This memo, now redacted, has been in the news in the last few days in a number of places (I’ll just link to the Thinking Anglicans article). I’d be interested to hear the C-C readers’ views on his development.

I fear that it greatly harms the remaining authority of the Archbishop among the Communion. I just can’t make up my mind how greatly this will change things.

-Chris

There is a part of me that feels like I gave away my posessions in anticipation of the rapture on 5/21, only to hear that it’s been rescheduled to 10/21 because of a little math error.  I suppose that’s why I keep wondering if there isn’t more to the story.  Nevertheless, if true as portrayed, it would only seem to accelerate the divisive momentum and undercut the Covenant.  Is there now a strategy for holding the middle way which has any political traction?  We certainly see the results of tying to put the politics ahead of “...walking humbly with thy God.”

We have no way of finding out whether Dean Slee’s account was overblown or not. As one of the candidates it is alleged was blacklisted is now Bishop of Salisbury, on wonders. I can’t imagine +Rowan losing his temper or shouting. He is a quiet and gentle man. He was of course perfectly right to take legal advice. I see no connection between this story, based on a leaked document of a deceased cleric who was hardly neutral in all this, and the fate of the Covenant.

If Rowan got mad, he got mad.  If it’s overblown, it’s overblown.  We are all human beings, and even the holiest of us can still fall prey to anger, lust, and misrepresentation.  It don’t think it hinders Rowan’s credibility or authority one iota.