I need to have this interpreted.

Is he speaking for himself only, or speaking for a group?

What are the unsaid implications?

In some sense, it reads like the opinion of a court of law. In another sense, it reads like a mist of spray from a water bottle.

Good observation. I totally agree.

Now, on behalf of the faithful that sit in the pews, I have to ask, Is anyone going to DO anything to fix the situation?

So far +Iker seems to have made a start, but it looks like a very small one.

God bless us every one.

I know on the one hand these guys (the Africans and the Asians and here in the states, Duncan and Anderson) are being polite and waiting until the very end of the convention to really say anything.


But all this talk of the revelation of clarity that has come out of ECUSA's convention is not cutting it for me.

I had better well see some clarity in about 24-48 hours after this disaster in Columbus is over....or here's some clairty from me....I'll be dropping the attendance of my parish by 10% next Sunday just by taking myself, my wife and my 5 children out of Christ Church in St. Marys, GA.

How about that guys? Is that clear enough for you? You silent, timid Orthodox had better get off your butts and do something radical, or we're outta here!!!!!!!!!!

I think he's speaking to the obvious assualt on the instruments of unity, Angilcan tradition and the scriptural prerequsites for a Bishop. No mistaking ++Venables position in this matter.

And for that I'm greatful.

Rootbranch:

It's way too late for us to do anything. It's like ignoring that odd pain in your gut that you've had for the last 5 years. This last Sunday afternoon you started puking up blood. ECUSick started puking last Sunday afternoon. It's way too late.

My wife and I are trying to decide between an APCK Church or the Roman Chuch. But the episcopal cult, contrary to Steveissatan's response to me yesterday, my wife and I are no longer welcome in our present esick parish. We've been exposed as orthodox, now start the snubs, slurs, etc all those other wonderful qualities of liberal inclusion.

Come on Greg, spit it out. What on earth are you trying, so ineptly, to say? Is this addressed to anyone? Is this your response? Or as inferred, was there some sort of meeting of the Anglican Communion that no one knows about? Yikes! The only thing that's clear is that Greg is schooled in anglican speak.

As I understand it, these are two statements of fact. 1) What the Instruments of Unity require is clear. 2) What ECUSA has done has clearly demonstrated their response.

Maybe I can boil it down even further:

TEC/ECUSA have chosen to walk apart.

Why do you need a church Stevil? Why don't you simply volunteer to the United Nations or SPLC or ACLU and leave the rest of us alone?

My interpretation of The Most Reverend Venables' remarks is this: he is saying that the sincerity of the Episcopal Church's desire to remain in communion with the rest of the Anglican Communion is dubious at best.

WR was clear in its request of TEC. TEC is likewise clear in its response: we will not change our present course.

Steve;

Take your thorazine pill and go sit and play with your fingers.

Hey, godis, what is your definition of "love"?

Don

I really don't see what is so hard to understand about Venables' statement. It's clear to me that it is clear to Venables' that TEC has no intention of doing what it needs to do to remain within the Communion. Does he need to say anymore at this point?

What is refreshing is that he released a short, and to the point, statement. I guess you ECUSA watchers aren't used to that. You are so used to the progressives "wordsmithing" that you are conditioned to look for hidden meanings and non-meanings.

This whole thing is hilarious.

Interpretation:
we asked you to repent, you gave us the finger
buh-bye!

A more wordy interpretation: the Primates indicated in their meetings and by the WR that when ECUSA violated Lambeth 1.10 that they would have to repent or be considered outside the communion. Their response to date has been to elect a PB who believes ECUSAs actions were correct and, in fact, wants ECUSA to go further in this wrong direction.

Venables gets it; Akinola will too. When the ABC invites KJS and Ecusa to Lambeth, the Global South will withdraw and the Anglican Communion will be a little cult consisting of the UK, US, Canada, South Africa and a few other small provinces. There will be more liberal bishops than faithful priests and deacons in that sect.

I wonder what the new worldwide communion will call itself? The African Communion? The Orthodox Communion? Time will tell...

Faithfully,
Gideon

Gander writes:

"Hey, godis, what is your definition of "love"?

Oh I don't know, a day at the spa and then an evening visit to the bathhouse. Oooh, how glorious!!

