The Rt. Rev. Stacy Sauls, Bishop of Lexington, is a member of the Episcopal Church’s Executive Council. Following the meeting of the council April 13 in Mundelein, Ill., he was interviewed by The Living Church magazine's freelance reporter George Conger concerning the council’s decision to voluntarily withdraw its members from the meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC).

TLC: Will the three ACC delegates from the Episcopal Church be the ones offering an explanation of the Church’s actions? Who will respond to the primates’ request for a theological explanation?

Bishop Sauls: It will be a different group. We had some discussion about “who,” and we left that in the hands of the Presiding Bishop. I don’t think it will be our ACC reps however. I do think it may include (Bishop) Cathy Roskam; but I think that is more because she is part of the theology working group than the fact that she happens to be our ACC representative.

The other thing that was important to us, about Bishop Roskam, was that it was very important for us that one of our voices be a woman bishop. We hated for that to be completely lost. So, I do think she will be one of our presenters in response to the request that we explain the reasons for our actions; the others will not be and will be a representative group from that theology working group, but the point is that they have yet to be chosen.

TLC: To my ears, [Executive Council's letter] was generous, thoughtful, mature, not strident nor combative. Is that a fair characterization? Is that how you would describe it?

Bishop Sauls: That is certainly a fair characterization of the intent. Over and over the words “gracious” and “generous” were used in trying to describe what we were trying to accomplish. We also used the word “honoring” what the primates asked us to do. The council as a whole sees this as an opportunity for reasoned discussion to take place—to allow room for reasoned discussion to take place. To try to indicate our willingness...one of the reasons we are sending our representatives to listen is intended as an expression of our firm desire to be part of the Anglican Communion. That was very much part of everything we talked about.

TLC: Was there a sharp division at the end, or was there widespread support for the decision?

Bishop Sauls: I think there was fairly widespread support at the end. At the beginning of the day I think it is fair to say people were in some ways sort of all over—but with more than half the people having hard positions across the spectrum. Really people had ambivalent positions across the spectrum. Everybody could see the pros and cons of the variety of responses. For example, from one end of the spectrum, of not sending our representatives at all—some people agreed with that, some did not—but there was a general understanding that we wanted to be responsive.

And at the other end of the spectrum, of sending our representatives to take their full seat, voice and vote, even from those who disagreed there was an understanding that we wanted to participate in the conversation and we wanted to honor our ties to the rest of the Communion. We didn’t see how we could do this if we were totally absent.

People kept talking. This was certainly my experience: I found my position changing frequently throughout the day. Struggle is a word we used to describe it. It was a struggle to try to craft the right thing. And in the end, I think we did a pretty good job.

TLC: One thing that has been shared with me about today’s work has been the leadership of the Presiding Bishop. Is it fair to say that the Presiding Bishop was a leader today?

Bishop Sauls: Yes, I definitely think that the Presiding Bishop was a leader today. And it is definitely fair to say that the Executive Council wanted the Presiding Bishop to take that role. Foremost on virtually everyone’s mind was wanting to hear from the Presiding Bishop because we knew that was the best source, our best link, to what others in the wider Communion were thinking. Especially what they were thinking after the House of Bishops’ Covenant Statement and whether that had altered people’s perceptions and maybe opened up new ways of conversation.

So people were, first and foremost, intent on his counsel as to what others in the Communion were looking for from us and how to stay committed to what we believed our principles to be, but be responsive in our relationships with others.

TLC: What would you want the global south leaders to take away from this? What would you want some of the more strident people to take away from this?

Bishop Sauls: Clearly the key word of the day is listening. I would hope that others in the Communion would hear us, be able to listen to us say that we are trying to sincerely respond to you. We value our relationships with you more highly than we may have expressed. And we want to do everything in our power to make those relationships stronger.

I am not sure the most strident voices in the Communion are the ones that I think will hear us. I hope they will. I hope everyone will be able to correctly interpret what we are trying to do. I am more optimistic that the more moderate voices will see us make a good faith attempt to be their partner.

TLC: People like Archbishop Eames, or Archbishop Ndungane?

Bishop Sauls: Yes, exactly. The conversation is strident, and those are the people who need the space to be able to be the more moderate voice. I hope what we did will help them in that regard.

Read more on Executive Council’s decision here:

· Council to Send Observers to ACC Meeting

· Presiding Bishop: More to Anglican Unity Than ACC

· Archbishop of Canterbury Commends Executive Council Letter

· Bishops Affirm Loyalty to Communion

To read more news, features, and commentaries not available online, we invite you to subscribe to The Living Church magazine. To learn more, click here.