the difference between punishment sanctions (which could come from capricious action by the esteemed Primates) and simply requiring the Episcopal Church recognize the consequences of our actions is this: Sanctions proceed from power being exercised on the condemned, consequences proceed from the condemned own actions.
The difference is this: To the extent that the Episcopal Church did something wrong, it is their own fault, and we simply have to take the consequences.
Well there it is.
But it reminds me of something – the Anglican Covenant, a document by the way that has not been ratified by the Church of England, nor by the Episcopal Church. Here is what section four of that document says about consequences:
(4.2.7) On the basis of the advice received, the Standing Committee shall make recommendations as to relational consequences which flow from an action incompatible with the Covenant…
The Rev. Mr. Harris, as with seemingly all liberal commentators on the Primates “gathering” apparently missed the point as it was laid out by the ABoC in his invitations and subsequent comments about the meeting. The purpose of the initial “gathering” was to allow the Primates to set the agenda for a meeting (if an agenda could be decided). I think +Welby anticipated that it was quite possible that the Communion would split at the close of business on Monday. That did not happen. At some point on Tuesday, an actual meeting began (rocky, at first, but started), and the “consequences” “sanctions” or “discipline” (depending on your point of view) were the result of that meeting.
The ball is now in Justin Welby’s court, and it is up to him to enforce the consequences as future meetings are called. If there is indeed a 2018 Primates meeting, one assumes that there will be a review of “progress” and possibly some determination on the process that will be followed at the end of the 3 years. Note that one place where Welby got pretty slippery was the “3 year” benchmark- designed to fall between Primates meetings, so he can restore TEC to full membership for Lambeth invitation purposes, ala RW, PRIOR to the Primates meeting in 2020.
Will be quite interesting to see who gets appointed to the follow up committee. Will this be another situation where Wales, Canada and Brazil (or some such) get appointments, or will the GS and Gafcon get proportional representation (3/4 of the committee) in order to actually assure that the purposes of the Primates are followed through?