A very touching report. If the world is to advance, if faith is to grow, we really DO have to start seeing whole pictures, and not snapshots. It is plain that the church in Africa is doing great things, even if it is doing some terrible ones too. I have read elsewhere on TA the people think that liberal churches should not have helped fund this gathering. I think it is plain that they should have.

@Rosemary Hannah: The lead paragraph of the first ACNS report is:

"Four hundred bishops from Africa announced today that 'business as usual' was no longer an option for the Anglican Church there and that Africans should "take their destiny into their own hands"."

Very well then -- let them do so. They don't want the "tainted" money of the Episcopal Church. Let them not take it, then. And let us not push our "tainted" money on them. There are other organizations in Africa doing good work. Let us support them instead. Let the African churches go entirely their own way, as they desire. They have said it.

My question to English readers is: How long do you think the Church of England will remain the Established Church in England once it becomes known that the C of E sides with the Nigerians and Ugandans on the question of homosexuality?

Given your new government's position, I would expect a disestablishment bill to be introduced within days, and I would expect it to have a good chance of success, as well.

Establishment of the Church of England is about far more than religion. Religion would not even be top of the 'list'.

I have no sympathy at all with discrimination against same sex attraction and relationships - at all times and in all places I have argued this for the last 40 years - more than 40 years.

But I do not think we can be the ones to close the door on African churches. I think we should continue support while speaking firmly of what we believe. I think we should continue to offer finance. I think we should try to understand how recently homosexuality came to be understood in the west. I think we should forgive.

Charlotte, it is not my impression that the C of E sides with the Nigerians and Ugandans on the question of homosexuality.

The congregations broadly reflect English people generally, who are now very liberal on this question.

The bishops are frightened of rocking the Anglican Communion boat but very, very few of them are hardliners who actually support homophobia - certainly way short of a majority.

It is the meekness of the C of E leadership which has appeased Nigeria and Uganda, not agreement.

As to establishment, the new Prime Minister is a practising member of the Church of England, which his predecessor Gordon Brown was not. David Cameron is also the man who rescued the Conservative Party from its reactionary elements and he will not let the Church of England capitulate to those elements if he has anything to do with it. Whereas Gordon Brown was indifferent to the church and happy to wash his hands of his role in it - happy, in fact, to let establishment go - David Cameron is more likely to give the Church of England the benefit of establishment and stop it falling too far out of line with the public at large.

We have already seen this in the warning shots fired in Parliament against any proposal that would marginalise women bishops.

While I have sympathy for Rosemary's Hannah's sincerity, I believe she is either naive or in denial about these particular denominational churches.

I am not a member of any group advocating for homosexual persons, in the church or elsewhere, and I have only come to accept loving and monogamous homosexual relationships as religiously valid within the past twenty or so years.

But I can recognize an evil effect, which I believe these African churches will have, no matter how sincerely they believe their positions to be. Therefore, to enable that effect, by the donation of money (whether from TEC or elsewhere)would be tantamount to being complicit in the evil effect.

Instead, such funds should be directed through organizations, whether churches or otherwise, in order to support people and their needs,

@badman: "David Cameron is more likely to give the Church of England the benefit of establishment and stop it falling too far out of line with the public at large" which, as you say, is nowhere nearly as anti-gay as the Church's leadership.

Well, but what story will they tell "the public at large" to explain why they forced TEC out of a Communion that makes comfortable room for Uganda and its "Kill Gays" law? Will they say it's because we have a woman as Presiding Bishop? (no, probably not)

Because gay people can worship as gay people in TEC? It's my understanding that if a gay or lesbian person wants to be a part of a Church of England congregation,in all but a favored few, he or she had better be totally closeted. Keep in mind that the C of E attracts less than 5% of "the public at large" as worshippers, and that the average age of the parishioners is 60.

What story will they tell "the public at large" to explain why they kicked TEC out but cozied up to Uganda? I suppose they will have to say it's because we are Americans and don't keep in our elbows when riding the Tube. Or because we had a Clown Mass? Not that the Church of England ever did such a thing...

It is not true that in most C of E congregations gay people are closeted. In the majority gay people openly in relationships are welcomed and in all sorts of roles. In a minority that will not be true, but those are the minority. There will of course be congregations where the demographic (congregation old and poor) causes their social attitude to gay people to wash over into their religious attitude. There will be congregations where the priest's attitude (evangelical, conservative) has the same effect and there may not always be a good match between priest and congregation, causing more congregations to be doubtful places for gay people. But I am not convinced it is anything like a majority. The English are rather good at believing one thing and doing another. They are very good at seeing the person in front of them and responding to that person and keeping abstract ideas in another compartment. Bear in mind that the C of E gives pension rights to all clergy in Civil Unions.

The English are not by and large a combative nation. They hate rows. They dislike the idea of falling out with anybody. They are more likely to engineer others to leave THEM than to leave any organisation.

Charlotte:

"Because gay people can worship as gay people in TEC? It's my understanding that if a gay or lesbian person wants to be a part of a Church of England congregation,in all but a favored few, he or she had better be totally closeted. Keep in mind that the C of E attracts less than 5% of "the public at large" as worshippers, and that the average age of the parishioners is 60."

None of this is true. If you're from TEC please feel angry with us - many of us are pretty angry with our leaders and deeply sympathetic to TEC's position - but please don't tell lies about us. I understand this was not your intention, and that you truly believe what you posted, but having been corrected by posters such as Rosemary, please don't spread this misinformation again. It can be too easy to believe in caricatures of each other's churches, as you will have found from the 'clown mass' incidents among others, and it helps nobody.

Of course there are extremists and homophobes in the CofE, as indeed there are in TEC. But a gay couple being told not to come to church is so rare that when this happened earlier this year it was actually reported in national newspapers, and even then it turned out that there were extenuating circumstances. That's not to say the CofE doesn't have its problems at the moment, and it's certainly not to say that we gay people face no homophobia in our churches, but in the vast majority of congregations gay people and gay couples are welcomed and accepted. And the vast majority of Anglicans in the pews are blissfully unaware of the international machinations on the issue, and, indeed, have a tendency towards shock when made aware.

Chloe and Rosemary Hannah have convinced me that my understanding was false and wrong-headed. Thank you both.

Dear Charlotte, I think you are getting the situation in the Church of England out of all proportion. Most Anglicans would gladly accept gay people into their congregations. It is only some of the leadership of the anti-gay crowd - like Chris Sugden for instance - and some of the Bishops, who are keen to keep the Global South contingency on-side. Most English people have gotten over the fact that homosexuality is just one of the components of human sexuality, and are not anti-American - especially not anti-TEC.

Jan Butter is a genuine enthusiast for the Anglican project and for Christian life generally, he has taken on a tough job at the ACO and I sincerely wish him well.

Jim Naughton slouching in his usual seat in the corner of his Cafe gave Jan quite a tough lecture on the realities of conference journalism in response to this piece - I strongly suspect he is right despite the smell of absinthe from over there!