GAFCON Primates Backpedal from FCA Confessional Stance

By Robin G. Jordan

In ascertaining the doctrine of a rite or service all liturgical elements in the rite or service must be considered. They carry the theological freight of the rite or service. This includes optional elements.

The liturgical elements in a rite or service may explicitly state the doctrine of the rite or service or the doctrine may be inferred from the same elements. Archbishop Thomas Cranmer went to great pains to eliminate from the rites and services of the 1552 Book of Common Prayer liturgical elements that could be construed to teach doctrine that was contrary or repugnant to the Scriptures. Liturgical commissions that are faithful to the teaching of the Bible and the doctrine of the confessional formularies have gone to similar pains to ensure that such elements are not added to the liturgy when they have revised it to make its language more understandable to modern-day congregations.

The confessional formularies as Dr. Mark Thompson, Principal of Moore College, points to our attention in his article, “Who or What Defines the Anglican Communion,” include the two Books of Homilies (1547, 1562; 1571), as well as the Thirty-Nine Articles (1571), the Book of Common Prayer (1662), and the Ordinal (1661). The two Books of Homilies contain thirty-three sermons that develop the reformed doctrines of the Anglican Church to a greater extent both in depth and detail than the Thirty-Nine Articles.

The rites and services that the Anglican Church in North America has produced to date contain a number of liturgical elements that explicitly state or infer doctrine that strays from the teaching of the Scriptures and the doctrine of the confessional formularies. When this evidence is considered in its entirety and the doctrine explicitly stated or inferred in To Be A Christian: An Anglican Catechism is considered with it, one is led to the inescapable conclusion that the Anglican Church in North America as a denomination does not in practice fully accept the Scriptures as its canon or rule of faith and life and the confessional formularies as its doctrinal and worship standard. Its departures from the teaching of the Scriptures and the doctrine of the confessional formularies are not minor ones, involving secondary matters over which Anglicans may disagree. They are major deviations.

FCA chairman Archbishop Iliud Wabukala in his 2014 GAFCON Easter Message stated:

"This is why confessions of faith, whether they are the ancient catholic creeds or later statements such as the Church of England’s Thirty-nine articles cannot be seen just as historical documents to be reinterpreted as we wish. In many countries, Anglican Churches are a significant voice in national life and we have a special responsibility to make sure that we confess Jesus as Lord with clarity and courage. It was for this reason that we produced the Jerusalem Statement and Declaration in 2008. Confessing Churches make a life-changing stand on the truth God has revealed. They proclaim the gospel, promote true godliness and should not be afraid to challenge the complacency of leaders who claim their nations are Christian while at the same time promoting laws and tolerating practices that are contrary to Christian belief. "

The view of the Thirty-Nine Articles with which Archbishop Wabukala takes issue in this address is the prevailing view of Anglicanism’ confession of faith in the Anglican Church in North America. This is evident from its constitution and canons as well as Texts for Common Prayer and To Be A Christian: An Anglican Catechism.

A group of GAFCON and Global South primates have issued a joint statement in which they receive the new ACNA archbishop as “a fellow Primate of the Anglican Communion,” identify the Anglican Church in North Americas as sharing “the same mission and purpose” as they and their provinces, and pledge their “continued partnership with the Anglican Church in North America.” In receiving Archbishop Foley Beech as “a fellow Primate of the Anglican Communion," this group of primates has tacitly recognized the Anglican Church in North America as a member province of the Anglican Communion.

Two of these primates are FCA chairman Archbishop Iliud Wabukala and FCA vice-chairman Archbishop Nicholas Okoh. Archbishop Okoh chaired the GAFCON Resource Group that drafted the three principal doctrinal statements of the 2008 Global Future Conference and the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans. Archbishop Wabuka was a member of the the GAFCON Theological Resource Group. These doctrinal statements are The Way, the Truth, and the Life: Theological Resources for a Pilgrimage to a Global Anglican Future, the Jerusalem Statement and Declaration, and Being Faithful: The Shape of Historic Anglicanism Today. In their tacit recognition of the Anglican Church in North America as a member province of the Anglican Communion and therefore “authentically Anglican,” the FCA primates in the group of primates issuing the joint statement backpedaled from the position set out in these doctrinal statements:

The Way, the Truth and the Life Theological Resources for a Pilgrimage to a Global Anglican Future

"Authentic Anglicanism is a particular expression of Christian corporate life which seeks to honour the Lord Jesus Christ by nurturing faith,and also encouraging obedience to the teaching of God’s written word, meaning the canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. It embraces the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion (published in the year 1571) and the Book of Common Prayer (the two versions of 1552 and 1662), both texts being read according to their plain and historical sense, and being accepted as faithful expressions of the teaching of Scripture, which provides the standard for Anglican theology and practice."

"While authentic Anglicanism makes no claim to be perfect, and respects Christians of other traditions, it nevertheless insists on certain basic theological commitments. These are to be found in the classic documents of the Anglican tradition, but they need to be reiterated and reaffirmed in each generation."

"Another element in this struggle is the distinction that is sometimes made between the main teachings of the Bible and the lesser ones, those that are referred to as adiaphora, meaning ‘things that are indifferent’. According to this view, some doctrinal and moral issues may be put aside because they do not really matter, while others must be affirmed by all. This distinction is seen as essential for the unity of the Church, and yet the Bible itself never applies it in this way. And in Anglican tradition adiaphora are primarily matters to do with ceremonies and robes, and not issues concerning doctrine or morality."

