Gledhill: Conservative Anglicans face “punishment” for helping US rebels

I’m sorry but, is this serious?

Yours in Christ,
jacob

Yes.

bb

So how will +++Rowan tell the Queen that the Anglican Communion is now smaller by 2/3 to 3/4 and that she has lost much of Africa and South America, perhaps part of Australia and SE Asia.  If we look at the GAFCON numbers that would make the Anglican Communion little more than a sect.  Naturally I hope that Mrs. Schori is less than persuasive and unable to buy her votes among the Primates and these steering committees.

Sad, unexpected, no, but still sad.

One day, we all will answer for how we handled things of the Master’s Church. May I live my life in remembrance of that day, then maybe I will have just the beginnings of wisdom.

That Williams has allowed himself to play the fool in this on-going farce suggests that the ACC is the real “power” of an apostate church. I am saddened that Orambi and Annis will not attend. I pray they will release a statement exposing the agenda and behind-the-scenes machinations of the ACC, including the manipulations and collusion of the almighty “Secretary General”, the impotent Archbishop, and the Schori. Anglicanism continues to disgrace Christ’s body. Meanwhile, while the church self-destructs, Rowan Williams contemplates the writing of another book on Russian spirituality.

Well, it sounds like wishful thinking to me.  For as we all know, the ACC is not Anglicanism’s “central governing body,” as Ruth Gledhill misleadingly puts it in her article, but is merely an occasional international gathering that meets for “consultation” on important issues, and that’s all.  It cannot “govern.”  Nor will it.

But the fact that ++Henry Orombi of Uganda and ++Mouneer Anis of Egypt are boycotting the event does speak volumes.  And in particular, it confirms the willingness of ++Anis to take a bolder, more active role in this conflict.

Bottom line: the deep “tear in the fabric” of the AC just keeps getting wider and deeper.  But the liberal primates said to be “furious” at ++Venables are still a minority among the primates.  This sort of thing is the last gasp of the old “Colonial” order within the AC.  It just confirms what ++Bob Duncan the Lion-Hearted said so aptly and eloquently in Jordan this past summer: the old “Reformation” or Elizabethan Settlement is dead or dying.  A whole new Global, “POST-COLONIAL” Settlement will emerge and take its place.  It won’t be pretty, but it will happen, as surely as day follows night, and spring follows winter. 

As the Psalmist said, “Weeping may endure for the night, but joy comes in the morning.”

David Handy+
Passionate advocate of high commitment, post-Christendom style, Christ-against-culture Anglicanism.

... has aroused the fury of liberal primates…

Beware of primates bearing Plymouths. A red and white ‘58 model has been seen in the Pittsburgh suburbs. 

Why am I not surprised?  It doesn’t take a gold-plated rocket scientist to figure out who’s behind this move….IF there’s any truth to it….and I assume that there is!  But does it really matter whether or not we have anything to do with Canterbury any more?  I seriously doubt it! 

If there IS a new Amglican Communion in the works, bring it on!  Can it also be that we might start talking seriously with the TAC?  Could a union with them be possible at some point?

... has aroused the fury of liberal primates…

As well as the sound I presume!

Matt,

You say the picture at the end says it all.  But I only recognize a few of the nine people in the photo.  Would you mind identifying the cast of “the usual suspects?”

What this news report does bring to mind is the infamous actions of this Joint Standing Committee in recommending to the primates in Tanzania in early 2007 that TEC had “adequately” complied with the requests made of it by the primates, and the equally notorious whitewashing efforts by this same group after the New Orleans meeting of the American HoB in the fall of 2007.

David Handy+

This is the same Joint Standing Committee of the Primates and Anglican Consultative Council which is dominated by extremist liberal primates (excepting Anis and Orombi who are now boycotting it) and which declared that TEC’s rejection of Dar es Salaam really wasn’t a rejection.  According to ENS, the JSC members are:

The Primates Standing Committee includes Archbishop Rowan Williams of England (chair), Archbishop Philip Aspinall of Australia, President Bishop Mouneer Anis of Jerusalem and the Middle East, Archbishop Henry Orombi of Uganda, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of the United States, and Archbishop Barry Morgan of Wales.
       
The ACC Standing Committee includes Bishop John Paterson of Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia (chair), Professor George Koshy of South India (vice chair), Philippa Amable of West Africa, Jolly Babirukamu of Uganda, Robert Fordham of Australia, Bishop Kumara Illangasinghe of Ceylon, Canon Elizabeth Paver of England, Bishop James Tengatenga of Central Africa, and Nomfundo Walaza of Southern Africa.

Take away Anis and Orombi and you’ve got Aspinall, Jefferts-Shori and Morgan.  So it really is no surprise that they would then try this stunt.

I don’t necessarily see this as a bad thing, because it will serve as yet another clear demonstration to the primates how out of touch the JSC and other Anglican Instruments of Communion are from the primates.  This is just another example of liberals kicking sand in the face of the conservatives, and past history shows that the Global South does not appreciate this kind of thing.  I would think that this would increase the chances of the primates positively reacting to the new CCP Anglican jurisdiction.

