From SF and Ruth Gledhill
There have been different interpretations of the sense in which “moratorium” was used in the Windsor Report. Our understanding is that moratorium refers to both future actions and is also retrospective: that is that it requires the cessation of activity. This necessarily applies to practices that may have already been authorised as well as proposed for authorisation in the future.
and
It warns that a “proliferation” of ad hoc episcopal ministries such as those put in place by conservatives cannot be maintained. It calls for all existing ministries already set up to be placed “in trust” in order to be reconciled back into their original provinces.
Update: More from SF. The use of the word ‘interventions’ is not encouraging The notion that the Southern Cone intervened in Canada is tripe: they were asked to provide a home for orthodox Anglican congregations. And, of course, the ‘breach’ that needs ‘healing’ is the one that separates the ACoC from the truth. The resultant pillaging by the ACoC of orthodox parishes could use some healing too, I suppose.
We have spoken of moratoria particularly applying to activities of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada but we also recognize that provinces like Nigeria, Uganda, and the Southern Cone have been involved in interventions. We wish to include them in the moratoria and we hope to find a way of healing the breach cause by the interventions.
What we are proposing is a kind of safe place into which these diocese and parishes can come which will not be dependent upon primates or others in other provinces, but they will be held in a sort of holding bay, a safe place that will have a link to that pastoral Forum we spoke of and they can hold there in trust until the day when through dialog they can return to their parent bodies.
Update 2: (Peter) From that SF article, this is perhaps its death knell:
Q: You make a point to say that this report is a preliminary one. What is next? Where do these observations go?
Handford: There is one set of observations divined into 3 parts. We will now as a group take on what we have heard as the response; those things that we have heard from the floor and written observations that have been put to us plus whatever we have heard as conversations. We take them all to the next stage. We are working on a time scale that leads up to the ACC meeting in May of next year
Should this have been proposed two years ago, then it may have had a chance. But to say, now, that we are looking at another 10 months to even begin to think about implementing something is, well, hopeful at best. These proposals seem to be designed to save the institution more than orthodoxy, and even as that it seems too little, too late.
Update 3 (David): The whole document is here
Update 4 (Peter): I note the following sentence in the report:
Through modern technology, there has been active fear-mongering, deliberate distortion and demonising. Politicisation has overtaken Christian discernment.
I see they’ve been reading David’s reports here 
Apart from that, um, totally uncalled-for aside, the truth is that the institution has noticed that some of the proletariat have become uppity. All to the better, I say. They do have a point in the report, but I wonder whether this is a threatened institution speaking more than a genuine grievance.
Update 5 (David): And now for a spot more demonising: we have this from the Journal. The whole thing is worth a read, being replete with ecclesiastical indignation at the prospect of having to obey rules. Here is a priceless gem from Bp Michael Ingham – who is well qualified to speak on irrational prejudice:
In his statement, Bishop Ingham said that the WCG’s proposals “seeks to impose a singular uniformity upon the complex diversity of our Communion.” He said that while in some parts of the Communion “homosexuality is subject to criminal law and cultural prohibition,” in Canada, homosexual people “enjoy the same rights and responsibilities under the law as every other citizen.”
If the proposals are accepted by the Communion, “it will put the Anglican Church of Canada in the position of having to support and defend irrational prejudice and bigotry in the eyes of our nation,” he added.
Update 6 (Peter): From the Journal report:
Archbishop Lawrence also said he was “quite surprised” that the moratorium was being made retroactive “and you have to go back and reverse actions… I think that having made a decision some point in the past…it’s changed the way we live and you can’t go back and just say ‘we’ll just go back where we were.’”
From Wikipedia:
Repentance is a change of thought and action to correct a wrong and gain forgiveness from the one wronged. In religious contexts it usually refers to confession to God, ceasing sin against Him, and resolving to live according to His law. It always includes an admission of guilt, and also includes at least one of: a solemn promise or resolve not to repeat the offense; an attempt to make restitution for the wrong, or in some way to reverse the harmful effects of the wrong where possible.
Update 7 (David – is it my turn?): From the Guardian. Agreeing with us is fine, but we don’t want your stinking tribunals!
Although the idea of a forum is still in its infancy it is unlikely to appeal to conservatives or liberals. One US Episcopal church insider was heard referring to it as “dead in the water”.
