Nothing quite became the Church of Ireland's leadership yesterday as the manner of its voting. Following the General Synod debate on three contentious motions the bishops waited until the vote on each motion was taken and the result announced. Then they voted publicly themselves.
In each case they voted unanimously and in line with the majority vote which preceded theirs.
Rarely can there have been a greater example of that style of leadership which holds to the maxim "There go my sheep. I am their shepherd. I must follow".
And in the Drumcree crisis to date nothing has illustrated quite so well the abdication of responsibility by those most charged with it in the Church of Ireland.
Instead we were told once more of other people's responsibilities in the situation.
In his presidential address, Dr Robin Eames told the Synod of the "immense" responsibility of "decent, respectable and law-abiding" members of the Orange Order. "Have they the courage to speak out and to witness to their moderation?" he asked.
As chairman at yesterday's debate Dr Eames did not vote on any issue. Neither did the co-chairman, Dr Walton Empey, Archbishop of Dublin.
Dr Eames also made it clear that if the Portadown lodges could not adhere in full to the three pledges he requested of them they would not be welcome at the July 4th service. And it would not be the Church of Ireland which would be responsible for what might happen.
"Let it be quite plain - it is not a question of the Church of Ireland dissociating itself . . . It is that the Portadown lodges will have taken themselves beyond what can reasonably be expected of the Church of Ireland by way of extending to them Christian hospitality or a Christian welcome," he said.
In its report on the matter to the General Synod yesterday the church's standing committee recognised that if the three pledges were not adhered to by the Orangemen this "placed a heavy responsibility on the rector and select vestry of Drumcree".
As if to underline the church's innocence of any responsibility for things going wrong again at Drumcree this year, should that happen, Dr Eames claimed "every effort has been made as a church, every opportunity taken, every conversation welcomed, every influence exerted and every dialogue encouraged to influence a peaceful outcome to the so-called Drumcree stand-off". A claim that has to be questioned.
One measure the church could have taken to avert Drumcree this year would have been to allow Dr Eames, as bishop of the diocese in which Drumcree parish resides, powers to withdraw the invitation to Orangemen to attend the July service if that were necessary.
The church's sub-committee on sectarianism did consider this. It decided in favour of offering to General Synod new legislation in the form of a bill which would give a bishop powers to "determine that a particular service should not take place because it might be attended by specified scandalous circumstances".
The legislation would allow a rector to express dissent with his bishop on such a decision, but the rector could not deliberately thwart it.
The sub-committee sent details of its proposal to the church's standing committee and it was discussed by the bishops.
The bishops "indicated significant opposition to such legislation, including opposition from a majority of bishops", according to standing committee's report to the General Synod yesterday. The sub-committee abandoned the idea.
It is fair to assume that, as Primate of all Ireland and Archbishop of the diocese where Drumcree is located, had Dr Eames wished to have powers to deal with the situation at Drumcree his colleagues in the House of Bishops would have been only too glad to assent.
Instead even the three pledges he has requested of the Portadown Orangemen before they are welcome at the church and which he announced at Armagh on October 28th last do not appear to be his own.
It is understood they were prepared at a special meeting of the church's standing committee and members of its Representative Church Body in Killiney, Co Dublin, last October 6th. Indeed many who attended that meeting appeared to have been taken by surprise that Dr Eames should have announced the pledges so soon.
And throughout yesterday's debate no one mentioned those who have lost their lives because of Drumcree. No one spoke of Michael McGoldrick, Robert Hamill, the three Quinn children, Rosemary Nelson. Nor were any of them referred to in reports on Drumcree submitted to the General Synod. It was as if those deaths had never happened.
Who will be responsible if more names are added to that list this year?