By Robin G. Jordan
The events to which I referred in my last article are a part of the history of the Anglican Church in North America. When these events and other events in the jurisdiction’s history are examined along with the doctrinal contents of the ACNA’s own formularies and the doctrinal associations of the practices that they mandate or sanction, they show that a serious conflict of interest exists between the ACNA and the GAFCON Primates and the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans.
The revival of unreformed Catholicism in the North American Anglican Church is not the renewal of biblical Anglicanism. The two are antithetical to each other.
Biblical Anglicanism is "the true Profession of the Gospel and the Protestant Reformed Religion Established by Law" of the Coronation Oath Act of 1688. Its principles are based upon the Holy Scriptures and are set forth in the historic Anglican formularies, including the two Books of Homilies.
The continuing support of the GAFCON Primates and the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans for the ACNA is not in the best interest of confessing Anglicans who desire to see a renewal of biblical Anglicanism in the North American Anglican Church. They are supporting leaders whose aspirations are at cross-purpose with the aspirations of such Anglicans.
If their commitment to the restoration of the Bible and the historic Anglican formularies to the heart of the Anglican Church is genuine, the GAFCON Primates and the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans need to reserve their support for the elements in the North American Anglican Church that share their commitment. It makes no sense to support leaders who have a contradictory and incompatible commitment—a commitment to the revival of unreformed Catholicism.
It also does not make sense for confessing Anglicans in the ACNA to support leaders who are not committed to the restoration of the Bible and the historic Anglican formularies to a central place in the Anglican Church, particularly those who are involved in reviving unreformed Catholic teaching and practices in the ACNA.
In failing to take any steps, much less adequate ones, to comprehend in the jurisdiction’s formularies the beliefs and convictions of Anglicans who subscribe to the biblical and reformed principles of historic Anglicanism, these leaders are signaling that their present toleration of confessing Anglicans is conditional. It is contingent on the expectation that these Anglicans will either compromise their beliefs and convictions or leave the ACNA. If they intended to make room for the beliefs and convictions of these Anglicans, they would have already extended official standing to those beliefs and convictions. This should be quite evident by now.