Piedmont (#9),

LOL.  I love the allusion.  Yes, so we see here that the liberal primates can display sound and fury, that signifies nothing.

David Handy+

The Episcopal Church of the US, which was suspended at a previous meeting, is expected to be welcomed back into the fold after sticking by its pledge not to consecrate any more gay bishops.

Good grief! So what if the election of another VGR hasn’t happened yet?  Haven’t these people read how many dioceses have repudiated B033 (the moratorium passed at GC2006) and passed resolutions in favor of same-sex blessings and the ordination of non-celibate LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ clergy?  What rock have they been living under?

As I recall, the saying went something like “I’ve been thrown out of better places”.

God bless Archbishop Venables for his selfless generosity and covering. God bless the GAFCon bishops for their continuing support.

Do you think Jefferts-Schori will let Rowan keep his job for so ably aiding and abetting the cause?  Or is she going to claim to be the ABC under some new interpretation of a canon yet to be determined?

Hi David+,

I was referring specifically to the proximity of KJS to the ABC…next to the ABC on the other side, his right, is the Primate of Australia, ++Aspinall. Next to him, on his right is the Most Rev. Barry Morgan of Wales.

Behind them stands, among others, Canon Kearon and James Rosenthall…who I thought had retired…

Does anyone really think that Her Majesty the Queen cares one whit about the Church of England and the Anglican Communion?  From our perspective on this side of the Atlantic, it looks like she either just doesn’t care and is completely out of touch with the Anglican world, or is content to let others do her thinking for her as far as Church affairs are concerned.  She’s just a figurehead Supreme Governor of the Church of England, and nothing more.  She could AT LEAST have used her moral influence, or what is left of it, and she couldn’t even be bothered to do THAT much!

Well, let’s see, that will take one vote away from conservative Anglicans in the ACC, IF it happens.  We’ll see. 
If Ms. Gledhill’s prognostications were accurate, +Iker, +Ackerman and +Schofield would be bishops in the Roman Catholic Church, as I recall one of her headlines last year.  And how many times since 2003 has the British press cast TEC out of the Communion.
If it is true, can we then assume that the same JSC intends to take similar action against each bishop of TEC who lied in ++Rowan’s face at Lambeth over SSBs, and was permitting them in their diocese before the conference was over?

Thanks, Matt, for identifying some of the people in the photo.  The more I think about it, the more I think you’re right, this photo is very revealing.  In particular, I note how very COLONIAL it all still looks, with the representatives of liberal Anglo, English-speaking provinces seated up close to the ABoC, and the conservative Global South representatives relegated to the back and sides.  Very telling indeed.  And very unrepresentative of the true state of Anglicanism these days.

David Handy+

I have learnt to be a little cautious of Ruth Gledhill’s breathless reporting, bless her, so would want some corroboration.  If you look at the list on <a > ACNS</a> there are no serious Primates there, just a few rump liberals, +Aspinall, +Barry Morgan, KJS and the rest are the usual excellent but not particularly outstanding group.

Were such a thing to be attempted I would conclude that our dear ABC had gone completely gaga and was doing his best to split the Communion, so I am not going to get too excited yet about this.

This doesn’t mean it will happen…But, now the important point, in the picture, where are the Scones? Or should that be S. Cones?

#16 - That’s Gregory Cameron in the back.  Jim Rosenthal took the photo.  He’s gone after Christmas.

Yes, I agree.  Putting Schori on his left and Aspinall (whom we got to know from being Rowan’s spokesperson at the Lambeth Conference on his right and Morgan at the table and it’s just postively a liberal love-in.  Unless Rowan remembers who stood with her arms folded when he finished his last Lambeth Conference address as her fellow TEC bishops walked out in protest.  The Welsh do have long memories.

bb

And let me add, as I read Ms. Gledhill’s report, all this amounts to is that TEC will introduce some motion at the JSC asking for punishment of Southern Cone.  I can’t say that is shocking news.  Let’s wait til the end of the week and see what actually happens, and keep our powder dry til then.  Were I ++Gregory, I would introduce a motion at the primates meeting to reconstitute the Primates’ Standing Committee.

The whole point of the TEC spin machine putting this story out to Ruth is to get us to overreact.

Not to be “political,” since my home isn’t in Wales, but this is ONE Welshman who indeed has a VERY long memory!  And I’m no fan of ++Barry Morgan, either.

On a side note, I have also been a bit leery of Ms Gledhill’s reporting lately.

And tjmcmahon, I think you’re right.

bb,
NOT apparently so long as two thousand years of Christian moral teaching and another two thousand of Jewish moral teaching before that.
Alas.

No, this is serious.  We need to pray for Archbishop Venables.  No braver sort can be found - as we may soon see.  This group is out to get him - personally.  This isn’t a province that’s gone off the reservation like TEC - this is an individual archbishop who has offered others protection and care and is being threatned with personal retribution.  It’s up close and it’s personal.  We should surround him in prayer and love and care ourselves through this week.  I mean it.

bb

Pageantmaster’s caution is very apt. This sounds like Gledhill/The Times making news up. The idea of +Mouneer just boycotting important meetings also seems out of character for him, given his past track record.

