Granted, "covenanted" and "federated" are not as catchy as "low" and "high," nor as easy to discern from outward appearances, but I believe that these categories, even more than "reappraiser" and "reasserter" accurately maps the fault lines in The Episcopal Church and wider Anglican Communion.

The reason I prefer "covenanted" and "federated" is that it also cuts across the conservative/liberal divide and allows room for moderates on either side. "Covenanted" Anglicans aren't simply those opposed to same-sex unions and the ordination of non-celibate gay people, and "Federated" Anglicans aren't simply those in favor of such practices, though one might expect the majority of people on one or the other side of these issues to end up disproportionately in either camp. Rather, "covenanted" and "federated" has to do with issues of Anglican identity and authority, of how one envisions good church order and discipline, the interplay between interdependence and autonomy, the local and the universal, the ecumenical and the denominational.

These two parties, the Covenanted and the Federated, are still emerging parties, as there is no formal Covenant, yet, and the Anglican Communion and TEC are, at least for the moment, de facto federations. But the two terms do denote the desire of Anglicans to move in one direction or another.

And for now, both covenanted and federated Anglicans live in an uneasy and conflicted coexistence. Rowan Williams is asking us: Can we live like this?