Covenant resolutions: compared

Lionel Deimel analyzes the General Covnention resolutions on the proposed Anglican Covenant:

The seven Covenant resolutions submitted for consideration so far are:
A126: “Consideration of the Anglican Covenant,” proposed by the Executive Council
A145, “Continue Dialogue in the Anglican Communion,” proposed by the Executive Council
B005, “Ongoing Commitment to The Anglican Covenant Process,” proposed by the Rt. Rev. Ian Douglas
B006, “Affirming the Anglican Covenant,” proposed by the Rt. Rev. John Bauerschmidt
D006, “Consideration of a Covenant for Communion in Mission,” proposed by Mr. Jack Tull
D007, “Response to Anglican Covenant,” proposed by the Rev. Canon Susan Russell
D008, “Affirm Anglican Communion Participation,” proposed by the Rev. Tobias Haller BSG
Six of the resolutions can be ranked from most accepting of the Covenant to least accepting:
Tobias Haller’s resolution (D008) is something of an outlier, about which I will have more to say ....

Deimel compares the various resolutions on the basis of Titles, Thanks, Communion Membership, Participation in the Communion, Other communion commitments, Action, Autonomy, Other Covenant related actions, Follow-up actions, Financial commitments, other Episcopal Church actions. The chart is here.
Returning to the resolutions themselves, I personally am happy only with D006 and D007. It is hard to view D008 as a standalone statement of the church. One could imagine combining provisions of these three resolutions to create a strong view of what our church wishes to stand for and the kind of Communion that can justify our participation.

Resolution B006 is, I think, a nonstarter, though it will clearly have its supporters in Indianapolis. Its embrace of the Covenant, would, I think, cause our church to be under siege by the reactionary elements of the Communion for the foreseeable future and would, eventually, result in the demise of The Episcopal Church.

A126/A145 and B005 have the flavor of Anglican fudge and a faint odor of surrender. B005 seems to send us down a road we do not want to travel and suggests that most of the Covenant text is acceptable, which many believe it is not. A126/A145, while seeming to reject the Covenant, agree, in principle, that we have an obligation to consult with the rest of the Communion before we may do what we think good and proper for our church in this time and place. All three resolutions suggest that a modified version of the Covenant presently on offer might be acceptable to The Episcopal Church. I can only ask for how many decades we are willing to expend our energies, money, and enthusiasm on the enterprise of creating such a version.

It is my hope, then, that the Committee on World Mission will focus its attention on D006, D007, and D008. It is time for The Episcopal Church not only to act on its beliefs, but also to stop behaving as though, in our heart of hearts, we feel guilty for doing so. We should be acting boldly for Christ and not be ashamed of the gospel as we understand it.

Read it all here.

Comments (1)

Yes. it is high time we stopped apologizing for the Gospel (Note: Leviticus is not the Gospel).

If anyone needs to aplogize it's the other folks for being arrogant, judgemental busybodies.

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Advertising Space