Well I bags having found the first mistake in Ruth’s blog column here.  According to Ruth this is a picture of delegates voting at what she calls the National Evangelical Council at All Souls, Langham Place.  Well it was the National Evangelical Alliance Consultation [“NEAC”] called by the Church of England Evangelical Council [“CEEC”] and that is not a picture of the event I attended, and if that is All Souls, Langham Place then I am a Chinaman!

Not to be “political,” since my home isn’t in Wales, but this is ONE Welshman who indeed has a VERY long memory!

LOL, I inherited caricature traits from several of my ancestors. I have a Welsh memory, an Irish temper and a German penchant for border crossing.

On the main subject, are we to assume that ++Rowan will now punish ++Gregory for actually doing what ++Rowan twice told us he would do (with set time frames no less) and then did not carry through on?  Could be.  Depending what happened in the markets today, if I still have $5, I would bet that there will be a “no decision” outcome from the JSC indaba.

FWIW, I would fully expect Rowan Williams to do whatever is in his power to nix such a resolution from the JSC.  The last thing Rowan Williams wants is a red flag waved in front of the primates this close to a primates meeting.

But let us engage in a little flight of fancy.  Suppose that the JSC does indeed suspend the Southern Cone.  Would this not anger many of the “moderate” primates?  And what if this anger boils over in the indaba groups, leading to a 2/3 majority vote to accept the new CCP jurisdiction as a Province.

It would then be at the AAC meeting in Jamaica that the addition of the new Province would be formalized, right?  And it would be at the meeting that the Southern Cone was suspended from, that the new Province would be admitted, which would then remove from the Southern Cone the charge of cross-border crossing.  Now THAT would be ironic indeed!

It appears that one can believe anything and be acceptable to the Anglican Communion from the perspective of those on the Anglican Consultative Council - however, one must also allow others to believe anything (the price of the acceptance of conservatives is that they agree that liberals - no matter how liberal - are also entitled to be called Christians) and one must refrain from making organizational changes.

The Southern Cone is guilty of breaking both these unspoken rules - so, “Off with their heads!”

Dr. Seitz:  There is a Joint Standing Committee meeting, and according to this ACNS press release, Abp. Anis is not there.

Posted On : November 25, 2008 2:56 PM | Posted By : Webmaster
ACNS: ACNS4543
Related Categories: ACC ACO
Primates, bishops, lay people from the various regions of the Anglican Communion are meeting this week at the Anglican Communion Office and Lambeth Palace in London. The group meets on a regular basis between official gatherings of their larger meetings.

Elected from within their respective bodies, the JSC are focussing attention on the forthcoming meetings of the Primates, in February in Alexandria, Egypt, the ACC in Jamaica, in May and ongoing business.

Those attending the meetings are:

Mrs Phillipa Amable, Ghana (West Africa)
Mrs Jolly Babirukamu, Uganda
Mr Robert Fordham, Australia
The Rt Revd Kumara Illangasinghe (Sir Lanka)
Prof George Koshy (India, Vice-Chair)
The Rt Revd John Paterson (Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia, Chair)
The Lay Canon Elizabeth Paver (England)
The Rt Revd James Tengatenga (Southern Malawi)
Ms Nomfundo Walaza (Southern Africa)

The Most Revd Phillip Aspinall (Australia)
The Most Revd Barry Morgan (Wales)
The Most Revd Katharine Jefferts Schori (TEC/USA)
The Most Revd Rowan D Williams Archbishop of Canterbury

The Secretary General, the Revd Canon Kenneth Kearon and the Deputy Secretary the Revd Canon Gregory Cameron and the Lambeth Palace Chief of Staff, Chris Smith are in attendance as are other staff as required.

Two members of the Primates Meeting group are absent, Uganda: The Most Revd Henry Orombi and Jerusalem and the Middle East: The Most Revd Mouneer Anis (Egypt).

#34 I understand. I simply question RG’s report and so any conjecturing about motives without hearing from the principals.

I would think it completely unrealistic to think that the new province would be approved by the ACC in May.  Politics aside, until such time as it constitutes 4 dioceses, I am not sure it is even discuss-able by the Primates (and whether you read the ACC constitution as meaning that province membership is initiated by the ACC or the Primates, it still needs 4 dioceses, and must be accepted by both bodies).  That means that once the proposed Constitution and canons for the province are unveiled next week, dioceses will need to review the constitution, call conventions, vote to join, etc. Given that it took them 2 votes to leave TEC and join Southern Cone, it strikes me as likely that under the canons of some, it might take 2 votes to leave Southern Cone and join a new province. If any one of the 4 former TEC dioceses were to reject or want to seriously amend the constitution or canons, it might require the time to constitute a diocese from the ADV.  Would the REC dioceses be acceptable under the ACC constitution?  I have no idea.
  Again, regardless of whether one favors a new province or not, I do not think it possible that the wheels of Anglicanism could turn so quickly as to have anything ready for the ACC to vote on in May.  This is more likely to take years than days or weeks.

#33 AnglicanXn, are we to assume you said “off with their heads” tongue-in-cheek?

Tjmcmahon, it DOES constitute four diocese now:  San Joaquin (the real one), Fort Worth, Pittsburgh, and Quincy.

