In particular, the Primates request, through the Presiding Bishop, that the House of Bishops of The Episcopal ChurchKeep it simple. Just say "we will" - unanimously. Given the Anglican ambiguity of the Communique, and given our polity, affirmation is open to many interpretations. As to negative consequences what could they be?
1. make an unequivocal common covenant that the bishops will not authorise any Rite of Blessing for same-sex unions in their dioceses or through General Convention (cf TWR, §143, 144); and
2. confirm that the passing of Resolution B033 of the 75th General Convention means that a candidate for episcopal orders living in a same-sex union shall not receive the necessary consent (cf TWR, §134); unless some new consensus on these matters emerges across the Communion (cf TWR, §134).
The Primates request that the answer of the House of Bishops is conveyed to the Primates by the Presiding Bishop by 30th September 2007.
The danger of violating the KISS principle is that you allow minorities to highjack the process and exercise a veto. Do we really want to give Bishop Iker a veto? The problem isn't a holdout by a liberal bishop, but by a conservative one.
Thanks to a commenter at daily episcopalian for fomenting these ruminations.
I have other thoughts on the HOB response planted here.