Michael Jensen turns the tables when he answers the $260 million question... Are Sydney Anglicans really Anglican?

Michael Jensen explains to himself and all his young followers the error of Muriel Porter's point of view,that Anglicanism in Sydney is unrecognisable.
Michael defends his cult by saying...
1.the view of Anglicanism which places Scripture as supreme authority and which has a flexible attitude to secondary matters - such as what garb the clergy wear - certainly has a good case to be considered as authentically Anglican.
2. The evangelical behaviours which have irritated non-evangelical Anglicans historically are magnified in the case of Sydney. The unusual dominance of evangelicals in the diocesan structure of Sydney diocese means that Sydney does look strange to Anglicans who are accustomed to liberal-Catholic hegemony - and ecclesiology - elsewhere. Liberal-Catholics expect to be in charge of things.
3. But they would be mistaken in calling evangelicalism "unAnglican," for the MODERATE CALVINIST EVANGELICAL OUTLOOK OF SYDNEY with its missionary activism and its biblicism and its emphasis on the atoning blood of Jesus Christ as a sacrifice for sins is utterly consistent with the evangelical Anglican tradition.

So is Michael saying that evangelicals are a product of oppression from within their church, so now they feel the need to become the oppressors...or is he saying that evangelicals have legitimacy within the Anglican Church but those who do not proclaim to be evangelicals (and don't just focus on literal scriptural interpretation in isolation)have no legitimacy?

You know, I quite like the comment made by GT at the end of Michael's opinion piece... I am a cradle Anglican (it was the C of E back then). I attend my local Anglican church every Sun. I'd consider it evangelical as would most of the other attendees. I was recently having a discussion with the rector whose credentials would probably be regarded as impeccably evangelical (outside of Sydney that is). He lamented to me "Why are evangelicals so ungracious?" I suspect as did he that it is the belief the "We and only we have the truth. All others are apostate." A friend of said rector has been in discussion with a Moore College figure and when he suggested that something put forward was an interesting opinion was told "No x you have opinions, we have the truth." Where on earth do we possibly go from there?

Michael...You wash your mouth out son! Don't refer to yourself as moderate! Your daddy and your Uncle Phillip worked hard for you to be accepted by US Baptists!