My fellow conservatives within the Episcopal Church in principle make much of the 39 Articles and rightly bemoan the diminution of their authority in the life of our church, but are they not themselves guilty of repudiating article XXVI when they refuse the ministry of "unworthy" diocesan bishops?

Anglicans, as catholic Christians, affirm that alleged personal immorality or adherence to false doctrine with respect to faith or morals does not negate the validity of ministrations by those duly ordained. To maintain otherwise is to fall into the superficially attractive but ultimately untenable pitfall of Donatism, the doctrines about sanctity developed in the 4th century. For, after all, who is truly worthy to minister in the Name of Christ? Who, outside of our Lord himself, is morally (or doctrinally) perfect? Adoption of the Donatist position puts one in a terrible dilemma. Since none of us is perfect, who decides what degree of imperfection is permissible in the minister before his or her ministrations become invalid?

Those conservatives who refuse the ministration of their diocesan bishops must examine themselves to see whether they have become tainted with Donatism.

Unchecked infection with Donatism almost inevitably leads to schismatic secession. It seems to me that the last thing the fragmented body of Christ needs is another mini-denomination. In general, those who have seceded seem to be driven by a schismatic demon into further secessions such that they now present a bewildering variety of mutually antagonistic sects hardly attractive to most persons who truly understand and value traditional Anglicanism. If one feels compelled by conscience to leave the Episcopal Church, it is far better to find another expression of Christianity in which one can be reasonably comfortable rather than form an "independent episcopal congregation" which is, of course, a contradiction in terms. Although Christians ought to pray and witness for truth and holiness in the body of Christ, one does well to remember that there will not be a flawless church until the Parousia.

It is important for secession-minded Episcopalians to remember that they will probably have to leave their church property behind. While the legal situation varies somewhat in each state, in most places legislative statutes and judicial precedents have vested ultimate property rights in bishops and dioceses rather than rectors, wardens and vestries. Moreover, protracted suits and recriminations (and both sides - bishops and seceding parishes - are guilty of exacerbating this process) ultimately bring no honor to the cause of Christ or his church.

I believe that if one wishes to be a "continuing Anglican," it is best to stay in the Episcopal Church with all its liberal hierarchs who behave so illiberally toward conservatives, its rampant heresies, etc. We must faithfully and sacrificially witness to God's truth under what will often be adverse circumstances. I am comforted by the verse, "He who preserves to the end shall be saved." One is, after all, saved by Christ, not by correct moral theology, godly bishops or works of righteousness of whatever sort.

The best insurance against a total liberal takeover is the continued presence of a faithful remnant of orthodox priests and people. Much patience and forbearance is required for this strategy. It is also necessary for us conservatives to make sure that a "strong stance for righteousness" is not a thinly veiled manifestation of self-righteousness. Sincere Christians can honestly differ over important issues without breaking fellowship. We must make sure that when we attempt to speak the truth, we attempt to speak it in love.

I am also amazed by the excessive hand wringing and lack of confidence in God's providence on the part of many of my conservative colleagues. Any cursory study of church history will amply demonstrate that the church has survived serious error on the part of those in high places. In the middle of the 4th century, for example, the majority of important sees were occupied by Arians aided and abetted by the formidable power of the emperor. The church survived by God's grace. Are we facing a greater crisis now than then?

Will the present House of Bishops have enough integrity to discipline its members who violate their ordination vows? Probably not. Will all bishops be as gracious as Paul Marshall [TLC, May 23] in putting the spiritual welfare of young confirmands above the prideful will to preserve prelatical prerogatives? Probably not.

Nevertheless, conservatives have little or no ground to oppose diocesan bishops with dubious theology from officiating in their parishes. It should be absolutely clear that the bishops' ministrations are valid notwithstanding whatever faults they might possess. Rather, we should endeavor to win over those whom we feel to be in error to a more orthodox understanding by fervent and earnest prayer, gracious persuasion and exemplary lives both personal and ecclesial. o

The Rev. Kenneth Aldrich is the rector of Trinity Church, Red Bank, N.J.