ANGLICAN CHURCH OF CANADA - LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES IN THE ANGLICAN COVENANT

From Canon Alan Perry, a priest in the Anglican Church of Canada at his blog Insert Cathchy Blog Title Here:

The Governance Working Group of the Anglican Church of Canada has released its report on the legal and constitutional implications of the proposed Anglican Covenant, as requested by the General Synod. In addition to the report, there is also an executive summary.

Definitional Concerns lists no fewer than nine key terms in the proposed Covenant that are left undefined. This is a concern because, as the report states, “the Covenant is more than a statement of belief or intention; it is a legal document.” Exactly. And as a legal document it requires clarity of definition. For without clarity, the report says, it is “difficult to know the full nature and extent of the obligations which would be undertaken by adopting the Covenant.” That being the case, it is difficult to understand how any Synod can responsibly vote to adopt the Covenant.

Under the rubric of Procedural Concerns, the report discusses seven difficulties with the dispute-settling process in the proposed Covenant. For example, the report raises concerns about the vagueness of the process in section 4.2. (See my comments in this vein here.) It also notes that the process fails to guarantee the principles of Natural Justice. I have also analysed this issue in two parts here and here. Furthermore, there is no right or mechanism to appeal a decision of the Standing Committee.

Even if you don't read the entire report, do have a look at the executive summary. It's well worth taking the time, because, as I see it, the document has implications beyond the Anglican Church of Canada.

Lionel Deimel, of the Diocese of Pittsburgh in the US, also comments on the Canadian church report.

Today, however, the Anglican Church of Canada released a document that, although it does not draw the obvious conclusion that the Covenant should be rejected because it is incompetently written, most definitely establishes that it is incompetently written. One cannot, in fact, read “Legal and Constitutional Issues Presented to the Canadian Church by the Proposed Anglican Covenant” without concluding that the text of the Covenant is a train wreck.

Lionel notes from a story in Episcopal News Service that the Executive Council of The Episcopal Church received a report from the Standing Commission on Constitution and Canons, which will not be published until later because, as council member Rosalie Ballantine said, “We’re reluctant to have it out there” because some people may assume that decisions have already been made."

In the interest of transparency, I'd hope that the Executive Council will rethink withholding the report, unless there are very serious reasons for doing so. The decision in favor of secrecy following on the heels of the Anglican Church of Canada's quick release of their document invites unfavorable comparison.

As Jim Naughton says at The Lead, "Conversely, the Anglican Church of Canada, which apparently regards its members as adults, has released its report...along with an executive summary...."

Transparency is the best policy, except for the gravest of reasons, and what people may assume does have the ring of gravity sufficient for withholding release of the document until a later time.