This is a very helpful site and Rowan Williams' answers to these key questions are full of insight. In the change from oral answer to written text, however, there are some spelling mistakes. In particular, the name of Sue Parkes, (the overall manager of the Lambeth Conference 2008) is transcribed as 'Sue Cox'.

On the Archbishop of Canterbury's Q&A...

Re Q1
"The church overall, the church of England in particular, the Anglican communion has not been persuaded that same-sex sex can be holy and blessed. Were it to decide that by some process unimaginable to most of you it would be by an overwhelming consensus. Only at that point would it be possible to say in the name of the church, this is holy and blessed. So I take my stand with the church of England, with the communion, with the majority of Christians through the ages."

This is a bit of a wake up call for 'reappraisers', i.e. it's just not going to happen. I don't know why all you 'reasserters' got so worried. I think I'm going to start looking more seriously at other churches now.

Re Q4
He gives a very good explanation here; it seems the problem stems from them fighting the conservative cause in trying to ensure CP was not 'equivalent, legally and morally, to a marriage.' It forced their hand later on.

Re Q4
"but I’ll simply mention that it is recognized as a disciplinary offence if priests either refuse to declare that his civil partnership is not a sexual union, or if they volunteer to the bishop that it is a sexual union."

I see nothing for the 'reasserters' to worry about here. It's putting same-sex partnered priests in an awful position: break up, leave or lie. I can't see most of them lying - those that do, the 'reasserters' can hunt them down and campaign for their removal.

I love Dr Williams, I think he's wonderful on various levels, and he made an excellent job of answering these questions. It's not HIM who is at fault in hindering the acceptence of PSSA, it's the Anglican Communion as a whole and its processes. If this current effort to push for change fails - and after reading this, I think it will. I will accept the verdict of the 'consensus', and leave you all to it.

Somewhere, over the rainbow...

Sorry to see you feeling down, Augustus. :-/

I don't like (per the ABC's reply above) "taking stands": I feel like my appropriate posture is *on my knees*, in gratitude for Our Lord's mercy.

However, if compelled, I'll take my stand with the *heart* of Anglicanism: the Episcopal Church USA (and the many, many faithful Anglicans all around the world who remain, gladly, in communion w/ it).

Buck up, Augustus---we already know how this ends: as Our Redeemer liveth, WE WIN!!! :-D

I think that his public statement that he recognises the orthodox networks in ECUSA and Canada (Q7) is very important. He even discussed talk about them being recognised a province... and I was also quite heartened by his answers to Q11 - his own and other people's coming to Christ... It was quite a brave thing to talk about his involvement in the conversion of a Jewish woman to Christianity.

Hey, not down, JC, just pessimistic.

After, reflecting on this and looking more closely at it and other people's insights, I'm less inclined to let Dr Williams off the hook. In fact, I'm starting to realise my previous support of him may have been misplaced.

I have been most impressed by The Anglican Scotist's analysis of this (I hope he won't mind me linking it, but I think it is brilliant and absolutely right):

http://anglicanscotist.blogspot.com/2005/11/archbishop-williams-erring.html

I think the insights here are very important.

in a nutshell: Mind of Christ not Mind of the Consensus.

Also Dave, it does not seem that Dr Rowan recognises other than the Network m e m b e r s to be Anglican (being members of ECUSA), and outright rejects the idea of "recognition", especially as "provinces".