In my first blog I asked, what is the 'inherent nature of the office of primate' and questioned this against the constitutional model of the Australian Primate.

Today I want to focus on the nature of Christian fellowship and how this must inform our expectations of outcomes of meetings such as the recent Primates' Meeting.

'.the Primates Meeting appears to be impotent' is a phrase used by David Phillips, General Secretary, Church Society (UK) in his comment on the recent Primates' Meeting.

David cautions us about expecting outcomes based on some notion that any one of the 'four instruments of communion' has legal authority over any of the national churches which make up the Anglican Communion.

Unlike the Church of Rome, legal authority is local not universal. What then can be done when false teaching informs the motivation, character and direction of a church?

The Apostle Paul tells us to avoid them (Romans 16:17), not to associate with them (1 Cor.5:9-13), not to be mismated with unbelievers (2 Cor. 6:14), and take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness (Eph. 5:11). John is just as direct: do not receive him into the house or give him any greeting because in greeting you share in the wicked work (Jn: 9-11).

To return to David's article, he welcomes the initiative of individual provinces in breaking fellowship with the American and Canadian provinces and concludes that 'This is how the Communion is supposed to work. It may be that the Lambeth Conference, Primates Meeting and so on are now part of an old order that is passing away'

While I cannot see the General Synod following the lead of African provinces, should a diocese declare itself out of communion with The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada?