Thoughts after GAFCON

I’d like to report that in the two weeks since GAFCON, I’ve been carefully going over my notes, digesting my observations, mulling over what I saw and heard, and preparing to deliver myself of some devastating post-conference insights. Of course, the reality is that I have been stumbling through a haze of jet lag and exhaustion, attempting to locate my wife and kids in the fog, and emerging into brief moments of clarity to stare with horror at the mountainous backlog on the desk.

So in lieu of a piercing analysis, here are six random thoughts about GAFCON that have floated to the surface:

  1. Even with the fading of the ‘conference’ effect, there’s no doubt that the whole thing was much better than I expected it to be. It was encouraging, stimulating and heart-warming in a gospel way (and in a human way, too, come to think of it). Some great friendships were formed. And the final statement was clearer, stronger and wiser than most had dared hope, myself included.
  2. It was good to discover that we aren’t alone. I think it’s easy for Sydney Anglican evangelicals to develop a touch of the Elijahs, thinking that in the house of Anglicanism we and we alone are left who have not bowed the knee to Baal (along with, perhaps, a hundred prophets hidden in a cave somewhere in the UK). But this was a big Anglican conference: 1,200 bishops, clergy and lay people from 25 countries around the world. And when the conference statement was read out, labelling the liberal revisionists as promoters of a false and different gospel which “undermines the authority of God’s Word written and the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the author of salvation from sin, death and judgement”, the whole room stood up and cheered!
  3. It was also good to discover that, compared to most places, we have it pretty good. I’m sure someone will instantly correct me, but I think I’m right in saying that in Peter Jensen (Archbishop of Sydney), David Mulready (Bishop of North-west Australia) and Peter Brain (Bishop of Armidale), Australia has just about the only classically evangelical diocesan bishops in the western world. What’s more, the constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia being what it is, there is very little that anyone can do to interfere with our pursuit of evangelical ministry. This unique position is something to be grateful to God for—something to guard and protect with all our diligence and strength.
  4. Correspondingly, it was sobering and eye-opening to hear firsthand how difficult it is to be an evangelical Anglican in other places: I’m thinking of conversations with ministers from New Zealand, Ireland, the UK, the US, Canada and other dioceses in Australia. Imagine having a local bishop who is personally and ideologically opposed to pretty much everything you stand for, who keeps speaking publicly in a way that denies the gospel you are trying to preach, who wants you out, who will deny you anything that is in his or her power to deny (including funding and ordained assistants), and who, should you leave your congregation, will seek to have you replaced with someone more liberal. One of the great achievements of GAFCON, in my view, was to create a global fellowship of encouragement and support for beleaguered evangelicals in dioceses around the world. There is now someone big and friendly for them to turn to.
  5. For all the encouragement and excitement of GAFCON, there were some headshaking moments too, when the breadth of practice and (one can only assume) belief about secondary matters stretched the limits of fellowship. The closing communion service, for example, was hard to swallow (so to speak), being heavily laced with Anglo-Catholic trappings and traditions. There was a lot of love in the room, and a great willingness to smile at the offensive bits, but it did make very clear that GAFCON is not a gathering of evangelicals, but of biblically orthodox, confessing Anglicans. The fellowship certainly includes some breadth. Using very large buckets to put people in, my impression is that GAFCON at present would consist of approximately 25% evangelicals and 10% Anglo-Catholics, with the remaining 65% being the Africans who sit somewhere in between. The Africans seem to be evangelical in heart and soul, but quite comfortable with many of the trappings of Anglo-Catholicism—especially the clothing!
  6. Therein is the challenge and opportunity, it seems to me. The Diocese of Sydney may be a statistical pinprick (70,000 of us compared to, perhaps, 30 million Anglicans in Africa), but in the providence of God, we are in a position to make a contribution in those places where gospel-based Anglicanism is on the move. It is said that African Christianity is miles wide but only an inch thick. It’s a caricature, but, like most caricatures, it captures a truth. The two main areas we can help, it seems to me, are in theological education for pastors (particularly in biblical theology), and in the doctrine and practice of ministry (how to get past clericalism, and how to mobilize all Christians for mutual edification and growth).

Of course, with my Matthias Media hat on, it also became obvious very quickly that there is a pressing need everywhere for good quality, Bible-based resources! My head is still spinning with ideas and possibilities.

These are six random thoughts. Others have started to form as I’ve been writing, but I might pop them in another post later this week. If you have any particular questions about GAFCON, stick them in a comment, and I’ll do my best to answer them in my next post.

7 thoughts on “Thoughts after GAFCON

  1. Tony,
    Fulcrum, the “open” evangelical group has critiqued the Gafcon response to the proposed Anglican covenant, saying that the Gafcon team used the wrong document. While I don’t think this affects the main thrust of Gafcon’s rejection of the covenant, does Fulcrum have a point? It would be good for Gafcon to be seen to respond to Fulcrum, I think because it is a group that as you have pointed out elsewhere, will be faced with a choice sooner or later.
    http://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/page.cfm?ID=330

  2. Tony,
    What do you mean by “classically Evangelical”? How would you describe the current Bishop of Tasmania?

  3. John,

    I think that the comparison of the St Andrews Draft of the covenant was in fact done with another document and not the Nassau Draft. This was an unfortunate error. The St Andrews Draft is not in fact as significantly different from the Nassau Draft as this comparison document suggests.

    However, the critique of the St Andrews Draft of the Anglican Covenant stands on its own. I understand it was written independently and prior to the comparison document. On that score I think Andrew Goddard’s attempts at defending the St Andrews Draft are unconvincing.

  4. Hi Marty

    I did say that someone would correct me immediately!

    What I meant by ‘classically evangelical’ was someone who builds their life and ministry on those elements of evangelical theology that have always characterized it (the five solas of the Reformation are not a bad summary). Another way of saying it is that if a ‘classic evangelical’ were transported back in time by a century, he would still be readily recognized as an evangelical by his forebears.

    TP

  5. I was more interested in clarification rather than correction, so thanks!

  6. Thank you Mark for that frank response. I think it is helpful for Gafcon to be open about these things and not to resort to PR.

  7. Hi Tony

    Thanks for your thought on GAFCON. While reading the material on the GAFCON website during the conference I couldn’t help notice the charismatic flavour of many of the comments, particularly those of the African Bishops. Do you have any thoughts on how you see this impacting the wider Anglican community in the future?

Comments are closed.