The rewording is part of their attempt to achieve precisely this end. For them the shift from talking about \u2018the mind of the Communion as a whole\u2019 in the original Call to \u2018some say, this and others say that\u2019 in the revised version is intended to shift the Call towards the idea that departing from historic position of the churches of the Anglican Communion as Lambeth resolution 1.10 can be acceptable within Anglicanism.<\/p>\n
Secondly on the issue of process, the archbishop promises the bishops that their feedback will be \u2018submitted to the Chair of the Lambeth Calls Working Group,\u2019 but he leaves unclear what will happen to that feedback subsequently. On such an important and divisive issue, what will happen next ought to have been clearly explained in a way that would give everyone confidence in the integrity of the next step in the process.<\/p>\n
Thirdly, in his remarks at the session, he wrongly separates out what resolution 1.10 says about pastoral care from the rest of the resolution. The resolution does say that \u2018all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation are full members of the Body of Christ.\u2019 However, these words have to be read in the context of the resolution\u2019s declaration that \u2018in view of the teaching of Scripture,\u2019 the Lambeth conference \u2018upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those not called to marriage.\u2019<\/p>\n
This context means (a) that being a \u2018believing and faithful\u2019 person who belongs to the body of Christ involves accepting the traditional Christian sexual discipline of absolute sexual fidelity within marriage and absolute sexual abstinence outside it, (b) that this discipline applies to all people whatever the nature of their sexual desire and (c) that ministering \u2018pastorally and sensitively to all\u2019 has to involve helping everyone to live in the way just described.<\/p>\n