By Nathaniel W. Pierce. At its simplest level the concept of “covenant” includes three characteristics: relationship, definition, and accountability.

By Andrew Goddard. The weakness of the Covenant lies not in the text and its alleged centralization but in the fact that many of the Covenant’s drafters and supporters now doubt that the standing committee and the instruments are sufficiently “fit for purpose.”

By John C. Bauerschmidt. Gathering is not simply a practical necessity for Christians: it is our vocation.

By Michael Cover. "You shall not make schism, but make peace among those who are fighting" (Didache 4.3).

By Alyson Barnett-Cowan. While it is true that the Communion’s language of “Covenant” was first used in The Windsor Report of 2004, the idea of having a comprehensive, coherent, agreed-upon understanding of how the Anglican family works has been around for a long time.

Perhaps the Covenant is not perfect — no human invention ever will be. But it is more than good enough. It has the potential to work well, if we are committed to making it do so.

By R. Mwita Akiri. We do not live in a world that allows us to confine ourselves within our own geographical, cultural and social contexts. The world we live in is a global village, and more than that, it has become a dot-com age. We have to relate with and to one another, within and outside our contexts.

By George R. Sumner. Mission must balance both adaptation and a careful guarding of what is authentically Christian.

By Ian Ernest. There is an urgency for all the stakeholders of this Communion to deal with the stranger within ourselves.

By David Richardson. What the Covenant has to offer the churches of the Communion is an instrument of unity and mission which, in good Anglican fashion, steers a middle path between centralism and juridical structures on the one hand and unfettered license and mutual irresponsibility on the other. But it does more.