I have written an article for the Episcopal New Yorker, on my eccentric Anglican position: the Communion is retarded by its established centre. Here is the final paragraph:

“In a sense I agree with those who say that Anglicanism needs more definition. Let it begin with the fundamental question of its attitude to political liberalism. For perhaps the most important question for a church is whether it seeks political power on the old Christendom model, or renounces the possibility of such power, by fully affirming the secular liberal ideal. A united approach to this issue would require the mother-church to reject its imperial history and finally adapt to political liberalism. The American church should respond to calls for a Covenant by putting church-state relations on the table. It should say: ‘OK, if we are at last defining common norms, to be followed by all provinces, why should sexuality eclipse all else? Let us begin by agreeing that establishment belongs to a past historical era, that it is now a hindrance to the gospel.’ Canterbury would be given pause for thought, and a more fruitful debate about Anglican identity would ensue. That is my modest proposal for how Anglicanism may be rescued from its imperial history.”