Given the amount of discussion that has already been generated concerning Lambeth 2008, I thought it would be profitable to re-start the ongoing discussion by gathering together as many of the key SA website articles as possible concerning the response by various Sydney evangelicals, and especially the Archbishop’s explanation of why the Sydney Anglican bishops are boycotting Lambeth.

As material is linked or posted on the Sydney Anglican website, I will try to post relevant links here in the OP in order to keep the discussion reasonably up-to-date. I will indicate updates by adding the word ‘update’ plus the date.

So for starters, once you’ve read Peter Jensen’s address to Standing committee (previous link), you can also find:

*audio from Phillip Jensen’s briefing of March 14 This is the uber-link that has all the other briefings on it from that day as well, in audio and pdf.

Specifically, Phillip Jensen’s briefing must be read in context of the others. So here is, in pdf format:

*Mark Thompson’s briefing.

*Robert Tong’s briefing

*Russell Powell’s briefing

These other briefings are necessary background to understanding Phillip’s comments rightly.

Also, buried deep in the previous Lambeth discussion but certainly worth more attention, if only to correct some serious misapprehensions, are Sandy Grant’s historical notes regarding the attitudes of Sydney bishops to General Synod in Australia. Sandy’s comments are well worth preservation by linking them here. Sorry about the scroll lock, dunno who did that.

Also, if you want to get GAFCON in its own words, their official GAFCON website is going to be a very useful and important resource.

The Anglican Church Website is worth checking regularly (updated most days).

UPDATE APRIL 21: Gay bishop decides to attend Lambeth anyway.

UPDATE APRIL 22: The ACL has posted Jim Packer and David Short’s response to their bishop’s ‘Notice of the Presumption of abandonment of ministry’.

UPDATE APRIL 30: Terry Venables has predicted the demise of the Anglican Communion.

UPDATE MAY 9: 267 bishops signed up for GAFCON.

UPDATE JUNE 6: Peter Jensen declares old Anglican communion dead.

UPDATE JUNE 15: Peter Jensen about GAFCON, on the eve of leaving to go to this conference

Please PM me any links that you think are especially relevant, and I will select at least some of them for inclusion here in this OP. Or of course, you can always just add your link by posting them yourself! (Here on this thread)

Another great evangelical response to include is the link to the South East Asian bishops’ statement:

SEA bishops at Virtue Online

Jenny George - 31 March 2008 03:27 PM

Another great evangelical response to include is the link to the South East Asian bishops’ statement:

SEA bishops at Virtue Online

Do these characters actually appeal to the Bible anywhere in providing a rationale for urging attendance at Lambeth?

I looked but I did not see. In fact, there was actually no reference to the Bible full stop, which indicates a problem. Evangelical some of these people may be, but it is not an evangelical response.

No its not an evangelical response. Some SEA dioceses are Anglo-Catholic (eg Sarawak)

Ah, that would explain it.

It seems to me the people who will feel the most tension and pain through this process are the genuine Anglo-Catholics. For evangelicals, the Bible makes matters clear. For liberal Anglo-Catholics, they are pushing as hard as they can in the other direction. But I feel sorry for those Anglo-Catholics who still hold to orthodoxy and biblical ethics, and are trying to work out what to do.

There would be a strong argument from a genuinely Anglo-Catholic perspective, I would imagine, to see GAFCON as the place which really represents the Anglo-Catholic way forward.

Hmmm…

Well the mob at Fulcrum are at least trying to use the Bible… not that the ‘call to action’ is particularly clear.

NOTE: Fulcrum is the self-described voice of the evangelical ‘centre’. Or to put it in Gordo-esque language they are evangelical equivalent of Mr Whippy - so soft they are almost melting.. ;)

There is also an interesting parallel discussion of our own Cathedral briefing on the GAFCON thread. Not as feisty as ours.

Jeremy Halcrow - 31 March 2008 04:12 PM

evangelical equivalent of Mr Whippy - so soft they are almost melting.. ;)
.

Yeeow! That’s gotta hurt. Hope none of those soft-centre choccies were reading just now, Jeremy.

too harsh?

You’re asking me??? ;-)

Gentlemen, I’m glad to see that someone changed the title of this thread before I had to myself. If it’s to be a discussion at all it has to at least allow room for people of differing opinions to enter on the same footing as everyone else. If there is to be derision, then let it arise naturally from the arguments they present not the tags we append.

I am hoping for some calm in the discussion of this very important and emotional debate, but I am realistic. And so I will be paying as much attention as I can over the coming days. I don’t intend to allow people to take the Roman approach to winning an argument, those who ‘made a desert and called it peace.’

With encouragement,

Mark

Mark Hadley - 31 March 2008 04:38 PM

Gentlemen, I’m glad to see that someone changed the title of this thread before I had to myself.

Sorry Mark, I don’t understand? The current thread title is the one that I had in mind and I thought I typed. Possibly early onset something or other, but I don’t remember changing it.

I’m sorry Gordon, was this the thread you suggested elsewhere you were going to call the ‘Lambeth Tea Party’? Or is that in existence elsewhere, and I’ve got more work to do?

If so, my apologies. Back to the main menu… (I should make it my home-page these days)

The whole tea party question is a fraught one which I’m not proposing to revisit on this thread. But no, that was not my original title, you have no further work to do. Rumours abound of a naming competition to provide a more apt description of whatever it is that’s going to happen at Lambeth, but remember you didn’t hear them from me. ;-)

I think that’s a little disingenuous:

So please ignore my request re moving the original Lambeth thread, Luke, Mark et al. The new, improved, Lambeth Tea Party thread can be found right here.

... with the ‘here’ leading to this thread.

I can only say I’m glad you thought better of the title when you actually created the thread. Hopefully the rest of this discussion will involve everyone thinking in Christ-like way about the words they choose before they use them.

All I can say is that the thread was never going to be called that. In fact, if you think about it, the thread with its current title had to be in existence before it was linked on the other thread.

However I do stand by the defence I offered, in that other thread you’re quoting from, of the use of satire. ‘Strain out a gnat but swallow a camel’ is an excellent example of Jesus using satire to achieve his rhetorical purposes. Exhortation to Christ-like speech I can agree with, but Christ used satire and exaggeration often enough that we shouldn’t confuse Christ-likeness with a certain type of etiquette.

In this particular case, the thread title was very carefully chosen and is not satirical in the least. If I was trying to be satirical, I would call the angry response of some to the Dean’s briefing the ‘strain out the gnat and swallow the camel’ response. We ought to keep the spotlight fairly and squarely on how we should respond to false teachers who refuse to repent; not on whether we’ve managed to hurt the feelings of those whose response to that false teaching is sub-biblical.

Actually, I think you will find that it is possible to do both - ‘keep the spotlight ... on how we should respond to false teachers’, and do so in a manner that shows concern for the feelings of all involved. It is the difficult job of speaking the truth in love. That is, at least, how I will be moderating, and how you will be required to post.

I don’t think I can be any clearer, but if there is any uncertainty I invite people to re-read the posting policy for these forums. A link appears on every page.