I simply question RG’s report and so any conjecturing about motives without hearing from the principals.

  Dr. Seitz, by now you must realize that we spend 90% of our time conjecturing.  Before this is over, someone will be conjecturing on someone else’s conjecture criticizing you for questioning our conjecturing.

Someone named Kenneth Jones commented on Gledhill’s blog stating that he didn’t remember TEC being suspended, and I have to admit, that I don’t recall it ever being suspended either

TEC has NOT stuck by the moratoria, it’s been openly discussing selecting more non-celibate homosexual bishops. If Williams goes along with this, you will know once and for all that he is a fraud.

Cennydd,
There are 4 dioceses in Common Cause.  There are not 4 dioceses that have held diocesan conventions to accept the constitution and canons of a new province.  Each diocese is required to act under its own constitution.  The states they are in will hold them to it.
  I am not saying I don’t want them to, I am saying they have not.

You are correct, tjmcmahon.

“Gledhill: Conservative Anglicans face “punishment” for helping US rebels” sould that be “us rebels” or “U.S. rebels”

This is a sick joke.  :(  :(

If they do it, GAFCON will be rightly galvanized all the more solidly into taking the next step - perhaps that is what the LORD desires. 

When man hardens his heart against the LORD, He has a tendancy to harden it further.  Lord have mercy on Rowan Williams and his mates.

Read: should not sould…red face here

#17 Cennydd
“Does anyone really think that Her Majesty the Queen cares one whit about the Church of England and the Anglican Communion?”
Yes.

[30] Good catch

The photo is of the celebration of the June 29th announcement of the signatures on the GAFCON statement.  It is available on the GAFCON website.

I thought the room looked, well, too global and too much like my future.  When reading RG, don’t stray too far from the salt cellar.

Dr. Seitz: I think that doubting RG’s story is wise.

FWIW, over at The Lead, Jim Naughton points out that TEC was asked to voluntarily withdraw from voting at the ACC meeting - it was not “suspended”.  This is true and further reason why RG’s story is to be doubted.  The very likely probability is that the primates meeting would reverse the JSC’s request, and that would result in further chaos amongst the AC’s governing bodies.

#46 Then, pageantmaster, I submit that it is time for her to use her influence on the matters at hand.

The article suggests that the acceptance of the 4 dioceses into the Province of the Southern Cone is the same thing as the “bording crossing” which Lambeth spoke against.  I disagree.  Lambeth was against a foreign bishop interfering in or encroaching upon a terrority which already has a bishop, without that territory’s bishop’s permission.  The Southern Cone has neither gone into anyone else’s territory, nor has it disrespected any territory’s bishop.  Instead, they have welcomed into their province dioceses which have made canonically legal decisions to join them, with their bishops’ blessing.  It’s totally different, and does not go against Lambeth!

Glad to hear that ++Mouneer Anis is with Orombi on this one.

The more clarity the better. We have seen most of these characters, including the PB, act before when it declared TEC to be in substantial compliance.  Conservatives should not shed tears for “losing” the favor of the ABC. You never had it.

Also, please note that although a few bishops in the Southern Cone have engaged in “border crossings” by taking conservative congregations in liberal dioceses under their wings, the MAJORITY of the bishops of the Southern Cone have not done so.  It would be ridiculous to say that the Southern Cone, as a province, has done so.  But again, this is not the same as accepting the 4 dioceses into the province.

Cennydd, what influence she has is no doubt exercised privately.  I would expect that on her travels to Commonwealth countries, she would greet the relevant Anglican primates warmly.  And she and other royals would probably steer very carefully to avoid taking sides in the US dispute.

Cennydd, it’s only fair that the liberal primates demand to off ++Venables’ head.  After all,  they lost their heads years ago!

I had supper with Bishop Riah Abu El Assal this evening and he said that ++Mouneer had intended participating in GAFCON but could not get a visa. I realsie there have been tensions in the Middle East over GAFCON but it speaks volumes that the present Bishop of Jerusalem openly endorses TEC.

It is not ridiculous to say that GAFCON’s southern Provinces represent the majority of Anglicans worldwide and therefore that the other Southern Provinces not yet signed-up represent a small minority. They will ++ Gomez, Anis, and Chew have all expressed solidarity with +Duncan. And that is just the tip of the iceberg if ++Venables is targetted this week by JS and the ABC.

It looks like +Abc is is moving slightly away from +Schori and +Schori is moving slightly closer to +ABC. His hands are clearly together on the table, and hers are underneath ......

Note the update on Mrs Gledhill’s blog:

Archbishop Mouneer is absent because he was doing a consecration that clashed with the meeting. He has written to Archbishop Rowan with his views on the agenda for the next Primates’ Meeting. That is where the crucial decisions will be made. If the Primates agree on action against the Southern Cone, conservatives are saying, then full-blown schism is inevitable. A conservative source says: ‘Martyn Minns, David Anderson, Bob Duncan and Greg Venables are not separating from the Anglican Communion. They have never said they are and are doing all they can to remain with the Anglican Communion despite all that TEC are doing which is unchecked by the Anglican Communion leadership.’

