Hat-tipping to Stand Firm: Sarah Hey, incorporating comment from Dan Martins, further confirms that Sydney re lay presidency etc, has made a very bad move, with little or no support from those in North America who saw New Hampshire etc as a very bad move. Along the way, David Ould's attempt to justify Sydney's action is given short shift!
Sarah points to an excellent response in a comment posted by 'boringbloke' on David Ould's article re the Sydney notion that preaching is equally important as the sacrament so if lay people can preach then they can also preside. I particularly like this sentence in the comment:
"If you feel so strongly that you have to proceed with this, then form your own new church rather than rewriting the rules of ours".
As Sarah Hey points out, that church has already been formed and is called the Plymouth or Open Brethren!
Incidentally David Ould simply does not get the objection to Sydney's decision which is that it is contrary to the BCP Ordinal which is expressly upheld by the Jerusalem Declaration - a commenter makes this point but his response is inadequate.
Final note: lay presidency is not an opening up of the presbyterate to the laity but a replacement of the presbyterate. If Sydney Diocese proceeds on this path it will be a 'new' church.