GIL writes "spit it out"
(see Rev 3:16)

RootBranch,

With all respect and Christian love, why have you been waiting? You want someone to "do something radical." Why aren't you doing it, instead of expecting someone else to do it for you? How much clarity do you need?

I would agree that this terse commentary by ++Venables is filled with possibilities, but he appears to be making a firm statement in each sentence. First, that the Anglican Primates have let ECUSA know very well what they MUST do...like coloring by numbers. Secondly, because ECUSA keeps coloring outside the lines they have let the rest of the communion...needless to say Rome and the East...know that they could care less. Now come the consequences, which ++Venables obviously won't say until he's spoken with the other Primates and they make a collective response. This Church doesn't operate along protestant lines...its ecclesiology is Catholic.

The interesting thing is that ++Venables is only talking about Schori's election...wait until ECUSA's pathetic resolution on the WR is finalized!

Another interesting point in the light of +Iker's request for provincial oversight from ++Rowan is that this places the AofC in a delicate position. If he says no, any of a number of other primates, such as ++Venables, would be thrilled to take Fort Worth under their wing, which would cause major problems for ++Rowan and any attempt to keep the AC united. If he says yes, which appears to be his only option (after he dances around the issue for a while), then the floodgates are open. Needless to say, ++Rowan doesn't have the luxury of months or years to make up his mind.

I always figured Steve for a swallower.

Damascus writes:

I always figured Steve for a swallower.

AAALLLLLRighty then It's up, it's outta here :~)

Watch it though as Queenie seems to be a protected species in this forum.

If I were a bettin' man I 'd bet you're right though.

I actually have read such explanations of the word.

Once we divorce ourselves from Scripture we divorce ourselves from reality as well.

May God show you the people he has for you to worship with.

Don

I have met ++Venables.
He is a truly great and humble man. A man of conviction, great humour, grace, and uncompromising principles. I would suggest that he, by analogy, is akin to the Argonath, in the Lord of the Rings.

Whereas GIL, is akin to a diminuitive ecclesial incontinent spot on a set of trousers.

MAKE NO MISTAKE - ++Venables is stating that he has noticed, and he has just placed the ECUSA on notice.

His collective response cannot come quickly enough!

Mushbrain, I think that Archbishop Venables was extremely clear in what he said! What more does he need to say? Nothing! He usually doesn't mince words....and he didn't this time, either. Bravo for him!

Cennydd

Poster: Gander Posted: 2006/6/20 16:06:09

Hey, godis, what is your definition of "love"?

Don

Don, please do not ask the demon GIL for answers.
===============

Everyone needs love. Everyone desires love. But not everyone understands love. In fact, love is probably the most misunderstood subject in history.
In his first Encyclical, Pope Benedict helps to clarify the meaning of love. He examines the nature of various kinds of love—human love and divine love, eros, friendship, and charity. He writes beautifully and inspirationally of how man was made for love by the God who is love, the God who became one of us out of love—Jesus Christ.

In the second part of the Encyclical, Benedict addresses the Church's practice of love. He examines the relationship between justice and charity, as well as the call of every Catholic to serve others in love. The Pope's "love letter" to mankind is remarkably accessible and timely.

Jewels from “God Is Love” ~ Deus Caritas Est

"'God is love and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him' (1 Jn 4:16). These words from the First Letter of John express with remarkable clarity the heart of the Christian faith: the Christian image of God and the resulting image of mankind and its destiny."

"We have come to believe in God's love: in these words the Christian can express the fundamental decision of his life. Being Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, that gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction."

"St. John's Gospel describes that event in these words: 'God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should . . . have eternal life' (3:16). In acknowledging the centrality of love, Christian faith has retained the core of Israel's faith, while at the same time giving it new depth and breadth."

"In a world where the name of God is sometimes associated with vengeance or even a duty of hatred and violence, this message is both timely and significant. For this reason, I wish in my first Encyclical, to speak of the love which God lavishes upon us, and which we in turn must share with others."

"I wanted here—at the beginning of my Pontificate—to clarify some essential facts concerning the love which God mysteriously and gratuitously offers to man, together with the intrinsic link between that Love and the reality of human love."

