Today's (6 May) NZ Herald report is here.
Monday morning comment (revised from first statement): the issue is chasteness and our definition of it.
- Expect huge pressure on our General Synod to change the definition of chasteness (whatever the outcome of this case).
- Expect keen interest from other churches. The Roman Catholic church will not be happy if the state attempts to tell it whom it may accept into its seminaries let alone ordain.
- On Twitter last night I (@petercarrell) pressed this question: what mechanism exists in our church to force a bishop to ordain a person they do not wish to ordain? I can think of no such mechanism.
@frbriand But can a bishop be forced to place his or her hands on a head they do not wish to lay hands on?
— Peter Carrell (@petercarrell) May 5, 2013
I now add to the list of reporting/commenting on this unfolding story, Taonga's article.
Handily placed under it is a link to an important point our friend ++Rowan makes about contemplating departure.
Meanwhile in England the Episcopal Candidate Who Cannot Be Suppressed features again. (I have got behind the paywall for this Times article. I hope you can too.)