I pray that the story of the Church of England’s missionary calling with the Anglican Communion will not be forgotten.
Both academic theology and the Church may well have a very different relationship to the academy in two or three decades; events like this are opportune moments to reflect on how these shifts may benefit the Church.
As the C of E struggles over issues in human sexuality, we might hope for more than attention to establishment and "apostolicity." Instead, we seek a recognition of the Church of England's providential role as a servant in the formation of a global Communion of national churches straining for a more Catholic identity, not ignoring the gift of the local, but always with an eye towards the graces of the universal.
I can only lament yet another airing of Anglicanism’s dirty laundry: namely, the fear and anxiety of all parties regarding any settled, visible consensus around human sexuality, both within national churches and in the Anglican Communion at large.
The English church is still wrestling with the consequences of a terrible demographic, psychic, spiritual, cultural, and philosophical catastrophe.
There is, arguably, more diversity in the C of E than in any other member of the Communion, with influences not only from both the Oxford Movement and radical liberalism from the past, but also from the New Calvinism and the Vineyard movement in more recent years.
I entirely agree with Thatcher that Anglicans need to do their homework on sex and gender, instead of incoherently flailing about, rewriting canons and changing the sacraments on the fly. But I was quite puzzled by his article.