A US bishop, the Rt Rev Sergio Carranza-Gomez of Los Angeles, said: “If it’s really a pastoral thing that will advise and uphold the authority of the body [national church] then it will be OK, but we don’t want to have tribunals or a group that enforces doctrine. If it’s something that will punish or discipline then I don’t think it will work.”
Update 8 — Kate. Ok so I could have just left a comment but I couldn’t resist joining in on the “update tag’. So, we orthodox need a safe place till we can rejoin our parent diocese through dialogue?? Where, oh where have we heard that before? Is this the definition being used, I wonder?
Dialogue, noun. We talk and talk and talk until you see that we were right all along, really.
On a different tack, the right rev Carranza-Gomez has one thing right. Discipline won’t work, because the bishops who are ignoring God’s word written won’t submit to it!
Very nice.
TEC and the ACoC, who have descended into apostacy and who have consistently lied about their activities to the broader communion, only have to pay lip service to a document enforced by that tiger of orthodoxy -the ABC, and they get their parishes back.
I have news for Lambeth, I for one won’t go.
Peace,
Jim
The forum would also “offer guidance on what response and any diminishment of standing within the Communion might be appropriate where any of the three moratoria are broken.” Rather vague, but offers some (remote?) possibility of discipline.
Oddly worded but might be interesting if one could figure out what they mean.
Well. We’ve already said that the current arrangements are temporary – if our dioceses return to orthodoxy, we’ll happily go back. Just a second, I have to go buy an umbrella to protect myself from anything the flying pigs might drop on me…
3, And to add to that thought: if our diocese (Niagara) – or the ACoC for that matter – returned to apparent orthodoxy, who in their right mind would believe it is anything other than a begrudging acquiescence to pressure from above, with no real change of heart whatsoever. I doubt that we will even get reluctant acquiescence – merely more conversation and listening – ie fudge and claptrap.
OK, who remembers the Panel of Reference? This sounds similar….
Apart from putting the cause and effect at the same level, which is hardly fair, I’d support the idea in principle. However, without willingness on behalf of the revisionists, and some real teeth for the forum, it’s hard to see how it can actually achieve anything.
“applies to practices that may have already been authorised as well as proposed for authorisation in the future.”
Does this mean that Gene Robinson is no longer a bishop in the TEC?
6 Steve,
That question was asked in the press conference – the answer was, no it doesn’t mean that. What does it mean? Very little, I fear.
I believe that may have been a direct reference to SSBs going on in New Westminster.
I am all for a safe place – how about the Primates Council of GAFCON. We would feel pretty safe there that’s for sure.
Even had the ABC actually supported Lambeth 1.10, Windsor and DAS, instead of suborning them, the attitudes in TEC and the ACoC (right down to the diocese synod level) have moved so far from orthodoxy, that this merely becomes an exercise in public relations.
It also gives Rowan an opportunity to patch the cosmetics of his reputation without fear of impeding the “new gospel” initiative.
Peace,
Jim
You can legislate and legalize all you want but you can’t change a persons heart. So while there might be some outward semblance of cohesion it would be like painting over rotten wood , it may look good from a distance but up close you can see it’s still rotten wood. Good riddance to the ACoC and if necessary to the ABoC (and it seems more and more so).
“What we are proposing is kind of a safe place into which these dioceses and parishes can come…a safe place that will have a link to the Pastoral Forum.” How long will a diocese or parish be “holed up” in the proposed safe place? Presumably until these groups repent and return to the very institution that drove them out in the first place. How is that for Indaba? In South Yorkshire where I hail from this sort of talk is called “bunkum.” For all you non-Yorkshire types, I’ll let you figure out the meaning.
Has KJS not already made her statement when she stated that bsp. gene robinson would not be asked to resign?
Kate, in the secular world there is a statement that says “You can’t teach pigs to fly”!! I would suggest instead that we watch where we set our feet.
There is a song done by the Gaithers that says “The Blood of Jesus can set the vilest sinner free” and that always leave the window of hope open but there is also a Scripture that says the “There are some who will never become believers” (paraphrased). I guess that all will just have to wait and see BUT while we are waiting, we ALL must move ahead and that is what ANiC and the Common Cause is all about….Moving ahead and doing our best to bring ourselves into a place that is in agreement with Scripture and the Christian Faith.
There is hope for the ACoC and TEC (however dim), but until it is manifested, then we must all move ahead and be on guard for the lies, the subtleness and the downright evil that the enemy can send our way (to which we are all susceptible) in the form of sweet talk, false promises and straight forward lies.