Gordon, in these posts I have not attemped to argue that Venables should go to Lambeth. (In fact I described myself a few posts ago as a Lambeth skeptic. And I am - I think Gafcon is where our bishops should go).
My point has been rather less grand and rather less important. I pointed out the case of Venables - a gallant defender of Packer and Short - to illustrate that your rhetoric was in my mind somewhat overblown. I would prefer not to mention the rhetoric issue again, because we have debated it to a standstill. And it is not the main issue, for this thread.
Venables hammered out his position on Standfirm, not here. I would go there and read the threads if you want to engage with his position.
A point I would like to make here is that while it is right to get all the boats in the evangelical fleet headed in the same direction, it is likely that they will leave harbour at different times.
Thus Short and Packer stayed in the ACoC when other of the 8 parishes that walked out of the New Westminster synod left immediately. Ed Hird, the leader of that group, joined in the commissioning service with Venables last week. They have not let this tactical issue divide them. Hird is not calling Short a slowpoke. Short is not saying Hird was hotheaded for leaving first. It is not important to them that one group left New Westminster four years earlier than the other.
Similarly, the primates in the Gafcon leadership group have decided that the Lambeth issue will not divide them. Not every boat is leaving port at exactly the same time.

For what it’s worth. My bishop (thouroughly Evangelical) is going to Lambeth. Why? He lived and worked in a Liberal Diocese and saw many evangelicals stay away from Synods and meetings etc. and hence give too much ground to the Liberals (who seemed to take over the hierachy and through that thoughoughly silence the gospel in the Anglican church there, espwecially when it came to employing evangelical Clergy). He is worried that if evangelicals don’t go, another battle will be lost.

He’s not the kind of Guy to pick fights, but he will stand up for the gospel and oppose those who would repress it and pervert it.

Oh yes, I think he’s going to GAFCON too.

Another Gafconite Lambether
http://www.fwepiscopal.org/news/lambethannouncement.html
Bishop Iker, whose diocese has started the process of leaving TEC, is going to both.
“I stand in solidarity with all those Bishops who have decided, as a matter of conscience, that they are unable to be at Lambeth,” said Bishop Iker.  “However, given the situation the Diocese of Fort Worth finds itself in with the unfolding realignment that is taking place in Anglicanism, I think it is important for me to be there to make our case and to face our detractors.”
(As an Anglo catholic he may not fit the thread title. On the other hand he invited Venables to address his diocese the other day, and got the normal telling off from the liberals...)

Anglo-catholics, as I said earlier, have the greatest reason of all to feel conflicted over all this, including Iker. But the stated reason just doesn’t make sense. Not going makes the case far more strongly than going.

And once again, there is no appeal to Scripture.

Well you have no argument with me on that one. Someone beat you to it on the Standfirm site where I got a pointer to Iker.

More good stuff from Venables on the schism within Anglicanism.

Latest: 267 bishops signed up for GAFCON.

If my houseparty and conference organization is anything to go by, half the people will sign up after the deadline and then phone up the day before it starts asking if anybody’s organized transport for them. Then 10% won’t turn up, and will ask for their deposit back.

(NB not St Paul’s Carlingford, where such things never happen ;-) )

Meanwhile, David Ould compares the liberal bishops who seek to derail Lambeth (and through it, Anglicanism) to the dogs at Philippi. It’s a brave and loving stand.

Okay, as a new joiner I almost need to have a week off work to catch up where the forums have gone over the last while…

I do have some reservations with being too antagonistic in a post, but then I did just read through this entire thread today so on the basis of what has been said by people already, all such reservations can be thrown out the window…

“Now say I worked for an outpost of a thoroughly right of right evangleical parish (say St Matthias) and went to a Sydney anglican church...Now my church is a member of a diocese, headed by an Archbishop, that is part of the Anglican Church of Australia, that is in full communion with the Church of England headed by the Most Rev’d Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury (and Primus inter Pares, head of the worldwide Anglican Communion)...who is also in communion with people such as the Rt Rev’d Gene Robinson…

“Wouldn’t I have a crisis in that I AM IN COMMUNION WITH FALSE TEACHERS?!?”

Lambeth is completely besides the point in many ways is it not? By remaining an Anglican I give my fundamental support to the ordination of homosexual priests and the consecration of homosexual bishops, do I not? It is not as though ordaining gays is a new thing...as my old chaplain in Melbourne said, ‘London would cease to exist if not for homosexual priests’

Now to give the disclaimer, I’m an evangelical. I’m not a Jensenite, i probably am not a Sydney Evangelical - I dont see the Pope as the anti-christ and I see the possibility of an evangelical reading of scripture that allows for faithful homosexual relationships. Oh, and I’m also gay. (My opinion being that I can see where some people can hold an Evangelical, not a liberal, viewpoint that some faithful homosexual relationships are not necessarily contrary to scripture; however to my conscience such a position is not possible for me)

Adrian said:
Now to give the disclaimer, I’m an evangelical. I’m not a Jensenite, i probably am not a Sydney Evangelical

Hi Adrian,

Since you consider yourself an Evangelical and you live (or at least worship) in the Sydney region (according to your profile), then you are a Sydney Evangelical.

That is the way the English language works! 8-)

And welcome to these forums.

P.S. I assume I am a Jensenite because I really liked having Pastor David Jensen lead my local church in 2007. 8-)

Grace & peace,
Terry

Terry Gallagher - 31 May 2008 12:27 AM

[Since you consider yourself an Evangelical and you live (or at least worship) in the Sydney region (according to your profile), then you are a Sydney Evangelical.

That is the way the English language works! 8-)

P.S. I assume I am a Jensenite because I really liked having Pastor David Jensen lead my local church in 2007. 8-)

Okay, I’m definitely Evangelical, and grew up in Sydney and consider the most beautiful sight in the world coming in between North and South head (I’m in the Navy...it has symbolism). I cannot argue against the English language, I AM a Sydney Evangelical…

Jensenites are not a bad thing...just not what I am. I love the Jensens in many ways...tho I suppose if I had a vote back many years ago I would have gone for Rob Forsyth.

Thanks for the welcome

In today’s SMH, David Marr quotes Peter Jensen as saying that the ‘old church [referring to the Anglican communion] is finished’. See here.

Adrian, I’m not sure what your question is?
Can you clarify briefly for the sake of our readers what your query is?

Since you consider yourself an Evangelical and you live (or at least worship) in the Sydney region (according to your profile), then you are a Sydney Evangelical.

That is the way the English language works! 8-)

Not necessarily Terry.  As the Duke of Wellington once said (upon being described as an Irishman), just because you were born in a stable, doesn’t make you a horse.

Welcome Adrian.

A reader of my blog pointed me towards this site, the Society For the Propagation of Reformed Evangelical Anglican Doctrine. It’s got an Illinois postal address on the website, and looks like some good recent responses to Lambeth, including positive quotes of Phillip Jensen in the pdf entitle “Counterfeit Communion and the Truth that Sets us Free”.