Tobias Haller takes issue with a recent essay by two English bishops advocating the approval of the proposed Anglican Covenant. He notes that while the covenant is often advanced as a mean of improving relationships in the Anglican Communion, nothing in the text achieves that end:
[T]he Covenant has no mechanism for improving relationships, and only explicit threats for diminishing them, in the text itself. It is full of good intentions towards "commitment to one another as churches" but when it comes to brass tacks it is all about the management of difficulties through the imposition of "relational consequences." The carrot is only a picture of a carrot for future reference, while the stick is real. Rejecting the Covenant is the surest way to indicate a desire to continue to live in peace, and to consolidate relationships without any coercive "consequences" imposed as a result of disagreements that have arisen, or may arise.
The good news about this essay is that it makes clear that English bishops, who overwhelmingly support the proposed covenant, are becoming increasingly worried that the clergy and laity will not do the same.