I have received a very encouraging email from an English lay person that makes so many good points that I thought I would just post it (with permission):
My sense is that the vast majority of Anglicans 'in the pews' have only dimly heard of the Anglican Covenant, if at all. Most of those who have heard of it have been lulled into a false sense of security by the soothing noises coming out of Lambeth Palace and other places. They are under the impression that the point of the Covenant is some sort of administrative housekeeping, which is only of interest to Anglican anoraks and geeks.
Somehow we need get across to the ‘poor bloody infantry’ the point made by Jonathan Clatworthy which you reproduced in November:
we might imagine that every Anglican in the world, on reading Sections 1-3, would agree that it is a fair statement of Anglicanism. It might then appear that persuading the provinces to commit themselves to it would not change Anglicanism at all. However it would. Firstly, the contents of Sections 1-3 would initially be accepted as a description of Anglicanism, but as soon as the Covenant was in force they would turn into a criterion of Anglicanism. Even if the authors of the text are right to think it accurately expresses what Anglicans actually believe, once the provinces have signed up to it it will then become possible to tell people that if they want to count as Anglicans they will have to believe it.If you wish to know more about the author and join her quest, then go to my post HERE and join in the debate on her website.