Griswold said it was important to see the covenant in context. “It's a pastoral response,” he said. Arrangements can be made, he said, in places where “there is a desire for ministry beyond the diocesan bishop,” with the approval of that bishop.

Many bishops doubted that they would need to invoke the Covenant in their dioceses. “We have three bishops who embody great diversity,” said Suffragan Bishop Catherine Roskam of New York said. “We don't have occasion to use it.” Bishop William Persell of Chicago agreed. “We have a variety of parishes with a variety of view points,” he said, but “I've been welcome everywhere I've gone.” He did express reservations that the document might be misused if it “were to take on a life of its own.”

Some were concerned that the covenant would not be used enough. “My fear . . .is that we will not use it in as many situations as it might be helpful in,” said Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, a member of the American Anglican Council and one of the 18 bishops who signed the “Appeal for the Preservation of Godly Union.” As one who believes in the need for such a response, Duncan was pleased with the interpretation of existing church law. Citing the formation of “continuing churches” that have left the Episcopal Church in the last 30 years, he said, “There are tremendous pressures in our church that could lead us to more division.” He said that the covenant, “when not interpreted in the extreme, one way or another, offers a better way forward than the last three decades have shown.”

Allen Bartlett, retired bishop of Pennsylvania, said the covenant was nothing new, but rather “one tool among many,” one that provides a “temporary arrangement.” He pointed out that the ultimate goal is full restoration of the relationship with a congregation. Bartlett was one of the bishops who made an arrangement when he was diocesan bishop with several traditionalist parishes for visitations by other bishops.

As news from the retreat moved through the church, early responses from conservatives were positive. The American Anglican Council, for example, said that the Covenant “represents a significant act of grace at a time when grace is most needed in the church.” The March 14 statement also expressed gratitude to Griswold “for providing the time necessary during the House of Bishops meeting for constructive discussion of Sustained Pastoral Care,” and they commended the bishops “for committing themselves to the path of reconciliation and unity.”

Griswold's leadership was cited by several bishops. Robert Ihloff of Maryland said that the presiding bishop “put things in a theological perspective, consistently leading us spiritually and theologically to think out our issues on a Scriptural basis.”

Retreat moves bishops to new place

Reaction to the retreat was overwhelmingly positive among bishops across the spectrum. Roskam described it as important for “our formation as bishops, our formation as community. We do it because we are the spiritual leaders of the church and we can”t expect the efforts of the church to move forward if we were not moving forward as reconcilers ourselves.”

Bishop Coadjutor Duncan Gray III of Mississippi called it a “soul-satisfying” meeting, “because we were engaged in the reconciling work of the church and we were doing mission and being transformed as we did it.”

Bishops considered how, as spiritual leaders, they give shape to the life of the church as it responds to the “confusion and sense of vulnerability” that followed events of September 11, said Bishop Arthur Walmsley, retired bishop of Connecticut, who helped the bishops implement the concerns expressed in their “Waging Reconciliation” statement at last fall's meeting in Vermont.. He said they also considered the Church's link to partners throughout the Anglican Communion and through them, to the larger issues of poverty, hunger, disease and the gap between rich and poor.

Several guest bishops helped make that connection more tangible. Desmond Tutu, former Anglican Archbishop of Cape Town, joined Bishop Iraj Mottahedeh, President-Bishop of the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East, and Archbishop Peter Akinola, primate of the Church in Nigeria, and a group of consultants on some of the international issues “enriched our discussions and our lives,” Persell said.

Griswold said that the presence of representatives from other churches and other contexts was very helpful, “a special gift because they serve as reminders of the larger fellowship and they present the Gospel from a variety of contexts.” In reporting to the Church Center staff following the retreat, he related a story of how Akinola dealt with several diocese caught in conflict. “He visited them, removing the signs of his episcopal authority, prostrating himself on the ground and asking them to accept his ministry of reconciliation.”

During the press conversation, bishops expressed deep appreciation for what had happened. “There is a commitment to understand and respond to the fact that we are people of privilege living in a time of extreme challenge, that global poverty and the situations of our sisters and brothers around the world is critical for us is a continuing agenda,” said Walmsley, who called this one of “the most remarkable meetings” he'd attended in 22 years in the House of Bishops.

Bishop Claude E. Payne of Texas said he saw the bishops' discussions as an example that the Episcopal Church is adapting to cultural change. By seizing the opportunity for mission, he said, the church is reforming, using reconciliation to reach out to all people.

Bishop Theodore Daniels of the Virgin Islands feels less isolated after time with colleagues. He said that the retreat was “energizing,” adding that “this particular meeting gave me hope as a leader of the church that we can set the tone. One can deal with issues that are not necessarily easy. We don”t always have answers and we can say “not yet” on things.”

Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of Nevada, one of the newer bishops at the retreat, said that it was “an experience of the body of Christ in a different way than I or any of us can experience in our own diocese. We gather, we deliberate, we disagree in love and we grow to love our neighbors who may disagree with us from time to time.”

Some bishops, looking to future meetings, expressed some eagerness and even impatience to move on to even larger issues. Bishop Chester Talton of Los Angeles, who chairs the planning committee, said that one of the most positive and important changes is that the meetings were beginning to focus on world issues.

The bishops shaped another covenant at their meeting, committing themselves to a list of specific issues as “next steps in reconciliation.” Included are a reduction in global poverty, hunger and disease; addressing the gap between rich and poor in the United States; candid dialogue among Abrahamic faiths; efforts to empower partnerships among the provinces and dioceses within the Anglican Communion.

Griswold greeted the commitment of the bishops to global issues. “Our reconciliation as a community of faith is not for ourselves but for the sake of the world. It was therefore important that having reflected upon our life as a church we turned our attention to the global issues that effect us all, remembering that Christ came not to save the church but the world,” he said. “I think it is fair to say that the real energy came to the fore in our global discussions. Many bishops eagerly welcomed the opportunity to move on to matters that have significance beyond our self-preoccupation.”

A Covenant on Episcopal Pastoral Care