—Pope Benedict XVI

====

Another link;
http://www.the-tidings.com/2006/0210/difference.htm

====

ps please quit referring to GIL as Steve or Fr_Steve. He was relieved of the demon that possessed him. i know many good and faithful Christians named Steve and even an orthodox priest named Steve.

GIL is the demon that used to possess Fr_Steve.

humbly, gregory

Fr Steve you now what he wants to say.The war againt the evil powers is just starting. Guys what do you think about the pervert godislove aka Fr Steve to be the new bishop of Nevada,he is the ideal candidate, I sure he is in a stable
samesex reletionship.After the Evil general Convention of the Evil Episcopal Church(TEEC) elected the so called Bishop of Nevada(a stupid
liberal protestant who thinks that is a bishop),as its Matriarch a pro sodomite,what do you want Steve? Now TEC is just one more marginal
Sect as the Jehovas'Witnesses and the Mormons.
I think that the HQ of the TEC should be transfered to San Francisco , and her title shoul be Her Evilness Katherine I Pagan Matriarch of TEC and archbishop of San Francisco the New Sodom. The Grace Cathedral should change its name to Matriarchal Cathedral of St Jezebel the Whore.

please quit referring to GIL as Steve or Fr_Steve. He was relieved of the demon that possessed him. i know many good and faithful Christians named Steve and even an orthodox priest named Steve.

GIL is the demon that used to possess Fr_Steve.

humbly, gregory

Rootbranch, You and your family are invited to attend at Nativity in West Jax, one mile west of I295 and Normandy Blvd.

8373 Normandy Blvd.

10 am service Sunday
We made our Stand for Christ and not ECUSA.


humbly, gregory

Guys I don't care what Venable thinks about this
thing (TEC),I want to now what Akinola thinks about,I will not sleep while I don't know,
please dear VOL try to find out.

Rossi,

+Venables is a good one! One of the best, allied with +Akinola!

I want to now what Akinola thinks
Well since he told all of his Nigerian congregations in the US, BEFORE GC, to sever all ties with ECUSA, what it is there to wonder about?

1) Akinola is the de facto leader of most of the world's Anglicans.

2) He is finished with ECUSA/TEC or whatever it will be called.

3)Hopefully this clarifies things.

4) It's over folks. It's just a matter of filing the paper work at the appointed time.

You can bet if it's clear to ++Venables, it's even clearer to ++Akinola. They have washed their hands of ECUSA. They will be washing their hands of Canterbury as well if ++Williams fails to take a hardline, but I do believe they will give him a chance to respond appropriately and quickly.

No interpretation needed here. A clear message to ECUSA. In the immortal words of Anne Robinson... "You are the weakest link...GOODBYE!!"

Guys main word in any news about Anglican Church is schism,If you anglicans(ex episcopalians)are in the middle of a messe there in America,soon we
here in England will be in the middle of one also

Hi Rootbranch,
It was clear to me in Oct 2004 when I joined a church which is now under Recife.
Is the below archdiocese at all close to you.

The Archdiocese of Christ the King
Bishop Mark Camp
http://www.ctkanglican.org/

He was very kind to me, via email, a traditionalist group I am in needed some study resources.

"I need to have this interpreted."

Read: "The jig is up. There is no hope the ECUSA will return to the historic faith, teachings, Scripture and doctrine."

melora20 wrote:

RootBranch,

With all respect and Christian love, why have you been waiting? You want someone to "do something radical." Why aren't you doing it, instead of expecting someone else to do it for you? How much clarity do you need?

What makes you think, that by holding the timid, cowardly orthodox's feet to the fire, including Bishop Duncan, that I am not prepared to do something radical?

I've already left one Episcopal church that I had attended for 8 years just because my pastor wanted to wait it out in the ACN and because he thought that Bishop Howard was an OK guy. He naively fed us something that was not true. He knows different now for sure.

I came back after a year of being in a neo-ultra Calvinistic church when I moved to St. Marys, GA. I only came back because of the love, compassion and staunchly traditional and Godly teaching of Father Mac Flowers. Even though he aligned Christ Church with the ACN and AAC, (I'm no fan of either ) he plainly told me why and had no illusions what would happen after GC 2006 if he decided to take us out. Bishop Louttit of Georgia will brook no opposition. I respected that. Plus my wife was tired of church shopping and even going a month without church at all. In my opinion better to stay out than go to a bad one (theologically speaking).

