According to the Anglican Journal, the so called pastoral visitors from the Archbishop of Canterbury, "...noted “a widespread sense of weariness with the whole business of same-sex blessings,” as well as a “palpable desire to get on with the business of mission."
(i) Did the visitors think that perhaps the weariness "with the whole business of same-sex blessings" might be somehow related to the very human desire not to have to do the hard work of change?
Unaccompanied by any further observation their remarks on weariness are no pastoral help at all.
They noted a "palpable desire to get on with the business of mission."
(2) Did the visitors have any sense that perhaps there might be a relation between blessing commitments by and among people and the business of mission, which seems to include restoring "all people to unity with God and each other in Christ"?
The "business" of mission is not at all limited to going somewhere else and mucking about in the name of Christ (as perhaps the pastoral visitors themselves might view their work). Mission is about unity expressed in ways that pastoral visitors for the "instrument of unity," that is the Archbishop of Canterbury can hardly match.
The hard work that has been occasioned by the hope of committed Christians that their relationships might be strengthened by blessing is itself a work of mission.
The Incarnation eventually has to be imaged with Christ having an Asian nose, or as black African, or as Navajo, or as a woman, or as Gay, because if it can't be so imaged, then it can't be imaged as inclusive of pasty-gray balding straight (although increasingly bent) guys like me.
We are restored to unity as Christ is seen by each of us in all of us, and God is all in all.
At least that's how I see it.