Despite protests to the contrary, it is clear that Section 4 is punitive. It is a break with the history of the Communion, which has been a warm fellowship of churches in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury and who share common sources of worship and tradition.
“…we are in relationship already with one another, quite apart from signing or not signing a document.”
Imposing penalties for actions or decisions deemed incompatible with the Covenant is inconsistent with our traditional understanding of covenants, as reflected in the marriage covenant or the baptismal covenant. … The deputation believes that the inclusion of such penalties would be antithetical to any covenantal relationship.
Following is the response by the
A wide majority of our members believe that [on-going] Communion processes and direct relationships are far more life-giving in the Gospel and Spirit-filled than pursuing the formal structures offered by the proposed Anglican Covenant.
“IF family means everything AND we all wish our Churches had the power that we used to think the CofE had vis a vis the state – namely that it was THE church of the State, then we are sunk.”
“The proposed covenant is a complex document that could have a major impact on the Episcopal Church and its many vital and longstanding relationships within the wider Anglican Communion,” the Rev. Lowell Grisham said. “We are grateful that well-respected theologians, clergy and lay leaders were willing to analyze it for us.”
As dioceses in the Church of England weigh the Anglican Covenant, the Church Times has put together a reader’s guide that contains articles both pro
Both clergy and laity (the latter overwhelmingly) rejected the Covenant at the Wakefield Diocesan Synod meeting on Saturday 12th March.