The verdict on the Covenant was

9-1 in favour. Actually, last night's meeting at Theology House on the Anglican Covenant:Progress or Stalemate? was more interesting than 'for' versus 'against' (though both views were represented across those present). The evening's short presentations and much longer discussions indicated the vitality of the 'autonomy has priority over interdependence'  and 'interdependence has priority over autonomy' views of Communion life. It offered evidence of the extent of lack of knowledge about the Covenant (i.e. some had come specifically to find out more about the Covenant). The discussion underlined some of the most repeated concerns about the Covenant as the e-discussion of it continues around the globe: renewed Communion stuctures will be under-represented by women, lacking in the voices of laity, liable to mistrust on the basis of past performance, etc.

It was good to be reminded that there should be a common life possible for Anglicans because we belong together by virtue of our life in (the one) Christ. Why can we not share a common life together?

For me, one of the best things said was that the Covenant should bring us together. There are many signs that the Covenant is not doing that - are we considering with care why we are not being united by the Covenant? The question also arose, however, about what alternative proposal is emerging from those against the Covenant as to what will undo our disintegration.

As to the question of 'progress or stalemate?', there was serious recognition that we seem to be closer to stalemate across the Communion than to progress.

This wasn't said last night, so I will add it in this morning: the Primates Meeting in January could be the game-breaker, the momentum mover towards progress or the moment when we all realise we are at a stalemate.