Charles+/Mike+,

My guess is that the Covenant will not directly address the Continuing 
Anglicans. So far all we see are some principles being set down by 
Canterbury, for which I'm grateful they sound firmer and better than I had 
anticipated, especially concerning the place of Scripture. Of course it was 
sad, but unsurprising, for ++Williams to adamantly delineate between 
practicing-homosexual consecrations and women's ordination. Obviously there 
are differences, but there are commonalities as well.

Our ties to Nigeria are important, and help give more than ample assurance 
to sincere inquirers about our legitmacy. This might only marginally be 
increased if one day we become a full organic member of the Anglican 
Communion. Regardless, I very much like that we're moving toward some sort 
of deeper union, but my concern is that such union might end up being at 
least a half-step backwards concerning our fidelity to the Catholic Faith. 
That is, if the Anglcan Communion refuses to revisit the issues around WO. I 
think it will be important for there not only to be a "place" for those 
against WO, but for there to be Communion-wide initiatives in the area of 
"discernment process" that would somehow reflect the process that the AMiA 
went through, which led to a moratorium on WO.

As for "back to the drawing board," "the Covenant" might take six to ten 
years to hammer out, but ECUSA/TEC's standing is a different issue. I think 
it's likely that ECUSA will be diminished in its Anglican status at the 
Primates meeting (Feb 2007) for some sort of closure to the Windsor Report, 
(we'll also learn more this Sept. after the African Bishops' Mtg). Likewise, 
the status of ACN/Federation/Common Cause affiliates should then have 
greater clarity as well, at least in regard to Communion. As for property 
issues, that may well indeed drag out for ten years. That's my take: that 
the Covenant won't reduce TEC's status, it will already be reduced; on the 
contrary, it will provide for a mechanism to let them "back in" at the level 
they choose: nothing, associate, or core member. Finally, I agree there's no 
primatial rush to bring in the Federation-type groups.

GCM+