This committee is obviously stacked, but they can’t do anything but recommend.  The action will be at the Primates’ Meeting, and if this committee does push for any sort of discipline for the Southern Cone, the fireworks there should be spectacular.

I don’t see that the Southern Cone has done much different—substantively different—than the African provinces that sponsored CANA or AMiA, and none of them was sanctioned by the AC.  I think the Southern Cone is significantly smaller than the great African provinces; I cannot imagine anyone trying to suspend Nigeria.  But I agree with TJ and others that we should read this report skeptically.

Alas, H.H., I fear that logic doesn’t enter in to this.  Whether what ++Greg did was “legal” or not, from the left’s point of view, he must be made an example of, pour encourager les autres!  I’m with BB: Prayer!

#57 Actually it looks like a meeting of the White Commonwealth.  Very representative.

Dick Mitchell in #59: I really don’t see how you can say that.  As I explained earlier in my post #50, the two things are entirely different.  The African provinces sent missionary bishops into territories which already had a bishop, without that territory’s bishop’s permission.  The Southern Cone, on the other hand, has not sent bishops into anyone else’s territory, and have not done anything without a bishop’s permission.  Quite the contrary.  Again, what the Southern Cone has done is not “border crossing,” and does not go against Lambeth.

Perhaps the Archbishop will award them all the Cross of St Bartholomew the Great for outstanding services rendered to uphold the unity of the Anglican Church.

Take a deep breath, folks. This story is way overblown. No one is going to be able to deprive the Southern Cone of a voice and vote at the next ACC meeting.

1. First, as to membership. The ACC Constitution provides that the PSC is a member, and Art. 3 requires, as we know by now, a two-thirds vote of all the Primates “to alter or add to the schedule” of membership. No matter how much TEC and its allies might wish it, they are not going to be able to kick the PSC off the membership schedule.

2. Next, as to vote. Section 6.1 of the ACC Guidelines states: “Only members of the council shall be entitled to vote on business before the council.” Section 7.2 provides: “The Council may at any time with the consent of the Standing Committee revoke, amend, or supplement these guidelines or any part of them for the better conduct of the business of the council.” I doubt whether the power to “revoke, amend or supplement” would include the power to deprive a duly constituted member of its right to vote—-remember that at Nottingham in 2005, the Primates had made only a request of TEC and ACoC that they “voluntarily withdraw” their representatives from the Council.

So the most that will happen is that a majority of the Primates might make such a request, and ++Venables can politely decline to do as they request. 

I think what happened is that TEC and ACoC were just asking ++Rowan to let ++Venables have a little of the medicine they were handed in 2005, and the request was leaked by someone who wanted it leaked to hit the news cycle before the meeting in Wheaton next week.

tjmcmahon, #34, don’t bet your last $5 on this one!
desertpadre

It’s all about the money.
Follow the money and there you will find the source of any decision or recommendation.
Poor Williams, he must feel like the captain of the winged monkeys right about now.  “Get them my pretty”...

Unless this new province is recognised as part of the Anglican family by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams and the other 38 primates, it will in effect become a new Anglican church.

This is the fable they said about the CC.  But it is Canterbury & Co. that has become a new Anglican Church.  It looks to me that the 4 dioceses are interested in remaining the same Church.

David Handy+
Passionate advocate of high commitment, post-Christendom style, Christ-against-culture Anglicanism.

“This has been a paid political announcement.”

“I’m David Handy, and I approved this message.”

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

Re. my #30 Looks like Ruth has corrected her blog…well apart from that National Evangelical Council bit.  Guess someone must read Standfirm?  Oh and I’m a big fan really - Ruth Contra Mundi.

perhaps that should be Contra Mundum

I see Ruth has added a jibe about the meeting at NEAC being open to anyone who paid £15 on the door.  I met people who had got up at the crack of dawn or earlier to travel to London for the event from the North, Midlands, Birmingham, Bristol.  All evangelicals of many stripes who approached it with commitment and seriousness.  Not fair to characterise the participants thus I would say.

However I must have overlooked Ruth in the crush.

I recall that the ABC approved of the Southern Cone taking in TEC dioceses in distress.  He called it, and I quote, “A sensible way forward”.  Why now does he think that we wouldn’t remember this?  I agree that we should pray for ++Venables.  Whether Ruth Gledhill is accurate or not is really beside the point.  We need to be in prayer! 

I was really hoping for future reconciliation.  If the entire Communion fractures over this, I fear that such reconciliation will never be possible.  Certainly, all things are possible with God, but my possibility glasses are a little dim when I look in that direction.

Phil/CryptoCatholic (#67),

LOL.  Hey, it’s nice to be noticed, even when people make spoofs about you.

But just for the record, I’m not running for any office.  Being the founder and leader of the NRAFC is enough for me.

David Handy+

#‘s 17, 46 & 48

She could AT LEAST have used her moral influence, or what is left of it, and she couldn’t even be bothered to do THAT much!

etc. . .
Isn’t there a saying that people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones?
and #72

I was really hoping for future reconciliation.

The only reconciliation acceptable to the Lord is with believers. It’s what TEC et al don’t get: Jesus does love us and He loves them, but without repentance, there is no reconciliation.  “Go and sin no more.”

