Wait, wait, wait . . . isn't the SCAC one of the 'instruments of communion'? Isn't this a bit like the tail wagging the dog?

Oh, and did I miss the memo from the SCAC on the human rights violations in Rwanda and Uganda with regard to LGBT people?

It's all madness.

No.
The Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion should graciously rock the boat of the Ugandan parliament by speaking out against the proposed anti-gay legislation.

Well, how nice of them to notice: "3. Continuing cross-jurisdictional activity within the Communion."

That said, I still want to know when anyone started talking about the Joint Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council and the Primates' Meeting as "Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion." It seems to me that this appears to officially confirm the authority that the Joint Standing Committee has arrogated, with Canterbury's support.

There is I suppose a good spin, though, to put on that: if the Joint Standing Committee is seen to speak so fully for three Instruments (the Primates Meeting, the ACC, and the Archbishop) as to be effective, surely the rest of the Communion can respect that the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church can speak authoritatively for the General Convention.

Marshall Scott

The "Standing Committee" of a mythical organization that has never had a sitting requests that real organization, meeting in real sessions, should do its will -- with some sort of gracious snarkiness to fall upon the first two (named) violators and a bit more kowtowing to fall uon the third (unnamed) ones. Big whoop! And the new in this is...?

I have real problems with the name of this committee, which was invented about twenty minutes ago to make it seem more authoritative than it is. As Andrew points out, it is actually a joint meeting of the standing committees of the Primates Meeting and the Anglican Consultative Council. The name change is further evidence of the archbishop's penchant for doing by appellation what they cannot do by legislation. The members of the Anglican Communion have not agreed to the creation of a body that has the authority vested in a Standing Committee. Yet by changing the title of existing groups, such a committee now exists. The fact that Rowan Williams is a brilliant guy with a kind of distracted academic affect obscures the fact that he's making an audacious power grab.

(The name change, I should note, was ratified at the last meeting of the ACC, but my point still stands.)

This statement fascinates me in terms of noting the issues the "Standing Committee of The Anglican Communion" doesn't address? What about discussing unjust and prejudicial matters in Uganda as other commentators have stated. If that's too hot, (which is a rather important matter unto itself) why don't they issue a statement regarding the Anglican Communion's concern with the lack of an environmental statement from the international conference in Copenhagen? Such a statement on this or other matters of communion-wide concern seem more critical to me. Finally, I continue to wonder what sort of canonical or ecclesiastical "weight" does the Windsor Report hold. Specifically, in terms of the "Standing Committees" comments of today, what about sections e and h of Resolution 14.09 calling for provincial conversations where applications of the moratoria create concerns and coincidentally call the communion to repentance, conversion, and renewal.

This is a ¨Steering Committee¨ complete with a loaded rudder...it´s not enough for the Archbishop of Canterbury to be cowardly when facing the possible GENOCIDE of LGBT in Africa and Jamaica he needs a front group? The whole ¨taking advantage¨ part is also wrangling me...just OUR luck to have a snide spiritual leader when we need REAL actions/speak of hope and love for one another at The Anglican Communion.