A VERDICT on the value of the 2022 Lambeth Conference ought to rest on more than the Archbishop of Canterbury’s ability to steer the ship between Scylla and Charibdis on the issue of sexuality. Lo and behold, the people who did not much care whether the Anglican ship stayed afloat before the manouevre cared just as little afterwards. For many of the bishops, though, the mood at the end — one commentator called it “self-satisfaction” — was actually relief. Away from the self-reliant parishes and dioceses of the West, the Anglican Communion does matter: not, as in the past, as a source of charitable funding, but for the organic relationships that it encourages. Bishops tackling the food shortages and climate catastrophes in East Africa, or the political turmoil in parts of South-East Asia or Latin America, are sustained and emboldened with the knowledge that they are in the prayers of their peers around the world. And if the deepening commitment to Christ which was promoted in the Lambeth sessions on discipleship finds its expression in a greater awareness of their struggles, and a readier generosity, they will not be disappointed.

Concerning sexuality, it is dangerous to hang too much weight on any particular form of words, especially in these days when lobbyists think nothing of distorting words and meanings. One of the most significant utterances, however, came during the Global South Fellowship’s press conference on Friday. As we reported it, the Primate of South Sudan, asked whether the GSFA’s pledge to remain within the Anglican Communion would survive a decision by the C of E to approve same-sex marriage, replied: “When the snake enters your hut, you don’t run away. You struggle and let the snake go out, because it is your house. So we are not leaving Communion, as it is our home. . .” Anyone looking for friendly and respectful rhetoric will need to be patient. But beneath the forceful language is a clear commitment to working within the Communion — reminding the West that its sexual mores are not universally accepted, but not about to give up when the Church of England, as it now must, moves from the theoretical debate of Living in Love and Faith to its practical outcomes.

As for the rest, the Lambeth Conference organisers have been bold in talking of a three-stage process, of which only two have been completed: the preparation and the gathering. Now comes the true test of value: the application — whether the words spoken and written in Canterbury can be given the weight that comes only when they find an echo (or create one) in the beliefs and actions of ordinary Anglicans. The task is an uphill one: if the typical UK parishioner has only the vaguest notion of the gathering in Canterbury, how much less will be known in remote parishes in other Provinces on other continents. None the less, the opportunity is there if the will is. Ordinary Anglicans have it in their power to make the Conference a failure or a success by their response. And this is as it should be.