There is nothing more irritating than someone who keeps saying, "I told you so." However, as I look at the Episcopal Church scene in the wake of the 73rd General Convention, and as I look at some of the things I have been writing and saying during the last few years about the reconfiguration of the church, it is sometimes hard to restrain myself.

As a theologically conservative Episcopalian who deeply loves this church, I went to Denver with my stomach churning and adrenaline pumping. I did not quite know what to expect, but things did not look rosy for those with my convictions. I wondered if there would be a place for me when it was all over. With General Conventions there is always good news and bad news, but as anticipated, human sexuality was the largest bone of contention.

I will not bore you by rehearsing details. Suffice it to say that in retrospect almost anything the convention might have done would likely have triggered the first steps toward reshaping of the church. This outcome has been developing quickly. Every time I have been ready to put together this piece something else has happened, and I have had to draw back from writing. The truth is that reconfiguring of the church will probably continue with many twists and turns a long way into the future. The question we need to ask is whether this will result in a murky future or whether we will make of it a missionary opportunity.

For a number of years observers foresaw a clean split between left and right, but that seems overly simplistic. There are so many different interest groups both within the Episcopal Church and in the penumbra of American Anglicanism, that a variety of approaches will be attempted. Furthermore, conservative groups, the ones who arguably feel the most marginalized, find it difficult to agree among themselves. As fragmentation is part of the spirit of this postmodern age, there could be as many as four or five different responses on the right to the crisis that is now remaking North American Anglicanism.

Despite the fact that left and right, conservatives, traditionalists, evangelicals, and whoever else, are couching their recipes for the future in the language of mission, mission appears bound to suffer. As old infrastructures are rejected and new ones are put in place, resources and energy will be diverted from the challenge of making Christ known by word and deed. Squabbles, which will inevitably involve huge legal bills, will lead detractors to shake their heads and mutter in disgust, "See how these Christians love one another."

A colleague recently told me of a conservative denomination that has been studying the downward spiral of the Episcopal Church, for fear that it might one day find itself going down the same path. The conclusion was that it could take Episcopalians 50 years to resolve their differences in the courts, and that in the process we would squander literally all our assets. We fail to heed such a warning at our own peril.

Having said all this, part of me welcomes reconfiguration. My overwhelming sense in Denver was that the accumulated structures are no longer capable of facilitating mission in the manner an increasingly hostile post-Christendom world demands. In tomorrow's church, every resource imaginable needs to be focused into effective congregational life. Both nationally and at a local level, rapidly changing circumstances demand an agility that today's plodding structures and financial priorities do not allow, designed as they were for less animated times.

What is happening is nothing short of a new reformation, which will be every bit as messy as the previous one. Human sexuality in all its complexity is merely the presenting problem of a far deeper missional malaise. If this malaise is not quickly addressed in an honest and forthright manner, North American Anglicanism will likely be stripped down to a mere shadow of its former self. You only have to glance at the demographic profiles of an uncomfortably large number of our parishes and dioceses to realize that time is running out for more components of this church than many are prepared to admit.

Our first task out of Denver is to be able to acknowledge that the church as we have known it will never be the same again - and then to ask what opportunities new configurations offer. The time is long overdue to turn all structures upside down and to create a new kind of partnership that provides a rich array of cutting-edge support and services to congregations - that is, the people on the front lines. The services necessary to enable parishes to become vibrant and evangelistic missionary units will be expensive, and a constantly expanding knowledge base will be required if we are to be effective in the long term. The question is whether we can afford not to do this.

The second task coming out of Denver is for the whole church to begin a dialogue about the sort of relationship between the various levels of denominational life that will enable the right kind of partnership structure to emerge. Be assured that if we do not face up to realities, more radical action is bound to force changes that will be more painful, and not necessarily more effective. Some will say (and they may be right), that the crisis is upon us and this is going to happen whatever. In these circumstances, the goal is to be focused on our mission and not to lose our heads.

In the past, loyalty is something that the Episcopal Church expected from its members as a matter of course. Today at every level of our life, loyalty is not unthinkingly conferred, but has to be earned, re-earned, and then earned again by those who lead and make decisions. Episcopal parishes are going to respond with enthusiasm to diocesan and national structures that are streamlined, efficient, Christ-centered and prayer-driven, but which above all think of the congregation and its needs first, rather than their own survival or well being.

Organizations and organisms of every kind face moments when their right to continue existing is tested. The Episcopal Church has reached such a turning point. If we grasp the opportunity, then it is possible that we have as amazing a future as we have had a past. But we need to be ready to embrace the reality that tomorrow will definitely not be more of the same. o

The Rev. Richard Kew is a priest of the Diocese of Tennessee. He has been involved in a wide range of mission ventures over the last quarter century.