But time is running out. Do something radical you say? I will indeed if we don't move. I will either sell my house and move to Pittsburgh to attend Trinity with or without Bishop Louttit's blessing. I may go REC and form a parish in St. Marys. Or I may start an Anglican house church and grow a congregation from there. I do not nor will I ever need the Church of England. They are just as dead and cursed as the Death Cult (My new name for ECUSA, TEC....whatever.)

How's that for radical?

I'm sorry you don't like me breathing down the orthodox's necks including Bishop Duncan. But because generations of so called orthodox for the last 40 years have done nothing "radical" we are in this horrible tragedy now.

Gregory:

My reason for asking him what "love" means is because he can't answer the question. He knows that his answer is unbiblical.

I know that he deceives - but not very well.

Gregory, I thank you for the longer post and I think that I understand your point. I wish that I had more time but am swamped with responsibilities. Pray for me and keep giving good advise - that is how I wish and need to be loved.

Don

Caroll wrote:

Hi Rootbranch,
It was clear to me in Oct 2004 when I joined a church which is now under Recife.

The Archdiocese of Christ the King

Thanks Caroll, unfortunately Kennisaw is close to Atlanta, I think, and I am in the last city in S.E. Ga before crossing into Florida. I can go to the St. Marys river and skip a rock into Florida. But when I get home from work I will certainly go back to the site and explore. Thank you again!

gregory wrote:

Rootbranch, You and your family are invited to attend at Nativity in West Jax, one mile west of I295 and Normandy Blvd.

Thank you my friend. Right now my van is dead and hauling five kids between a 3 passenger mini-truck and a borrowed old-school Chrysler for a 100 mile round-trip is a bit much. Let me get a bit back on my feet and I will come see you.

You are a Lion of Christ my friend! Your illuminations you post from time to time, espcially of the Archangel Michael, give me strength and inspiration!

You are needed in just such a time as this !

I understand where Root is coming from. The last time we has an organized exodus in ’79 it was led by the laity. It fizzled. We are hoping for the bishops to lead this time. But hold on for a little while Root! As pessimistic as I have been about exactly that happening we now hear ++Venables issuing a mere two sentence statement and a rather terse one at that. No fudge. No fog. No bovine scatology. I am cautiously optimistic that we are hearing the first sounds of ICBM’s being loaded in the Global South with a “little” present for FTG,RW, and KJS!! Let keep our fingers crossed.

I, too, find Archbishop Venables statement to be very clear.

But he also withholds further comment until he has discussed with his fellow primates and archbishops, as he should.

I suggest to ICXNICA that this is actually a protestant characteristic, not just an Anglican one! Although I must admit, a failure to co-operate with other churches is at times noticeable in the history of ALL denominations, from the eastern orthodox, through Rome and all the major protestant churches.

But regardless, ICXNICA's summary of ++Rowan Williams' predicament is brilliant. That is indeed his problem - having been formally asked by the diocese of Fort Worth, if he declines, another Primate is likely to take up the invitation. That is the crucial difference between now and 1979.

Regards
Michael

Surely the problem with ICXNICA's summary of ++Rowan Williams' predicament lies in the question: Why on earth would Jack Iker go to the Archdruid? There is nothing that I know of to prevent the Church of England from electing a woman as Archbishop of Canterbury the moment they've cleared bishopesses - she would just complete the politically correct trio: York, Rochester - and then Canterbury. I have said for some time that "they" will aim for Canterbury very early on.

FrOwain

FrOwain

I don't disagree with you about Canterbury. I don't trust that See or its incumbent an inch. I suspect he is a good deal less honest than Vicky Gene Robinson, who at least says openly what he believes in.

I am curious though about your politically correct trio - isn't Rochester held by Michael Nazir-Ali? Why would you see him as politically correct?

Curious
Michael

It's the token minority thing. Which means that they'll try to get a woman into Durham, London or Canterbury ..... probably in that order ..... then after that they'll revisit the Geoffrey John idea to complete it. They've already got that woman at Salisbury waiting to move up a rung.


FrOwain