The Church Times has published an analysis of the changes between the Nassau and St. Andrew's drafts of the proposed Anglican Covenant. They highlight the differences in an article here.
The explicit reference to the 39 articles has been removed at the suggestion of provinces which do not recognize them as normative for their lives.
Churches are expected to commit themselves to "upholding and proclaiming 'a pattern of Christian theological and moral reasoning and discipline that is rooted in and answerable to the teaching of holy scripture and the catholic tradition and reflects the renewal of humanity and the whole created order..."
There is an apparent deprecation of the role of the Primates meeting as the primary decision making body of the Communion and instead a new emphasis on the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) as the new body of final arbitration.
Specifically from the article:
"In section three, ‘Our Unity and Common Life’, much concern had been expressed about the perceived growing influence of the Primates, and the over-importance accorded to Primates’ Meetings in decision-making. The Archbishop of Canterbury is ‘accorded a primacy of honour and respect as first among equals’ and as ‘a focus and means of unity’. He exercises his ministry ‘collegially with his brother primates’.
The Primates’ Meeting — called for ‘mutual support, prayer and counsel’ — now comes fourth in a chronological list of the Instruments of Communion, after the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference, and the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC).
The meat of the changes between the drafts seems to be in the section that discusses the details of conflict resolution. According to the Church Times article this section is "completely rewritten". The new section explicitly lays out the suggested process and mediation model.
‘While the Instruments of Communion have no legislative, executive or judicial authority in our provinces, except where provided in their own laws, we recognise them as those bodies by which our common life in Christ is articulated and sustained, and which therefore carry a moral authority which commands our respect.’
‘Any such request would not be binding on a Church unless recognised as such by that Church. However, commitment to the Covenant entails an acknowledgement that in the most extreme circumstance, where a Church chooses not to adopt the request of the Instruments of Communion, that decision may be understood by the Church itself, or by the resolution of the Instruments of Communion, as relinquishment by that Church of the force and meaning of the Covenant’s purpose, until they re-establish their covenant relationship with other member Churches.’
Finally the article points out what a number of other readers have noted, the new draft makes explicit changes to strengthen the language which lays out the principle of autonomy that a number of Anglican provinces felt was being encroached upon in the first draft:
The appendix says that no process shall affect the autonomy of any Church of the Communion. No process shall exceed five years from the date of consultation. Any matter ‘involving relinquishment by a Church of the force and meaning of Covenant purposes’ is to be decided solely by that Church or the ACC."
Read the rest here.