I'm exercising considerable license in paraphrasing the priest's words. His comments are typical of many others I've heard in the past year. Conservative and moderate clergy are echoing these sentiments all around the church. Typical also is the theological truism that there are no "enemies" in the present warfare between Episcopalians, only the one Enemy of us all. Here the painful divisions end and love takes over.

I have a real concern with the refrain of "can't we all just get along" that appears in more and more exchanges between clergy in the present day of conflict in the Episcopal Church. It has the unmistakable character of denial, a recipe for filtering out the elephant in the room. Worse, it seems to be a means, perhaps unconscious, for reducing a saving gospel with a divine origin to a religious opinion based upon human myth and metaphor.

No doubt it would be a relief to devote our energies entirely to building up the Kingdom of God rather than taking swipes at each other. Only now we can't be too specific about what we mean by "Kingdom of God" for fear of being divisive. Conservatives who believe it means converting people to believe in Jesus must put that aside, because some of our colleagues reject that understanding of the gospel. Thus the liberal view becomes the default position. For the sake of peace and unity "Kingdom of God" must be reduced to a metaphor for the human effort to achieve an ideal or "divine" social order.

Let's face it: it would be a great relief if man lived by bread alone after all, and not by every word proceeding from the mouth of God. Sooner or later words from God become divisive.

Here's the solution of political moderates to the present division in the Episcopal Church: let's just everyone get along. Unity and equality will be our common denominator. We will "include" all theological positions, which means we will reduce the concept of divine revelation to that of human opinion. Our unity, after all, transcends and supersedes each of our purported "truths". And our love for each other, or at least our shared warmth as we huddle together in our corner, will be its own reward - our "salvation", so to speak.

Surely there would be great relief in such a position. Indeed, this is relief reduced to a generic formula - the absence of conflict as an end in itself.

I don't know how else to say it, but the worst thing that could happen at the present moment in the Episcopal Church would be for us all to just get along. For orthodox Episcopalians, accepting a place at the table means agreeing that the doctrine of salvation is one among many human opinions. It means admitting that there is something greater than this gospel that unites us. It means that silencing the exclusive claim that Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life - that no one comes to the Father but by him - is a price worth paying if only we can all get along. In effect, accepting a place at the table is a negation and a rejection of that gospel.

This is the terrible truth that many conservatives do not see, and many are going out of their way not to see. This is the truth some have seen and, after counting the cost, are realizing they cannot pay. A new conservatism or a more "generous" orthodoxy is coming into play, one which professes to speak to those in the middle. It is an orthodoxy that pays lip service to core doctrines of the Faith, but becomes agitated when the unfolding of those doctrines conflicts with the canons of political correctness.

When the House of Bishops met this past week and essentially denounced the Primates' Communique, there were a lot of comments about the "cordiality" and "collegiality" of the bishops. Perhaps a vision was forming of what a truly "inclusive" Episcopal Church might look like. In spite of their differences, there was a genuine warmth and affection between members of the House, all the more convincing because it was unexpected. Each one saluted the sincerity with which the others held to their respective positions. Thus the positions themselves didn't seem to matter so much, only the warmth and sincerity of those present. That's what they had in common.

We might imagine wheels turning as the bishops secretly counted the personal cost of decisions that soon lay in store for each of them. Perhaps the new spirit of frankness and acceptance that characterized the meeting opened new vistas of a kingdom where Jesus both is and is not the only Way, where the Bible both is and is not the Word of God written, where man does and does not live by bread alone.

The proverbial cat is out of the bag. In recent months the Church's consciousness has been raised so that we all understand ourselves too well. There can be no going back now. There are at least two religions in the Episcopal Church, and everyone has to choose one or the other. Ironically, one of the choices can be made to look like refusing to choose and thus risk dividing the church.

Here's where the orthodox are in a bind and revisionists are not. Revisionists can preach the merits of getting along, which is, after all, not a position but the absence of position. It promises an end to conflict because it is the very embodiment of conflict avoidance. If all religious opinions are just that - opinions, and not revelations - revisionists can accept a conservative evangelical. They can admit someone whose opinions they believe to be wrong because there is no "wrong". Anyway it's not like it's a matter of life and death.

The orthodox cannot say this. For them the gospel is a matter of eternal life and death. That's why the Bible and the creeds are non-negotiable. They are not just wallpaper for an anteroom at the UN. Nor are they suitable occasions for getting the old gang together to sing some of the old songs.

Nothing could be worse than for the orthodox to accept a place at this new table, to be "included" in the new religion. While those on both sides often have the best intentions, the inclusion of the orthodox in the revisionist church means the death of Christian orthodoxy. It means ceasing to exist -- like a drop in a bucket.

END