Despite a number of very clear motions at the 2017 General Synod, debate still rages. davidould.net has learned from a number of sources that at their recent annual meeting in March the bishops of Australia made a private agreement on how to proceed on the matter but have embargoed any publication of the details. davidould.net understands this was the only way that the more liberal members of the house could be persuaded to sign up to the fairly conservative agreement.
Thus the appointment of Treloar raises a particular dilemma for the national church:
Given the overwhelmingly conservative nature of the 2017 General Synod motions and the recent bishops’ agreement (albeit the exact details remain unknown), how can Treloar be consecrated as a bishop who promises to uphold, promote and defend church teaching when he is not only on the public record as being categorically opposed to it on a (perhaps the) key issue of contention but has even indicated that he may have already broken church law and teaching on the issue on multiple occasions?
How can Treloar himself make those promises in good conscience?