In 1998, the bishops of the Anglican Communion said that we "commit ourselves to listen to the experience of homosexual persons." In recent months, the committee planning for the next meeting of Anglican bishops, set to open in July 2008, has been gathering reports on how the listening process has been going.

Amid the chaos and confusion, what can be heard? As one interested listener, what I hear first of all is the incredible diversity of the voices and the improbability that Anglicans will arrive at a common mind anytime soon.

Connecticut Episcopalians often are baffled by the attitudes of Episcopalians in Fort Worth, but at least we are all Americans and follow teams in the NBA. When we add England and Australia to the mix, we no longer have sports in common, but we do still speak English. But what do we have in common with Anglicans in Myanmar and the Congo?

Consider, for example, that Myanmar has been involved in a struggle with a brutal dictatorship and that the Congo has been enduring devastating civil conflict. The Anglican Church of the Congo says, quite honestly, "circumstances prevent any response at this time." Likewise, the Church in the Sudan reports that "social healing" is its priority.

Then, too, there are societies in which conversations about sexuality seem impossible because such conversations are so contrary to their traditions. The Japanese Anglican Church reports that "the culture does not allow for talking about sexuality, and so there is little awareness in the congregations of the presence or otherwise of lesbian or gay people and no need or way of talking about that. In this context it is hard for listening to happen." In Hong Kong, we are told, "sexuality is not talked about even in private conversations." In Melanesia, "it is not generally thought seemly to discuss sex publicly."

On the other hand, there are churches unable to hear because their minds already are made up. The Church in Nigeria has reported that "homosexuality is sin" but "the church will respond pastorally to repentance." There is legislation in Nigeria, which the church supports banning "same-sex unions, all homosexual acts and the formation of any gay groups." That makes listening more than a little difficult! The Church of the Southern Cone, which includes Argentina and Chile, objects even to being asked. They have no time, they tell us, for "manufactured agendas...foisted on them."

Listening both ways
Listening ought also to go in both directions. It is well worth listening to the Church in Uganda when it reports on the ways in which it already has "challenged culture with wonderful results.

"It has ended the traditions of revenge and enslavement to evil spirits. It has widened the circle of love beyond the immediate family and thus broken strife and mutual exploitation this caused. Interethnic marriage has produced a united society. It has freed women from the bonds of male oppression and challenged polygamy and divorce at will and valued the biblical institution of marriage."

The Ugandan church reports that, "concerning homosexual behavior and relationships," from a careful, critical reading of Scripture "it has no place in God's design of creation, the continuation of the human race through procreation or his plan of redemption." This church also has been dealing with dictatorship and civil conflict, but it makes no excuses. When it has done so much, can it be faulted for not doing more?

The Church in Australia reports that it has had "difficulty in creating a listening process because homosexuals fear consequences of public identification." It adds that there has been "more shouting than listening in some areas."

Canada began a process of listening in 1976 but reports that there is "no common mind" and it is "continuing to listen." The Church in Ireland reports cryptically, "The bishops believed that it was more important to find a temporary accommodation of a disagreement between parties pending a permanent settlement than to assert abstract decrees."

The Episcopal Church report notes that its listening process began in the 1960s and that there is still widespread disagreement on the subject. So what can we expect when we learn that the Korean Church began its listening process in 1998, Brazil in 1999 and New Zealand in 2006, while in Wales the formal listening process has not yet begun?

Yet these all are Christian Churches, formed by the same prayer book tradition. Amidst the diversity, there are reminders that the Holy Spirit is at work and that the Churches do want to provide a pastoral ministry to all people and develop a deeper understanding of an issue that often sparks more heat than light.

The Church in Burundi says that "the debate challenges our understanding of marriage and family" but that it "remains willing to listen to the concerns and challenges of all the provinces of the Anglican Communion." The Church in the West Indies acknowledges that, although homosexuality is "viewed unfavorably in most areas" and "extremes of gay rights and fundamentalism [are] unhelpful...change is happening." It has asked the bishop of New York to come and help plan a listening process.

One can hope that the Lambeth bishops did not expect in 1998 that a consensus would have emerged by 2008. Nor, it seems, will 10 more years be likely to bring us all to the same page. But if we listen carefully, we may come to a better understanding of each other and a greater ability to work together in our global village. We may even hear the Holy Spirit at work to do more than we humanly could have expected in ways beyond our imagining.

To respond to this column, e-mail commentary@episcopal-life.org. We welcome your own commentary.