The Covenant was designed as a ‘web of mutuality’ across the Anglican Communion: a balance of provincial autonomy with worldwide interdependence and accountability.
Today Diarmaid MacCulloch’s writing has been shown to be selective, speculative, tendentious and agenda-ridden.
By Andrew Goddard. It is now clear that less than half the dioceses of the Church of England will agree, in both their house of clergy and house of laity, to “approve the draft Act of Synod adopting the Anglican Communion Covenant”. This article attempts to map out some of the ramifications of this development.
Enough dioceses have now rejected the Covenant to prevent its further consideration by General Synod during its present term. This doesn’t mean the Covenant is dead either in the Church of England or in the wider communion.
From the Archbishop of Canterbury: “[O]ne of the greatest misunderstandings around concerning the Covenant is that it’s some sort of centralising proposal creating an absolute authority which has the right to punish people for stepping out of line. I have to say I think this is completely misleading and false.”
If the Church of England rejects the Anglican Covenant, how will it honor its ecumenical covenants? In 1964, the Church of England made covenanting central to its ecumenical endeavors; is it now abandoning that legacy? A historical review is necessary, for the Anglican Covenant is a historical document shaped by Anglican precedents.