The press asked who was running the conference. The Archbishop of Canterbury gave five retreat addresses, three presidential addresses, chaired the five evening plenary presentations from guest speakers, and preached the final sermon. The press were told he was the common figure in meetings of the Design Team, the Anglican Communion Office and Lambeth Palace Staff meetings.
\nHe did not consult the primates before indicating at the final press conference that the future agenda was the moratoria and the pastoral forum. Some bishops noted that the pope always speaks with his bishops rather than to his bishops. There was much speaking of people\u2019s respect, loyalty and affection for Archbishop Williams. If people say that of a primate in Africa, this is regarded as fawning on an autocratic tribal chief. The Lambeth Conference Network in the Anglican Communion seems to have have been overtaken by celebrity culture. Is this style a reaction to criticism of lack of leadership?<\/p>\n
The Culture of Lambeth was of Inclusive Church. The opening service was on the theme of diversity in unity. Most self-select sessions were from the liberal perspective. The market place was dominated by gay organisations.<\/p>\n
The Archbishop said in his second presidential address: \u201d\u009dAnd the answer, I hope, is that we speak from the centre. We should try to speak from the heart of our identity as Anglicans; and ultimately from that deepest centre which is our awareness of living in and as the Body of Christ.\u201d\u009d<\/p>\n
What is the centre which is the heart of our identity as Anglicans? Is it defined by the faith, or is it defined by inclusion?
\nTraditional Anglican liberalism was founded on core Christian truths and commitments. Secular liberalism denies that truth is possible and urges the equality of every person and their views. Therefore all views can contribute and must be at the table.<\/p>\n
Secular liberalism places the value of inclusion over against faithfulness and faith. The claim to speak from the centre must face the challenge of whether the faith that defines the centre is the centre of faith, or the centre of the secular vision of inclusion?<\/p>\n