This keynote paper was delivered at the Society for the Study of Anglicanism which gathered at the AAR Annual Meeting in Philadelphia in November 2005. On the basis of many years of observation and participation in the life of the Anglican Communion, I attempt to offer in this article a ‘Wisdom for Anglican Life’ — a wisdom which takes seriously the unity and koinonia of the Church as rooted in the cross of Jesus Christ and the love of God. Such wisdom is rooted in the faithful worship of the Church but also engages seriously with the struggles of the world. It counsels gentleness, kindness, forgiveness and above all patience in matters of dispute, and embraces the thoughtful but rigorous communal study of Scripture. This article ultimately suggests that a pressing task facing the Communion today is to learn afresh how to be Anglican Christians in the twenty-first century.

By 1900 the higher critical method of studying the New Testament, once fiercely resisted, had become an acceptable activity for the staff of the ancient universities and representatives of the churches in Britain. Making use of the heuristic and analytical tools furnished by Randall Collins's The Sociology of Philosophies, this paper seeks to explain the role of the ‘Cambridge Triumvirate’ of Lightfoot, Westcott and Hort, conceived as a distinct group operating at the centre of a wider intellectual network, to this change. It argues that social process as much as individual and collective achievement furnishes an historical explanation of their contribution to the acceptance of New Testament higher criticism in Britain.

It is argued that the Windsor Report is a new Anglican ecclesiology that attempts to answer problems within more classical and historically induced and offered Anglican ecclesiologies. In order to reflect this new direction, the authors borrowed ideas from several offsetting loci—including Roman Catholic receptio theology of communion and a more classic magisterial Protestant theology of Scripture—and as such has morphed the understanding of how Anglican authority, in all its forms, might look without opting for a Roman or the, as perceived by many as problematic, Protestant Liberal model. It is asked whether there is a polarity in the above theologies and which theme, if any, must assume the central role in articulating Anglican ecclesiology. I offer that it is the tacit theology of Scripture that is the true strength of the Windsor Report and which needs to be clarified in future discussions on Anglican ecclesiology.

Austin Farrer is highly praised but curiously under-read. Despite being recognized as ‘possibly the greatest Anglican mind of the 20th century,’ his influence in discussions of Anglican identity and theology is almost non-existent. As an attempt to remedy this deficit, this paper provides a sketch of Farrer's life and work, and then presents him as a specifically Anglican theologian through considering a sermon, a meditation on the Apostles' Creed, and a set of lectures to Oxford undergraduates. But presenting Farrer as ‘a specifically Anglican theologian’ is problematic if we cannot agree on the nature of Anglican theology. Therefore, the paper concludes by referencing a debate between Stephen Sykes and Paul Avis on this question, and asks if Farrer can function as a paradigm for contemporary Anglican theologians.

The article addresses a number of different themes related to Australian Anglicanism. Underlying this inquiry is a deeper concern to trace the contours of an ecclesiology that is both embedded in a particular context (Australia) and through that points to common ideals that inform the self-understanding of the wider Communion. After an introduction, the remainder of the article is divided into four sections. The first section involves a brief historical perspective to introduce Australian Anglicanism to a wider audience. A second section attends to matters of law and governance; familiar enough but often dry territory, though certainly revealing as to the present state of our Church. From history and law I offer in the third section a reflection of a geographical kind on the idea of place as a formative factor in ecclesiology. In this way I hope to be able to highlight some of the particular challenges for Australian Anglicans and hopefully the wider Communion.

The Church of England remains deeply divided over the ordination of women. The present study charts the debate from the early 1990s and reanalyses centrally collected statistics to identify how the 42 mainland dioceses have responded so differently to the opportunity to ordain women to the priesthood. Then the rate of growth or decline in terms of membership statistics within the dioceses is assessed against their attitude toward the ordination of women. The data demonstrate that dioceses which have apparntly encouraged the ordination of women have overall experienced neither greater nor lesser decline in terms of membership statistics than dioceses which have apparently discouraged the ordination of women.

The ARCIC Statement on Mary features an underlying agreement on Mary as a basis for recommending that Anglicans accept the two Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption as matters of faith. In outlining the case it becomes clear that the place of Scripture, as expressed in Article 6 of the Thirty Nine Articles, is different in the two Communions. The two Marian dogmas shift the focus of the underlying agreement so that Mary becomes more aligned with Jesus than believers. Mary's sinlessness, which is the focus of the dogma of Immaculate conception, apparently involves her continuing virginity. Though perpetual virginity is assumed in the creeds and the Book of Common Prayer, it is not explicitly connected with Mary's purity or sinlessness. This move is consistent with the place of virginity and celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church. It is a serious difference from the Anglican position. In addition, ecumenical research brings into question the view that Mary remained ever a virgin recognizing children born to Joseph and Mary. Historically and exegetically the mother and brothers of Jesus are seen as believers and followers of Jesus.

In the last decade the sexual abuse of children by some clergy and church workers in the Anglican Church of Australia has become a serious public issue. There have been criminal convictions, civil litigation, inquiries, Church discipline and resignations. Initial responses in the 23 dioceses were reactive and inconsistent. Beginning in 2001 the General Synod took initiatives to develop national strategies to respond to this growing crisis. The culmination of these initiatives occurred at the 2004 General Synod. By the passing of several resolutions and canons the Church at a national level expressed a commitment to, and set out detailed comprehensive and uniform strategies for, the protection of children.

Richard Hooker's theology of law was rarely far from pragmatic concerns. He wanted to promote a peaceful and prosperous human community before God while holding that moral right consists in conformity to the divine will. In this paper, we tread a narrow path between Hooker as ‘villain’ because of his role in preparing for the modern separation of ethics from metaphysics and as ‘unqualified hero’ whose ethically substantive and teleological theology of law took inspiration from Holy Scripture and the angels' worship of God. The claim is that Hooker's theology of law still provides a fertile environment in which to think practically today about questions such as: What is the nature of divine authority? What is law for? What should characterize the human exercise of authority?

This short piece seeks to offer a theological framing to the issues raised by Garth Blake in his very fine article ‘Child Protection and the Anglican Church of Australia’. What are some of the theological issues behind the current state of affairs with regard to child protection, and the church's attempts to remedy past failures to protect the children in its care? Very briefly I want to mention several clusters of theological issues: responsibility, or the duty of care; forgiveness and betrayal of trust; sin and scapegoating; gospel and law; and the problem of meaning.

Sixty years after William Temple's death, little in the way of constructive theology has been done with the body of writings he left. Part of this is due to the way in which his legacy has been (mis)appropriated by some of the scholars and church leaders who are seen as his heirs and admirers. An over-emphasis on the ‘middle axioms’ approach exemplified in Christianity and Social Order, and later promoted heavily by Ronald Preston, explains much of this lack. Although the ‘middle axioms’ approach is still applicable, the principles set out in Temple's most famous work need to be re-examined and perhaps expanded in the light of a post-Christian plural society. The purpose of this essay is to examine a broader range of Temple's work than is commonly done. By doing so, I will propose that the virtues of intellectual excellence, graciousness, and the welfare of the wider (non-church) society are guiding principles for ecclesial being, speech and action that are fully present in Temple's writings.