#74.  I presupposed repentance when I said reconciliation.  Such repentance is not forthcoming at this time.  I still hold out hope for future repentance that would be grounds for reconciliation.  I wish people would stop lecturing me on this.  Hope for reconciliation does not equal cavorting with the enemy.  It should also be said that my enemy is not flesh and blood!

Lord knows we have much to thank Archbishops Anis and Orombi for, but my God, what is with missing these meetings?  It is totally inexcusable.  The whole “we’re not going to go to that meeting” attitude is inexcusable, and has been a disasterous strategy.

Not attending nonsense meetings speaks volumes. Until the West and their allies wish to rejoin the Christian fold and sign on to the Jerusalem Declaration there’s nothing to the dicuss. The orthodox will just go about the Lord’s business of building the Kingdom. When there’s reptenence and when the US, Rowan, etc. etc. choose to believe what Christians have always believed   . .  then there’s a reason to meet.

NB+S-
I don’t know about Abp. Orombi, but I believe Ruth G has published that Abp. Anis is consecrating a bishop, and has sent ++Rowan a letter outlining his thinking on the agenda items.  Truth be told, perhaps Bishops in parts of the world where Christianity can carry a death sentence have more important things to attend to than one more go round about TEC.  I mean, it is the functional equivalent (size wise) of the US senate meeting once a week to discuss dairy farming in Vermont.  Dairy farming in Vermont is important, but it does not take precedence over world wide economic crises or war in Iraq.

mari, #40,  This “suspension” probably refers to the Anglican Consultative Council meeting which followed the Dromantine meeting (I have forgotten all these dates, but I think this was in 2005.  Anyway, TEC was supposed to ” voluntarily withdraw itself from the councils of the Communion” according to the Windsor Report and this suggestion was strengthened by the Primates at their meeting at Dromantine. But in true TEC style they not only showed up at the ACC meeting, but gave a paper which explained to all those who had not “seen the light,” why their innovations were the correct “new thing” and, though not given a vote at that meeting (that was the “suspension”), were very much in evidence in and around the meeting which they were (voluntarily) not supposed to attend.  This is as close as those responsible for “tearing the fabric of the Anglican Communion at its deepest level” have ever been to being “disciplined,” or undoubtedly ever will be.
bb,  Whether RG is exaggerating or not, thank you for reminding us to hold one of the heroes of the Christian faith in our time, Archbishop Gregory Venables, in prayer.

#64   Chancellor, after some reflection on this subject, I’m inclined to agree with you.  There’s no sense in going off half-cocked, so let’s let this simmer for a day or so until we see the proof of what Gledhill alleges.  I want it straight from the horse’s mouth, and not hers!

Chancellor….Thank you! But we should all pray anyway. Prayer is always appropriate! And by the way mari….I really like that Kenneth Jones guy. He’s a good o’l sort!

#76 NBS - I wonder if they found the seating arrangements uncomfortable.  Worth reading their letters in support of +Duncan, theirs along with so many others.

On Ms. Gledhill, please wait for confirmation.  Please recall that 1.  Her access to sources is limited.  2.  That her reporting has more than once been questioned for accuracy.  3.  It was she who, after her interview with +Venables, stated that the +ABC had stated that the Venables “plan” (her word) was a “sensible way forward. +Venables subsequently denied that he had either sought or received +Cantuar’s approval.

4.  A possibility that has been overlooked here is that Ms. Gledhill’s “source” is not on the left but on the right.  If, again, it is +Venables it might make sense if he wished the primates to believe he was being poorly treated by the “West” or, he again could be misused or misquoted by Gledhill…. Again, ladiew and gentlemen…Wait for it.

#72 Modest Mystic.  As noted in 83 above.  No, if the ABC used the words, “sensible way forward”, it was not in the context of an approval of +Venables’ “plan”  He never sought or received such approval.  The misrepresentation of the content of the +Venables/+Cantuar conversation was Gledhill’s and, either from Gledhill or +Venables’, Schofield twice reported to his diocese in a pastoral letter read twice on Sundays just prior to their vote this mischaracterization of the ir conversation.

I’m including Archbishop Venables, and the rest of those holding fast in my prayers, also that the ABoC does the right thing.

It occurs to me that there might be an intent to intimidate those who have affiliated or those contemplating reaffiliating under the Southern Cone.

I’m with Kramer in 77—staying away sends a much clearer message about the crisis than sitting with the the TEC PB as if…......

EmilyH, given that what is known that it came about via Gledhill, it’s wrong to attempt to assign any blame to Archbishop Venables, speculatively.

Mari @ 87 Gledhill’s sources on the left are limited, but she clearly has sources on the right.  Whether she deals with them well is another story.  On the headline of this story, it is also possible that she didn’t write it, an editor’s redaction.  But the information in the story was poor.  TEC was asked to voluntarily refrain from voting which it did.  It may be that +Venables will be asked to also accept this request….Time Out so to speak. TEC accepted this request.  If such a request is made of +Venables, which I think is really all that can be done, (I don’t think he can be “suspended” as I don’t think the ACC can do that), it would be interesting to see his response.

