There is a certain logic to this position, for the history of Anglicanism certainly is marked by vague theological pronouncements and wide disagreement. There are legitimate questions, however, regarding the sustainability of this approach. Factions within Anglicanism have downplayed, recast, or even dismissed the fundamental beliefs of Christianity. Where some members of a religious group dismiss the basic tenets of the religion, while others hold fast to those tenets, the observer may be forgiven for doubting the existence of any substantive unity--it appears only the form of unity remains.
One outgrowth of liberalism has been the redefinition, in some circles, of what constitutes ethical conduct in an Anglican context. In particular, issues of sexuality have become dividing lines that are pushing Anglicans to address matters of authority in new ways. The question of the extent of scripture's authority and the way its authority relates to that of tradition, reason, and experience is prominent in Anglican controversial literature. Also, as local parishes disclaim their ties to bishops they see as apostate (having renounced the faith), and align themselves with bishops from overseas, the historical authority of the bishop within his or her diocese is placed in dispute. Even the continuing viability of the historically central position of the Archbishop of Canterbury vis-à-vis global Anglicanism is being questioned.
1. Why is history central to Anglican identity?
2. What was the desired outcome of the 19th-century Oxford Movement? Was it achieved?
3. How has theological liberalism shaped contemporary Anglican theology?
4. What issues have divided the contemporary Anglican church?