The significance of this slim collection of essays about Anglican identity far exceeds its modest dimensions. The writers of the ten essays share a conviction about Anglican identity being grounded in the essentials of faith and endeavour to express this ‘through a generous breadth of interpretation’, as Archbishop Jeremy Greaves puts it in his Foreword. Few will deny that there is a sharp polarisation of theological opinion across the Anglican world. Dialogue is difficult, not least in Australia, but the intention is to remain in conversation. As Stephen Pickard, chair of the National Comprehensive Anglican Network (NCAN), puts it, ‘zeal for the truth too easily overreaches itself.’ He raises the question whether the church has the capacity and willingness to ‘navigate the richness, depth and multifaceted wisdom of God.’ Must the comprehensiveness of Anglican theology and practice be suppressed?
The former Archbishop of Brisbane, Phillip Aspinall, argues for a comprehensive Anglicanism which has three strands: continuity with the ancient church catholic, the evangelical or reformed emphasis and an openness to truth wherever it is found. Anglican character comprises a dynamic interplay of these strands, perhaps accentuating one of these but avoiding polarisation and any hint of ‘cancel culture’. He certainly does not sanction the idea that ‘anything goes’. Dorothy Lee, a renowned New Testament scholar, is emphatic that the Bible is at the core of the church’s life and that it contains all things necessary for salvation. She argues that this should not be pushed in a narrow direction that fails to respect the diversity of the church. The Bible is more intricate and complex than such a position claims. Diversity in biblical interpretation actually enriches the church. Scripture calls for on-going interpretation, a task which requires humility and openness, and which is best done in conversation together.
Two contributions focus on doctrine: the first, by a former Archbishop of Perth, Peter Carnley, is a response to a report to the Synod of Diocese of Sydney on the Doctrine of the Trinity and its bearing on the relationship of men and women’. He pulls no punches. In the Diocese of Sydney women may not be ordained as priests, on the grounds that women must be subordinate to men in the exercise of authority: there is complementarity in their relationship (often stated as equal but different). This complementarity is claimed to be grounded in a functional though not ontological subordination of the Son and the Spirit to the Father. Carnley has written elsewhere on this matter in great detail and offers here only a summary of his emphatic opposition to the Sydney view. At stake here is the orthodox understanding of the Trinity – the Son being homoousion with the Father – but also the essential equality of the Persons of the Trinity, which humankind is called to reflect. Carnley finds Sydney’s ‘Trinitarian complementarianism’ seriously out of step with orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. The second article, by Fergus King, is on the doctrine of the atonement, on which there is a wide range of interpretations. However, the metaphor of sacrifice, whatever questions it raises, must surely be at the centre of any serious discussion of salvation. In any part of the Anglican Communion one would expect to encounter the constitutive elements in the doctrine of the atonement and also to experience its reality in word and sacrament.
The collection includes two contributions on the church’s mission. The first, by John Deane, is on mission in the New Testament and for today’s church. A key insight is that mission is sourced to God, not to the church: it is the missio Dei. There is some fresh thinking about mission, especially in Anglican missional theology. This article should be instructive for the Anglican Communion as a whole. He points to three generations of missional theology: Paul; the first three Gospels; and the book of Revelation and the Gospel of John. He also considers a major change in recent missional thinking, viz. a balance between evangelism and social action and the addition of a 5th mark of mission: a mandate for humankind to care for the whole creation. The second contribution on mission is the account of a personal journey by Peter Sandeman, in which he includes the division of the ACA on divergent priorities in mission: geared to the salvation of souls or to social care. He points out that as early as 1984 the Anglican Communion noted ‘Five Marks of Mission’: proclaiming the Good News of the Kingdom; teaching, baptising and nurturing new believers; responding to human need by loving service; seeking to transform unjust structures of society and pursuing peace and reconciliation; and striving to safeguard the integrity of creation and sustaining and renewing the life of the earth. There is certainly a challenge here for every part of the Anglican Communion.
The final three contributions are observations about disparate aspects of the Anglican Church. The first is a hard-hitting critique of the Diocese of Sydney; ‘Power, Ideology and Church Politics’, written by Muriel Porter, a Melbourne Anglican. She argues that the ACA has become a weak federation, each Diocese allowed to maintain a high level of autonomy. The General Synod is now, in her view, ‘almost entirely controlled by the Diocese of Sydney...’; cooperation ended by the 1992 decision to allow women priests. Sydney made a ‘substantial and unconstitutional’ change to Anglican polity by authorising diaconal presidency in its diocese. She regards the ACA now as ‘a fractious place’, a view undoubtedly and sadly shared by many Australian Anglicans.
The second, by Keith Joseph, Bishop of North Queensland, is a critique of Gafcon decisions, in particular of the Jerusalem Declaration, assent to which is obligatory for a church wanting to belong. The Abuja Affirmation describes communion as ‘confession, rather than by a shared history or institutional structure.’ The old Anglican Communion is to be rejected, matters of sexuality being symptomatic of doctrinal and moral departures from the teaching of Scripture. Gafcon now claims to be ‘confessional’, requiring assent to the Jerusalem Declaration in order to be regarded as ‘orthodox’. Joseph’s criticism is twofold: that the Jerusalem Declaration goes beyond traditional Anglican orthodoxy and that the ‘confessional’ process goes beyond the norms of Anglicanism and sets up a new and divisive Anglican unity. These are not minor criticisms. Gafcon is criticised for ‘deliberately taking on a novel approach to Anglicanism, which stresses a confession of faith beyond Scripture and Creeds’ in order to distinguish those who are true Anglicans (according to Gafcon’s criteria) from those who are not.
The final essay addresses a legal question, not a theological one: what is and is not a diocese of the Anglican Church? It is an important question, considering that a corporation registered with the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC)under the name ‘Diocese of the Southern Cross Ltd’ describes itself as a ‘separate and parallel Anglican Diocese.’ However, there is no defined geographical territory over which a particular bishop might claim jurisdiction; nor has the DoSC elected or appointed its own bishop. Dr Carolyn Tan argues that the DoSC is not a Diocese of the ACA or the Anglican Communion. She considers only the legal aspects of the claim.
This is a significant and valuable publication, which deserves serious attention. It does, however, leave this reviewer with a problem. The early essays are commendably irenic in tone; several of the later essays are hard-hitting, not without reason. Tensions are certainly not resolved at this time. In an ‘Afterword’ the Archbishop of Perth describes these essays as ‘timely, freeing, gracious’; an invitation ‘to live into an Anglicanism that is big enough for everyone’. But the problem remains: churches related to Gafcon have made clear that they do not want a Church that is ‘big enough for everyone’: that would simply enlarge the problem! But until the doors are firmly closed, should the dialogue not be kept open?
This review was first published with the Journal of Anglican Studies. It has been reproduced here with permission.
