And you thought I was hard on the ACC . . .

It appears my characterization Friday of the Anglican Consultative Council meeting in Jamaica might have been a bit off – the meeting might have been even worse.

But don’t take my word for it. Chris Sugden focuses on the litigation issue and on the highly questionable and confusing parliamentary run around aided and abetted by the Archbishop of Canterbury himself. Here’s another summary of the same and of the delay of Section 4 of the Covenant, a delay which pleases the Episcopal Church as said section contained the proposed disciplinary procedures.

Stephen Noll states that this is more than a delay, that the Covenant is dead. He has further thoughts here and holds Canterbury accountable for the Covenant’s mortal injuries at the hands of the ACC.

Robert Munday also takes Dr. Williams to task for his “perfidy.”

Who else but the Anglican Curmudgeon gives the ACC meeting and its excuse for parliamentary procedure a withering examination and finds both it and ++Rowan wanting.

AND if you still think I’m too hard on the ACC meeting, then you don’t want to see what Christopher Johnson thinks here and here.

You really don’t.

-----

MORE: I have to admit that, after reading the Anglican Communion Institute’s statement on the ACC, my respect for the ACI continues to grow. And their conclusion is a bit of a jaw-dropper:

If lawful and proper action on the covenant is not forthcoming from this meeting of the Council, the only appropriate response is for the Churches of the Communion to begin themselves the process of adopting the Ridley Cambridge Text.

The ACI suggesting going around the Instruments of Communion?? As “Katherine” comments here, pigs may be flying.