Simon, Can you explain to us what the exclusion of the ACC and ECUSA really means in practical terms? I have seen it described as expulsion from the communion and as an insignificant banning from committees that we weren't going to be on anyway. How serious is it? Thanks for your help.

In purely practical terms, this action of the ACC imposes very little additional sanction. To describe this action as "expulsion" is simply incorrect as a reading of the resolution wording makes clear.

Had the earlier wording of clause 5 been passed, then the practical significance of that clause would have been greater.

However, the fact that the ACC has endorsed the Primates' views (clauses 1,2,3 of the motion) is itself a significant action and should be recognised as such.

Thanks, Simon. I've found it interesting that the only subject upon which comment is being made in the discussion is the place of gay people (espececially gay men) in the Church. A bit sad, really.

Simon:

I'm wondering if there is a process in place for writing a final draft of the Anglican Covenant and getting it adopted.

This seemed to me one of the most productive proposals in the Windsor Report and I haven't seen anything on it since.

Bruce Duggan

Nothing is currently in place as far as I know, but Rowan Williams did refer to this point in his Church Times interview this week, when he said:

"I think we've held the line on what the Primates had recommended. My only regret is that we haven't yet focused on the question of the Covenant for the Churches of the Communion, which, it seems to me, is something we have got to get our heads round if we want to find a constructive solution."