Prayer.

Well we don’t know who the little bird is that has been whispering in Ruth’s ear and what they are seeking to influence but I am with Christopher Seitz’ and Chancellor’s assessment and join Jill in prayers for this meeting for the future of our Communion seeking to do God’s will.

In her blog, Ruth writes:

“One of the many tragedies of all this is just how rich the lawyers in the US are going to get as the inevitable property battles now escalate.”

Given my profession, I could take exception with her characterization of this as a tragedy.

On a more serious note, we should not cast the prospect of expensive litigation as unforeseeable misfortune.  TEC is presumably staffed by adults receiving counsel from experienced litigators.  Make no mistake - these progressives make their innovations knowingly - the cost in dollars is a tolerable, just as the cost in broken churches, people, broken relationships, ruptured communion, etc., is insufficient to prompt reconsideration or compromise.

In view of the foregoing, perhaps the lawyers can make better use of the money.

If ++Venables is asked and he concedes to withdraw voluntarily, then, despite Ephraim+‘s distaste of the term, we truly would have moral equivalency between communion tearing actions of the TEC and border crossing.

Here is the big but…

We have the new constitution coming out is a week. When the dioceses and the ANiC approve it, ++Greg will no longer be border crossing. So the relevance may only be for the May meeting!

(tongue only slightly in cheek)
Speaking of moral equivalence…..
It would seem only fair (or morally equivalent) that if Southern Cone were asked to withdraw from the councils of the Communion, that the Archbishop of Canterbury be asked to withdraw as well.  Because regardless of what S. Cone of other GS jurisdictions were doing to support breakaway parishes, ++Greg would never have extended oversight to whole dioceses (or needed to), if ++Cantaur had implemented the unanimously accepted Dar plan.

Has he offered even a modicum of explanation for why he didn’t implement the Dar plan? Or has he simply ignored it ever since he left the meeting?

Sometimes we need to step back and review the situation, just to understand how ludicrous this has all gotten.

It’s easy to forget in all the Sovietology over dark intrigues within Lambeth Palace and the ACC that we are dealing with a wayward province that is led by people who think and/or tolerate the teaching that:

- A man can “marry” a man - supported by multiple, contradictory explanations, many of which are not theological, and most of which would also compel the church to bless a transaction with a prostitute or a “marriage” of five men and two women.
- Christ did not really rise.
- Christ is not really Christ, just an enlightened teacher whom we choose to follow (when convenient), but whom others definitely should not.
- All of Christ’s miracles are really fraudulent myths invented by the patriarchy.
- Christ did not die for our sins, especially since we don’t really have any, and, if we did, we have it in our power to reconcile ourselves to each other, anyway.
- St. Paul was a repressed homosexual who worked overtime to distort and maim Christ’s teachings.
- A priest can (should?) be both a Christian and a Muslim.
- A priest can (should?) be both a Christian and a Wiccan.
- The church should sell material teaching witchcraft, especially witchcraft that can further our sexual exploits.
- &c;.

Against this partial list, we have an embarrassingly few dioceses that understandingly want nothing to do with the institution championing these weird innovations.  And yet, the Anglican Communion is said to be proposing that this institution be afforded full membership, and the embarrassingly few dioceses be read out of Anglicanism.

Am I missing something?

Never mind.  I return you to another 5,000-word, obscure essay by the ACI as to how this is all OK.  Take another Valium.

Don’t count on ++Venables’ withdrawing from anything.

Whether or not this comes to pass, I would say the primary motivation might not be “punishment” but legal positioning. TEC’s legal advisors may think that if the Southern Cone appears to be “excommunicated” by the Communion it weakens the legal standing of the four Dioceses who have realigned. Given the apparently stacked membership, I would not be too surprised if the JSC did vote to ask SC to excuse themselves, but I would be very surprised if 2/3 of the Primates upheld such an outcome of the Joint Standing Committee meeting.

monika

While the Queen exercises no real power - the PM still has a weekly audience - from everything I have read the powers that be do not like hearing that the Queen is displeased in areas where she still holds some residual influence like commonwealth relations (she is the official head of state of many of its members ie Australia and Candada) and the church.

I have a question about one of the themes running through this thread.  Are we shooting the messenger because we don’t like the message?  If Gledhill is wrong, we can have a party.  If she is right, we need to be in prayer and we need to discern what this means for the new province.  Phil #95 is very correct in his assessment of the situation.  What Gledhill proposes, whether it finally will manifest or not, is entirely possible.  It would be foolish of us not to heed the warning and prepare ourselves.  Monika #97 has an interesting point, and one that should not be overlooked.

Let’s <a >enhance the photo</a> with a nice little play on words.

Oops! Let’s try the link again.

This seems like one of the nuttiest threads I’ve read.  No one really knows what is going on, the reporter may be acting as a gossip columnist and yet there are 102 entries.

Guess SF people just like to talk to each other.

Happy Thanksgiving all (of those who are celebrating it).  And remember, the first Tgiving was in VA not MA…..

Boy, am I slow on the uptake!

I just now realized why it is called the Joint Standing Committee!

