tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post2415678042946223224..comments2024-02-15T03:32:25.686-05:00Comments on Preludium, Anglican and Episcopal futures: The Anglican Covenant: a Church Times guide: out nowMark Harrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06871096746243771489noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-57671835617358790872011-03-29T02:03:19.814-04:002011-03-29T02:03:19.814-04:00What a mess. Hopefully the idea of a Covenant wil...What a mess. Hopefully the idea of a Covenant will receive enough opposition across the AC to be scrapped altogether.Baron Bluehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069762940589881358noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-13679262444597409512011-03-28T13:03:31.316-04:002011-03-28T13:03:31.316-04:00Point of Order, part of the difficulty is that the...Point of Order, part of the difficulty is that the proponents haven't been convincing in saying it's not about punishment. If that's true, than there's little point to section 4. Individual national/provincial churches have managed "relational consequences" to this point without an over-arching committee. <br /><br />It is also a complication that there are two groups of opponents, if not three: those who think the Covenant is too binding (or potentially so), thus inhibiting "local expression;" those who think the Covenant isn't binding enough, and so inhibiting the level of unity (and unanimity they desire); and perhaps those for whom too much structure and centralization is a separate issue. For those concerned about centralization, the issue divides over who might/should be in charge. Those who think the Covenant isn't binding enough also want the primates to be the decision makers. Those who think the covenant is too binding aren't sure they want any decision makers, but could probably live with the ACC. In either case, there is some suspicion of the Standing Committee as too much a mix, with too many folks involved appointed by "them" (Primates Meeting or ACC, depending on your perspective).<br /><br />If we had been living with the Covenant in 2003, would there have been issues raised with the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada? Certainly; but, as you suggest, we don't know what the consequences would have been. If we had been living with the Covenant in 2000, at the foundation of AMiA, would there ahev been issues raised with Rwanda and Southeast Asia? Certainly; but, again, the results are hard to imagine with clarity.Marshall Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02807749717320495495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-62148506709756429142011-03-28T11:59:18.252-04:002011-03-28T11:59:18.252-04:00Since the proposed covenant isn't about punish...Since the proposed covenant isn't about punishment, has any proponent suggested how TEC and ACoC actions would have been handled or how our current situation would have been different had the covenant been in place in 2003?<br /><br />I am concerned that proponents are diligent in telling us what the covenant <i>isn't</i> and opponents haven't offered an argument that moves beyond the possiblity of punishment.<br /><br />It is customary to offer a test drive before buying a new car, especially when the old one still works (even if it needs some work).Point of Orderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11197275383322593717noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-45706697941130437132011-03-26T09:24:14.026-04:002011-03-26T09:24:14.026-04:00The Anglican Covenant is the best we can do to res...The Anglican Covenant is the best we can do to resolve a "crisis" in the Communion? Really? It's biggest sin is an utter lack of religious imagination.Elizabeth Kaetonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06787552280232329081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-56207969435225675892011-03-25T15:19:40.597-04:002011-03-25T15:19:40.597-04:00What a mess of pottage is the daft covenant! Bish...What a mess of pottage is the daft covenant! Bishop Alan doesn't mince words. I like that.June Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723016934182800437noreply@blogger.com