with its superannuated demographics and a belief structure little different from the neopagans around them, is a place one would want to invest time, money and family into. For a group of people who have risen on the backs of others and sold themselves through a combination of deception and coercion, this is a tall order. The Episcopal church may have “crossed the Rubicon” with this General Convention, but we doubt seriously that Katharine Jefferts Schori—or anyone else they could have elected—is the Julius Caesar that the left is going to need to win the victory.