* slaps forehead *

1) When did those holding fast to the Faith as delivered to the Saints become ‘rebels’.
2) Since when did a London newspaper reporter become THE authority?
3) All of you who really care what Ruth thinks please raise your hand.

I’m done with this thread.

I just want to make a small clarification, because there are several people on here who talk as though Archbishop Venables equals the Southern Cone.  Yes, he is its spokesperson—but there are a number of things which he does personally (or in his capacity as the Bishop of Argentina) which do not necessarily express the mind of the whole province and are not done on the province’s behalf.  I do not say this because I disagree with anything he has done, nor do I mean to imply that there is division within the province.  I just mean to point out that the Southern Cone can and should only be held accountable for what the province does, not for what ++Venables does alone.  And again, I would argue that welcoming another diocese into your province does not contravene Lambeth’s statements about border crossing!!!

Oh my gosh, I can’t believe what y’all have been talking about while I’ve been busy in the kitchen.  Hod Rod Anglican is joking about joints and Fr Van wants to know where the scones/S. Cones are—and I’m wondering where the cajones are (or however you spell it).  Cajones in the Communion, that is.  I’m sure there are no cajones in my turkey giblets.  Ruth is just stirring up the pot and I have pies to bake.

ELO is reporting that the JSC meeting is over.

Regarding the matter of RG and the Southern Cone, KJS is quoted as saying, “The subject has not come up.”

Rafe, always a cynic (but still in TEC), doubts that the subject did not come up. Oh, to have been a cockroach on the wall, listening in on this closed happy-church meeting!

See:
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_103093_ENG_HTM.htm

There are some great pictures, ripe for Photoshopping by crazed conservatives. Oh, the caption opportunities!!!

Well….interesting that! I thought that Ruth was reliable? LOL1 And BabyBlue thought this was “serious & the group was out to get him”? it is always better to pray and wait and not jump to conclusions unless you have good inside information that can be openly shared!

#75 You are absolutely right- we should all be praying for reconciliation and not only with those who are going a different way, but with those from whom we went a different way.  God cannot be very happy with any of us, and happy is not the word I would use for those of us who have removed ourselves from temptation.  It is bittersweet. No one said it would be easy and, in fact, we are told by Our Lord that if we love Him, we will take up our crosses and follow Him.  THAT is the bottom line.  God often moves in mysterious ways and He moves in His time, not ours.  Prayer is never wasted.  People make statements in different ways, some by showing up and talking and others by boycotting.  It would seem that neither has had much effect.

Please i beg you people you surely need prayer…seriously, if you think this weird knocking on the head business and falling on your face is for real, YOU NEED PRAYER… God wants you to pray with the holy spirit. The holy spirit wants to talk to his people… in my church the holy spirit talks through people shows visions about people and thats what you need in your life. I don’t think that falling on the ground is from God… God bless you guys :( i hope you understand Gods true power…

Gigs Girl, sorry, but while it’s true everyone needs prayer, I think you have hold of the wrong end of the stick.

In scripture, Christ tells us to remove ourselves from those who refuse to repent their sins. Reconciliation is dependent on those who are excusing sin, and seeking to promote sin to others, including children, seeking redemption with God, by admitting their sin, and promising to sin no more.

#112 Mari - God wants us all to be one and we should be praying for reconciliation with TEC, dependent upon their repentance and return to the Lord of course.  But that is not what I meant when I said

You are absolutely right- we should all be praying for reconciliation and not only with those who are going a different way, but with those from whom we went a different way.

I was referring to our having left Rome.  They may have their problems but they do not teach that sin is all right, quite the opposite.  We went a different way from Rome, NOT from TEC.  THEY are the ones who went a different way.

I’ve always found it the ultimate irony that border crossing appeared anathema to TEC but yet blessing sodomy in every way, shape, and form was always ok. 

Then again, it probably dislikes border crossing because it doesn’t want to give even an inch of quarter and doesn’t like appearing “wrong” in any way. 

Waaahhh…..

[94] oscewicee asked

“Has he offered even a modicum of explanation for why he didn’t implement the Dar plan? Or has he simply ignored it ever since he left the meeting?”

Here is a possibility.  Dar could be seen to give some sort of authority over churches/provinces to the primates.  It is, correctly understood, advisory yes,  but,  nevertheless, moves in that
direction. +Cantuar could not support such a measure as, if became something more than advisory, violate the rules of the Church of England.  The CofE will not permit offshore rule by an exterior power.  If’s called praemunire and it was Rome’s attempt to control the church
in England that resulted in the English reformation and the establishment of the CofE. ... Elizabeth was far more concerned with polity than theology

+Cantuar could not support such a measure as, if became something more than advisory, violate the rules of the Church of England.

Funny that he didn’t tell all those earnest folks at Dar, then, that they were wasting their breath - to say nothing of their time and money in attending? Why not just have a cozy tea instead?

The Dar es Salaam communique received unanimous agreement by the primates, including the Archbishop of Canterbury and PB Schori.

The only person to spin a statement is KJS.  There’s been no joint-statement and no press conference and nothing from Lambeth Palace.  In fact, the only press release is from ENS.

bb

Typical of KJS, isn’t it?  Oh, well, what can one expect from that woman?