Goodday! I am a Pakistani Christian currently living in England, with a close eye on events in Pakistan, expecially concerning the Churches there as I do research work on the development of Christianity in Pakistan. Anways, I have been keeping abreast about developments concerning the Church of Pakistan over the last few months, and see this conflict as nothing unexpected. For one, the Churches which did form the Church of Pakistan in 1970 were never theologically atuen to each other. Scottish Presbytarians, Lutherans and Anglicans can hardly work together for a long time as one Church. I am not saying that there should be no cooperation, but the mere fact that all of them have a different theological tradition means that they cannot reconcile on all issues, which I think is a must for a United church. So probably if the church breaks up, and still remains in close touch, things will get better. Secondly, no matter what Bishop Malik does, it would still be legal in a Court of Law. This is because it is an established fact that almost all church property, in all the dioceses, is in the name of the Primate of Lahore. This is a fact and thus Dr. Malik has all right to interfere and even take charge when he sees fit. Also, the mere fact that almost half of the Church of Pakistan lives under his jurisdiction gives him additional leverage. Here I am not supporting Dr. Malik in any way bt just describing the facts, which again lead to the question that would it be better if the Church split? I really think that that would help. Being half-Anglican and now living in London, I really think that the real ethos of the Church of England has been lost in the merger and needs to come back. Pace, Nawabzada Yaqoob Ali Khan Bangash yaqoobbangash@hotmail.com