"The Anglican Church has always been a confessional institution,but its confession does not seek to be comprehensive on every issue, or to foreclose discussion. Over the last two hundred years, however, an unwillingness has grown up, in some parts of the Church, to bind itself to confessional formulae, such as the such the Thirty-nine Articles. Instead, there has been a strong move towards a more general affirmation of the Thirty-nine Articles, accepting them as a historical background which informs our life and witness, but not as a test of faith. As long as this unwillingness remains s, there is little hope for an effective Covenant within the Anglican Communion."

"The universal acceptance of the Prayer Book and the Articles, as standards of Anglican teaching, seemed to guarantee biblical orthodoxy, but, like the church in Ephesus (Revelation 2:1-7), Anglicanism suffered from latitudinarian indifference rather than overt heresy. The regulatory force of the Articles was weakened, from the late seventeenth century, and replaced with a rationalistic moralism. By the mid-nineteenth century, concerns began to arise that the Church of England was no longer ruled by the plain sense of Scripture and its classic formularies. One challenge came from John Henry Newman and the Tractarians, who reinterpreted the Articles in a Roman direction. From the liberal side, Bishop Colenso of Natal was seen to employ ‘higher criticism’ of the Bible in order to question the authority of Scripture. This latter challenge led to the calling of the first Lambeth Conference. The Lambeth Quadrilateral, adopted at the third Conference, functioned as a means of steering a middle course through the modernist-catholic debates, while promoting a basis for ecumenical dialogue.Some have seen the Quadrilateral as an adequate definition of Anglican orthodoxy, but the current crisis has shown that, without the recovery across the Communion of the classic doctrinal and liturgical formularies, it is inadequate to the task."

Statement on the Global Anglican Future

"Our fellowship is not breaking away from the Anglican Communion.We, together with many other faithful Anglicans throughout the world, believe the doctrinal foundation of Anglicanism, which defines our core identity as Anglicans, is expressed in these words:

The doctrine of the Church is grounded in the Holy Scriptures and in such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the said Scriptures. In particular, such doctrine is to be found in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal.

We intend to remain faithful to this standard, and we call on others in the Communion to reaffirm and return to it. While acknowledging the nature of Canterbury as an historic see, we do not accept that Anglican identity is determined necessarily through recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Building on the above doctrinal foundation of Anglican identity, we hereby publish the Jerusalem Declaration as the basis of our fellowship."

 The Jerusalem Declaration

"4. We uphold the Thirty-nine Articles as containing the true doctrine of the Church agreeing with God’s word and as authoritative for Anglicans today."

Being Faithful: The Shape of Historic Anglicanism Today

The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion (1571), a slight revision of Thomas Cranmer’s Forty-two Articles of 1553, were designed ‘for the avoiding of diversities of opinions’ and not as a comprehensive statement of Christian doctrine in the manner of some other Reformation ‘confessions’. They have long been recognised as the doctrinal standard of Anglicanism, alongside the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal."

The authority of the Articles comes from their agreement with the teaching of Scripture."

"The Articles make no attempt to bind the Christian mind or conscience more tightly than Scripture does on matters of doctrine and Christian living. However, acceptance of their authority is constitutive of Anglican identity."

"In recent years, some member churches of the Anglican Communion have dispensed with assent to the Articles, presenting them as mere ‘historical documents’ or relics of the past. Not coincidentally, these same churches include the ones which have abandoned historic doctrinal and moral standards. For other churches, the Articles have formal authority but they have been neglected as a living formulary. The Jerusalem Declaration calls the Anglican church back to the Articles as being a faithful testimony to the teaching of Scripture, excluding erroneous beliefs and practices and giving a distinctive shape to Anglican Christianity."

While the GAFCON and Global South primates’ joint statement may have been their response to the recent statements of Archbishop Justin Wilby, they do not appear to have given full consideration to the ramifications of such a statement. It is noteworthy that language of the joint statement is reminiscent o the language of a number of addresses by former ACNA Archbishop Robert Duncan, prompting this writer to wonder who drafted the statement and whether its issuance was something that the primates had planned to do beforehand. The document gives the appearance of being hastily put together. The signatures suggest that it was not known in advance who would sign the document. It is plausible that the primates' ACNA handlers drafted the document and then handed it around for the primates to sign, taking advantage of the excitement of the moment and not giving its signers time to give though to what they were doing.  If the document had been prepared by the primates beforehand or even on a laptop in a hotel room, one would expect to find a list of the names and titles of the signers, as well as their signatures. As in the case of the Diocese of North West Australia’s recognition of the Anglican Church in North America, the joint statement does not help the cause of confessional Anglicanism in North America. Rather it harms that cause.

All the GAFCON and Global South primates who gave their recognition and support to the Anglican Church in North America in doing so chose to turn a blind eye to its policy of not making room in its doctrinal statements for Anglicans who are faithful to the teaching of the Scriptures and the doctrine of the confessional formularies and who are Protestant, Reformed, and evangelical in their theological outlook. They are in effect countenancing its policy of not extending to these Anglicans the same license to maintain and propagate their beliefs and practices that it extends to those who embrace its major deviations from the Scripture’s teaching and the confessional formularies’ doctrine and who are Anglo-Catholic or philo-Orthodox in their theological outlook.

Their issuance of the joint statement raises questions as to where they really stand on the authority of the Scriptures and the confessional formularies and whether conservative evangelicals can fully rely upon the GAFCON and Global South primates as allies in the struggle to uphold the authority of the Scriptures and the confessional formularies.