As the principal sponsor of this resolution, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to it.
First, a word about timing:
If you check your calendar, you’ll see that the deadline for pre-filed resolutions was before the most recent meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council.
My co-sponsors and I wanted to get something in the pipeline before the deadline because we believed it important that this convention address the emerging Anglican Covenant in some way.
We gambled by referencing the most recent draft at the time: Cambridge Ridley.
As you know, ACC signed off on Secs. 1-3, but referred Sec. 4 to a sub-group for further refinement.
I can understand how some might see D020 as either moot or premature because of this—i.e. the Covenant is as yet “incomplete.”
Consequently … were I a member of this committee, I would move to amend the resolution to refer specifically only to Sections I, II, & III, rather than to the whole document, and I encourage you to do so.
Finally, I need to stress that this resolution is not, nor is it intended to be, a de facto acceptance by the Episcopal Church of an Anglican Covenant. The Covenant is still a work in progress, so there is as yet nothing to “accept.”
What D020 does do is commit us to voluntarily, for the next triennium, using the spirit and language of Secs. I-III of Cambridge-Ridley as a point of reference in our corporate actions—something that we will hold ourselves accountable to while our partner churches in the Anglican Communion also discern how a Covenant might enhance our common life in Christ.
Either in its current form, or as amended in the way I have suggested, D020 represents an expression of good faith on the part of TEC to persist in the spirit of several 2006 resolutions that were overwhelmingly passed in response to the Windsor Report; including A159 on interdependence in the Anglican Communion and A160, wherein we expressed our regret for not having properly considered the impact of certain decisions were had made three years earlier would have on the “bonds of affection” within the communion.
I would suggest that these bonds of affection remain “strained” even now, so any step we might take to ease the strain would be like healing oil on the wounds of the communion we profess ourselves to be a constituent member of.