THE ATTRACTION of the Roman Catholic Church is its certainty. At least, that is what people who like certainty find attractive. Some of us see it as scarily authoritarian, and seek a little more humility from our Church leaders. For us, the attraction of the Anglican Church is its very lack of certainty. Thankfully, it does not claim always to know the mind of God.

This is the main difference between Anglicans and both Roman Catholics and Puritans. Anglicanism is not meant to be hardline and infallible. It is supposed to be a benevolent and broad-ranging Church: a house with many mansions.

That is why many of us are watching the attempted takeover of the Anglican Church by conservative evangelicals with horror. Today, at Lambeth Palace, the 38 Primates of the Anglican Communion are due to thrash out the arguments over homosexuality. Already, the conservative majority have held a pre-meeting meeting at the evangelical church, All Souls, Langham Place, to plot their strategy. This caucus approach reminds me of the Militant Tendency in the 1980s Labour Party.

And the way the Labour leadership dealt with Militant was to face it down, not give in to its intimidation. We don’t know exactly what pressure Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, has been under, but the net result is that the conservatives have been emboldened to push him even harder.

At today’s meeting, they are expected to call for the US Church and the diocese of New Westminster in Canada to be suspended from the Anglican Communion, if they don’t retract their positions. The US Church is in trouble for having elected — lawfully — a gay bishop, Gene Robinson. New Westminster has sanctioned blessings for same-sex couples.

But, as the Church Times wisely pointed out this week: “These were not the first such blessings, nor the first gay men to become bishops. What characterised these acts and appointments was that they were made openly and without shame.”

So the evangelicals have to answer the question: if it is wrong for gay people to become priests and bishops, what are we to do with the thousands of of gay priests and bishops who are already serving? Should they be cast out of office? Or should that happen only if they are honest enough to admit to their orientation? If the answer to the last question is “yes”, then the conservatives are endorsing dishonesty, a sin in anyone’s book. If, instead, they follow through the logic of their position, then a witchhunt should now rage through the Anglican Church and all homosexuals who hold office should be sacked. That this would also drive away half of all churchgoers and reduce Anglicanism to a narrow sect should not bother them. What matters, after all, is the word of the Bible.

There is no doubt that churchgoers would leave. Already many liberal Anglicans, repelled by the Church leadership’s obsession with homosexuality, have stopped attending. The number of Liberal ordinands for the priesthood is dwindling. Morale in the Church of England is high only among evangelicals.

Surprisingly, though, those active congregations that remain are much more tolerant of homosexuality than the conservative evangelicals would have us believe. A fascinating poll of churchgoers in The Sunday Telegraph this week found that 52 per cent thought that active homosexuals should be allowed to become vicars, and that figure rose to 69 per cent for non-practising gays (like Dr John). Seventy per cent said that they would continue to attend church if they discovered that their vicar was an active gay. Only 21 per cent said they would find another church.

It is this practice of picking and choosing churches that could be the saving of the Anglican Communion. The age of the rigid parish system has long gone. People don’t feel obliged to attend their nearest church; they opt for the one in which they feel most comfortable, evangelical or liberal, High or Low Church.

Already this has allowed churches that are vehemently against women priests to seek what is called alternative oversight from a “flying” bishop who shares their view. One of the plans on the table at today’s meeting is to allow alternative oversight right across the Anglican Communion for those churches that disapprove of homosexuality.

In the interests of tolerance and avoiding schism, this may well be the best solution, but only if both sides accept the other’s right to hold their views in good faith. Most liberals are prepared to accept that conservative churches should be allowed alternative oversight, even though such a notion seems to entrench discrimination. In return, evangelicals should agree that gays should be allowed to become priests, even though they don’t want anything to do with them personally.

The Anglican Communion is big enough to encompass such diverse views. And it should be big enough to understand that — however rancorous the debate — this is a marginal matter compared with what the Church should really be concentrating on.

COLUMNS FIGHT CRIME

TWO WEEKS ago I wrote about the theft of my handbag. Many thanks to the readers who e-mailed me with similar tales of police inaction after their possessions were stolen. May I offer them some advice? It is quite easy to get good service from the police. All you have to do is give them some bad publicity.

In my case, it was miraculous. The day my column appeared, I received an e-mail from the office of the Commissioner of the Met offering sincere apologies, lunch and a promise of swift action. When the local CID have the Commissioner himself breathing down their necks, they certainly get a move on. I have had gold-plated service ever since. My precious diary and address book was found in a crack house frequented by prostitutes in South London, and restored to me. They are now following up CCTV pictures of people who have taken out store cards, pretending to be me, and spent more than £2,000 in my name. They even kindly alerted the House of Commons to the loss of my pass.

Why, though, does it have to take an article in The Times to prod the police into action? And what are other victims to do who don’t have the luxury of such an outlet for their frustration?

maryann.sieghart@thetimes.co.uk

Times Recommends

• In the real world, the public sector must pay
• Playing politics in a land of double Dutch
• Be like the plinth people: not set in stone