AAC Reconvenes

The Council has reconvened.



The are now picking Clause C back up which the never actually voted on earlier. They want to add words to C as the Anglican Covenant:

• c) asks the Secretary General to send the Ridley Cambridge Draft, at this time, only to member Churches of the ACC for consideration and decision on acceptance or adoption by them

So it would then be:

• c) asks the Secretary General to send the Ridley Cambridge Draft as the Anglican Communion Covenant at this time, only to member Churches of the ACC for consideration and decision on acceptance or adoption by them

Amendment (Question 17) - They are preparing to vote now.

Now they are moving to debate what was once "c" and is now "e"

Kenneth Kearon is now speaking. He is attempting to clarify the mistake. Mouneer Anis is now speaking.

I've lost my connection but Robert is reporting:

Chair: "members of the ACC..the end of the last plenary session...I've had a discussion with our legal advisor...I feel that each section of the covenant was dealt with and we now have a decision on the covenant.We now ask those named to implement the work that needs to be done."

Kearon: Statement from the Secretary General. The resolution that has just passed asks ABC and Sec Gen to consult with provinces. We intend to appoint a small working group to consult with the provinces. That report will come back to JSC which will meet before the end of the year

Mouneer Anis: Point of order...resolution A was defeated..including the two clauses...I think that is illegal to bring back two amendments...bringing back resolutions that were defeated is not right...its not right..we need legal advice on this very point...how can we bring defeated clauses in to a new resolution...

Chair: As chair...I took it strongly that votes were taken in anticipation that other material would be admitted...

So, the attempt is underway to move the authority away from the ACC to the Joint Standing Committee. Mouneer Anis, Primate of the Middle East, has objected saying that he believes it is illegal to bring back resolutions that were defeated. How can defeated clauses be brought back in to a new resolution?

How indeed?