In an earlier post to my blog I gave some unsolicited “Thoughts for Executive Council,” as they were about to meet to consider a response to the Primate’s request that we not send our normal delegation to ACC but rather send a group to “explain.” The publication of the ACC schedule prompts me to wonder if one of my concerns has become a reality.
I said in my post, “
The schedule for the consultation (which is what the presentation of representatives is being called) consists of three sessions: The first for the ECUSA presentation, the second for the Anglican Church of Canada and the third for “input from other Provinces.”
We know who the spokespersons are for ECUSA and the ACCanada. If this is to be a conversation between the delegates to the ACC and the participants invited from ECUSA and ACCanada, I assume “input from other Provinces” will be provided by the regular delegation of those provinces.
Perhaps that is precisely what is meant: Having listened to the two presentations the delegates from other provinces would in this third session respond and offer input, questions, etc.
But if the “input” consists of opinion, information and the like from persons other than the seated delegates, this is somehow an extension of presentation into debate, pro and con, with the ACC delegations hearing out ‘both sides’ of an issue, to some end not yet clear. First, I hope that this is not the case. If that is the case, it would be helpful to have such speakers clearly identified before the sessions begin.