Tony, I hope and pray that this will indeed be a second Reformation. But I wonder if the broadness of the anti-liberal alliance will cause us difficulties down the track? As well as people who are clearly evangelical, there are, I believe, many whose doctrines regarding justification and the sacraments are far closer to Roman Catholicism than to biblical views.

Do you see this as creating a potential problem?

Thanks for the comments guys. It’s a packed programme and I’ll do my best to pop on and respond now and then, but time (and internet access) is limited.

Gordo, there may be problems, but to echo what has become almost a mantra here so far—there is no early foreclosing on what GAFCON will end up being or achieving. There is certainly a strong feeling that it doesn’t want to be a ‘single issue’ party, or a loose federation of theologically disparate cobelligerents.

I was in a workshop this morning on Anglican Identity, brilliantly led by Andrew Shead and Ashley Null, which strongly affirmed the classic Scriptural basis for Anglican identity and unity. (I think the text will soon be online at the GAFCON site; definitely worth reading). In the discussion afterwards, it was clear that the way ahead was to affirm a doctrinal and moral unity based on Scripture, while allowing for regional distinctives in matters of order and practice—this being the classic Cranmerian distinction between doctrine (including morals) on which there must be inflexibility, and discipline (including ceremonies and such things) about which there may be geographical and temporal differences.

Whether some of those regional distinctives turn out to be more than matters of discipline we will have to see.

Steve, I think the good bishop was reflecting standard terminology—although his ecclesiology may give rather more weight to the denomination (let alone communion) as church than either of us would! I am not sure.

Perhaps I can report more accurately after Thursday’s workshop on Anglican ecclesiology.

TP