IS THE ANGLICAN COVENANT THE BEST WAY FORWARD? REALLY?

Mark Harris at Preludium directs our attention to the three videos from the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Unity Faith and Order (IASCUFO) in defense of the Anglican Covenant. The first video is here. Links to the other two may be found at Preludium.

Below is the commentary that accompanies the video:

In this video, members of the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Unity Faith and Order (IASCUFO http://bit.ly/wIPVqK) reflect on the Sections of the Anglican Communion Covenant. The members include:
- The Revd Canon Dr Sarah Rowland Jones, Anglican Church of Southern Africa
- The Rt Revd Kumara Ilangasinghe, recently retired Bishop of Kurunagala, Church of Ceylon
- The Rt Revd William Mchombo, The Church of the Province of Central Africa
- The Rt Revd Dr Howard Gregory, Bishop of Jamaica & The Cayman Islands, The Church in the Province of the West Indies
- The Revd Dr Katherine Grieb, The Episcopal Church

Mark points out the irony of Dr Katherine Grieb's presence in the video.

Professor Grieb is herself now a consultant to IASCUFO rather than a full member precisely because of the "consequences" of The Episcopal Church's actions, and was done in ways similar to that provided for in Section Four.It is quite interesting, perhaps ironic, that she is in this video at all, what with her relation to a church so questionable that she is reduced to consultant status simply because she belongs to that church.

So. Because of the naughtiness of the Episcopal Church in ordaining gay bishops, Dr Grieb is already sidelined in the committee by some authority or other in the Anglican Communion, and yet she tells us not to worry. The covenant will apply to the church 'just as we are'. But, as Mark says further:

The real question IS about the future. If we sign or not, "where do we go from here?" If we sign, we will surely be disciplined and / or politically pressured and we will fight against that and be called divisive. If we do not, we will surely be called divisive for not signing.

To me, adopting or not adopting the proposed Anglican Covenant looks more and more like a Catch-22 situation for the Episcopal Church.

A further irony is that the videos were produced by (IASCUFO), a committee which is under the authority of the Anglican Communion Office, which is funded by all of the provinces in the Communion. Why then are the reflections in the videos entirely pro-covenant? If each province must decide whether to adopt the covenant or not, there is the possibility that not all will decide to adopt. Wouldn't it be fairer to present both pro and con material on whether the proposed covenant is the proper solution to the present disagreements in the Anglican Communion? Is no one at all on the committee entertaining doubts about whether the best way forward is to draw provinces of the communion together by exclusion or reduction to a lower status of certain present member provinces?

Have I mentioned that the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Unity Faith and Order reminds me of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Roman Catholic Church, which began life as the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition? I'm sure the resemblance is purely coincidental.