Dr Williams describes the Covenant as a tool with which disagreement within the Communion could be managed, even if such disagreement would not be resolved. Katie Sherrod…of Ft. Worth: “It seeks to wrap rings of bureaucratic barbed wire around the Holy Spirit, imprisoning the Spirit in processes of discipline designed to enforce unanimity of theology, of interpretation of Scripture, and who knows what else.

In his first Presidential Address to the Church of England Synod which voted overwhelmingly to accept the Anglican Covenant, the Archbishop of Canterbury urged members to recognize the value of the Covenant for the life of the Anglican Communion. He commented,

“The Covenant text itself represents work done by theologians of similarly diverse views, including several from North America. It does not invent a new orthodoxy or a new system of doctrinal policing or a centralized authority, quite explicitly declaring that it does not seek to override any province’s canonical autonomy. After such a number of discussions and revisions, it is dispiriting to see the Covenant still being represented as a tool of exclusion and tyranny.”

It was a desperate plea by the ABC to the Synod to ratify the Covenant at a time when both liberals and conservatives around the Communion no longer believe it will hold us altogether. His plea won the day. The bishops voted 39 to 0 with the clergy and laity voting overwhelmingly for it as well.

Williams also warned of the consequences if the Church of England does not engage in the inevitable changes that will occur within the Communion, including the affect on Communion relations – which could in turn affect vulnerable churches:

“It is an illusion to think that without some changes the Communion will carry on as usual, and a greater illusion to think that the Church of England can somehow derail the entire process. The unpalatable fact is that certain decisions in any province affect all. We may think they shouldn’t, but they simply do. If we ignore this, we ignore what is already a real danger, the piece-by-piece dissolution of the Communion and the emergence of new structures in which relation to the Church of England and the See of Canterbury are likely not to figure significantly. All very well, you may say; but among the potential casualties are all those areas of interaction and exchange that are part of the lifeblood of our church and of many often quite vulnerable churches elsewhere. These relations are remarkably robust, given the institutional tensions at the moment, and, as I’ve often said, many will survive further disruption. But they will be complicated and weakened by major fracture and realignment.”

Dr Williams describes the Covenant as a tool with which disagreement within the Communion could be managed, even if such disagreement would not be resolved.

Contrast this statement with that of Katie Sherrod, a liberal Episcopal writer from the Potemkin Diocese of Ft. Worth, in her newfound rhetoric about barbed wire and the Covenant: “I know this is exactly what the proposed Anglican Covenant will do to the Anglican Communion. It seeks to wrap rings of bureaucratic barbed wire around the Holy Spirit, imprisoning the Spirit in processes of discipline designed to enforce unanimity of theology, of interpretation of Scripture, and who knows what else. It is a document born out of fear that seeks to force an institutional solution onto a relational problem. It is designed to control and punish.”

These two views draw into sharp focus the diversity of thought and mind about the covenant and what might be its future, if any.

Before the dust settled on the archbishop’s appeal for unity, eight GAFCON/FCA Primates who had met in Oxford in early October released a statement from their meeting. They explained that they will not be present for the next Primates’ meeting to be held in Ireland: “For the sake of Christ and of His Gospel we can no longer maintain the illusion of normalcy and so we join with other Primates from the Global South in declaring that we will not be present at the next Primates’ meeting to be held in Ireland. And while we acknowledge that the efforts to heal our brokenness through the introduction of an Anglican Covenant were well intentioned we have come to the conclusion the current text is fatally flawed and so support for this initiative is no longer appropriate.”

The Primates Council includes The Most Rev’d Gregory Venables, GAFCON/FCA Chair, The Most Rev’d Justice Akrofi, Archbishop, Anglican Province of West Africa The Most Rev’d Robert Duncan, Archbishop, Anglican Church in North America The Most Rev ‘d Emmanuel Kolini, Archbishop, Anglican Church of Rwanda The Most Rev’d Valentino Mokiwa, Archbishop, Anglican Church of Tanzania The Most Rev’d Nicholas Okoh, Archbishop, Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), The Most Rev’d Henry Orombi Archbishop, Church of Uganda And the Most Rev’d Eliud Wabukala, Archbishop, Anglican Church of Kenya.

Together these men represent 80% of the communion, which raises the question: What exactly will the meeting in Dublin next year amount to if the major players are not there?

David W. Virtue is a theologically trained journalist and a pioneer in Internet journalism. He has been a newspaper reporter and editor in New Zealand, Canada and the United States. He studied theology in London, Chicago and Vancouver. www.virtueonline.org