My information dovetails with Jim Naughton’s below. The sections cover a lot of interesting topics: Gene Robinson coming to Lambeth, for example, and boundary crossings. I hear that some of the language is so controversial the final form MAY need to be voted on by section.
My early sense is that this feels like an attempt at appeasement, rather than to answer the requests on their own terms. In other words, it is a fudge of sorts but with lots of components.
If indeed this is what is coming, I am praying for a minority report.
I am probably wrong, but I think it’s all over. Things are moving now and what ever comes is irrelevent. The ABC’s comments were the tipping point. We all know that anything coming out of TEC cannot be trusted.
Perhaps the “committee of four” was not that far off the mark. Maybe, just maybe, Bruno and Chane were writing the majority report and Stanton and Howe were writing the minority report.
It could happen!
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
We all know that the final resolution will say “(1) We want to stay in the Anglican Communion … (2) yadda, yadda, yadda … (3) we’re not changing anything we’re doing.”
Any other response would be politically and intellectually impossible for the great majority of bishops.
I don’t see that the wordsmithing of the yadda-yadda-yadda section will make much of a difference.
Word-smithing to make it LOOK like it is the Communion dumping TEC, instead of TEC “walking apart”….so these frauds can go back to their enclaves and proclaim how hard they worked to stay in the Communion. *Takes deep breath, remembers Kendall’s advice to temper comments*