ACC-14: Did the Clauses on Section 4 Ever Pass?
Written by: Mike Watson & Mark McCall
Thursday, May 28th, 2009
Much of the criticism of the Anglican Consultative Council’s deliberations concerning the Anglican Communion Covenant has centered on control of the resolutions committee by those opposed to a covenant with real accountability, confusing and inadequately explained procedures during the debate and intervention by the Archbishop of Canterbury said to have had the effect of diminishing chances for adoption of the intact Ridley Cambridge draft. As forceful as those criticisms may be, there is still more to the story. The bottom line is that it appears the deliberative process did not produce the resolution claimed to have emerged, because the critical clauses intended to introduce a delay of several months for further consideration of Section 4 of the Ridley Cambridge draft were never approved by the Council.
In a discussion at the dais immediately following adjournment of the May 8, 2009 session at which the debate took place, this was apparently pointed out to the Chair, Bishop John Paterson of Auckland, New Zealand. It apparently did not take Bishop Paterson long to realize his mistake, because he quickly reactivated his microphone and announced to the large crowd still in the room that there would need to be a vote on the two clauses in question when the plenary session reconvened at 5 p.m. He went on to apologize for misleading the council members about the status of the proceedings. By the time, however, the plenary reconvened, the position had changed, apparently as a result of discussions involving a legal advisor.
May 28 2009 | Articles