Intriguing. People actually read what we publish in Aotearoa New Zealand!!
Thus the Anglican Communion Institute takes up a Taonga report of the proceedings of our GS on the Covenant.
And is neither happy nor satisfied with what we decided.
Read here.
What a mess the Covenant, and the group/committee/body which needs to be constituted properly to implement it, is turning out to be.
Or are the concerns misplaced?
Can you please clarify, Peter, from the General Synod reports and discussion: after this 2 year discussion around our province, if General Synod decides to proceed with signing the covenant including what you call "mother's teeth" (section 4), will this require rewriting of our constitution to recognise the Standing Committee - requiring a "twice round" voting (GS, episcopal units, GS, wait a year), or, with it being such a significant decision would it use the twice round in any case, or has GS not thought about the process yet and will make it up as it goes along?
ReplyDeleteHi Bosco
ReplyDeleteI do not know the answers to your questions.
I was not actually present for the debate and do not know whether these matters were included in the discussion.
I presume that 'adopting' the Covenant could proceed in a constitutional direction (and thus would require twice round) and it could proceed in a 'standing resolution' direction ...