The Most Rev. Edmond L. Browning, Presiding Bishop, made a major plea for reconciliation in the church in his address to the January meeting of the Executive Council [TLC, Feb. 16]. He said that too many Episcopalians have yet to capture a vision of the partnership we are called to at all levels in the life of the church. However, he criticized dioceses that withhold funds "as a way of making a political statement," and accused them of "poor stewardship based on flawed theology." He said, "Withholding funds as a form of protest is contrary to our received understanding of what it means to live in a covenant community ..."

These criticisms will not reconcile the protesting dioceses and the national church that the Presiding Bishop represents. The only time I ever hear bishops talk about the corporate nature of the Episcopal Church is when they plead for money from stubborn parishes or dioceses. Bishop Browning didn't say anything about our covenant community when he signed a statement in 1979 saying he wouldn't abide by the General Convention's resolution on sexual morality. He doesn't say anything about "flawed theology" when Bishop Spong flaunts beliefs contrary to scripture and the tradition of the Christian church. I don't hear the Presiding Bishop speak of the "vision of partnership" except to accuse people who disagree with him of lacking it.

When I became an Episcopalian in 1974, the corporate doctrine of "church" was one part of the Episcopal Church's theology that appealed to me. Coming from a Baptist congregational background, I liked the idea of a church that acted in unity, worshiped in unity and believed in unity. Only later did I learn that it didn't exist.

I've often thought about polity differences between the Southern Baptists, from which I came, and the Episcopal Church, where I became a real Christian after a conversion experience. The Southern Baptists gave me all the answers, but without a sense of the love and mystery of God. They pretend to be congregational but are in practice autocratic and hierarchical. Since the fundamentalists took over a few years ago, individuals, pastors and congregations who don't adhere to the party line are shunned, at best, and expelled, at worst. Both charismatic congregations and congregations that ordain women (odd combination) have been expelled from local associations. Dozens of moderate seminary professors, including friends of mine, have been forced out of their jobs.

The Episcopal Church, on the other hand, pretends to be a corporate church but is, in fact, a congregational church. Bishops and dioceses do what they want without regard to national church policy or practice. Seminaries do what they want. Congregations do what they want and ignore the diocese, especially if they have a large enough endowment. Doctrinal discipline doesn't exist in the Episcopal Church because Episcopal doctrine doesn't exist outside of the Nicene Creed. One of the implications of the ecclesiastical court's decision in the Bishop Righter case, I believe, is that no theological basis remains to argue about the corporate nature of the Episcopal Church.

An editorial in THE LIVING CHURCH emphasized that "the church is not a democracy" [TLC, March 2] which is true. In theory, the church depends upon its succession of bishops as "guardians of the faith" and interpreters of scripture, tradition and reason. But what happens when the bishops cannot agree among themselves? The whole system begins to unwind, which has been happening since Bishop Browning and the other 20 bishops signed the 1979 protest statement over that convention's position on sexual morality.

The time has come for Episcopalians to recognize and accept the fact that we are a congregational church. That recognition can offer a theological framework for moving beyond the current impasse on sexual morality. If there is no official expectation that members of a congregation follow national church positions and policies, then the exodus of defecting congregations and individuals could cease.

Let bishops, dioceses and congregations choose what they want to believe and do. That is, in fact, already the case because the Episcopal Church has no canonical procedure to discipline those who don't.

The only way that the Episcopal Church touches 95 percent of all its members is at the congregational level. Only clergy, bishops and less than 3 percent of the laity, I estimate, are involved at diocesan or national levels. Most people are attracted to an Episcopal congregation because of its beautiful liturgy, reverent worship or music. They may like its Sunday school programs or the rector's preaching. I've never heard anyone say they came to the Episcopal Church because of its ecclesiastical polity, the national church's position on anything, or because they liked having their money support a diocesan and national structure.

Think about it some more. Is a congregational church such a bad thing? Does any evidence exist that the first-century churches were anything different? Does any evidence exist that the Episcopal Church is still anything different? o

David E. Sumner is an associate professor of journalism at Ball State University. He resides in Anderson, Ind.