The promoters of the Anglican Covenant simultaneously assure us it is not introducing any radical change to our life together, and that it is vital to our continued life together that we have it. As Ma Chere Mimi has observed, it is harmless and toothless, but we must have it!
Thus, like no-cal soda, it makes of virtue of what it lacks. It may quench your thirst but it will not nourish your body. It is powerless.
This particular claim of powerlessness reminds me of Rowan's Plaint:
In the same way, the Covenant does nothing to the Anglican Communion, except to make changes in the relationships between the members. But since that is what communion is — not a substance or an institution but a form of relationship — the capacity to have consequential impact on the relations of the members of the Communion, through the Instruments thereof, cuts to the heart of the only relevant power on offer. And the fact that it does so by threats of what amounts to withdrawal of affection just makes the whole thing that much more toxic and morally suspect.
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG
who, if it seems he's going on a bit about this Covenant, is only doing so because of the impending vote in the General Synod.