More ANiC news

Posted on 22 November 2007 by Peter

Second Anglican Network in Canada bishop received into Southern Cone

Letter from Archbishop Gregory Venables, read 22 November 2007 at the Anglican Network in Canada national conference in Burlington, Ontario

This entry was posted in Anglican. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to More ANiC news

  1. white rabbit says:
    23 November 2007 at 01:14

    First. I am a bit slow but I don’t see how someone who is retired can leave the established church to join another. Did he give up his pension?
    Secondly, I don’t see the point of leaving “the church” to join another. far better to stay and recapture it; or failing that just cut down on what goes in the plate. But if Jesus commended the widow for putting her last two mites into the church that was about to kill him I think we should be slow to abandon ship. But that is just my opinion.

    Like

    Reply
  2. mrsfalstaff says:
    24 November 2007 at 18:36

    Why should he give up his pension? He contributed to it throughout his career. What he did was give up his licence under the Canadian church, and take a licence from the Southern Cone.

    The point is that the Canadian Anglican church is no longer Christian in leadership; two religions are trying to coexist under one roof. There is nothing left to recapture. We want to stay authentically Anglican – hence the move to the safe harbour of the Southern Cone.

    Like

    Reply
  3. white rabbit says:
    25 November 2007 at 01:50

    Hello mrsfalstaff,
    It is not so much that he should give up his pension;it is more of a case that I don’t understand that how someone who has already retired from a company can turn around and say, once in retirement, “I quit.” A retiree deciding to leave his place of former occupation does not make sense to me.
    The Anglican Church is the citadel of Britishness and cannot be abandoned. The English have/had a way of life that has never been surpassed (I’m Scottish) and must not be lost. While i am no fan of sodomy even a sodomite that cries out to Jesus can be saved. He may not have any rewards in heaven but accepting Jesus Christ as saviour is the ticket to eternal life. The leadership of our church has never denied Jesus as saviour so they are still Christians. They may be bad Christians but they are still Christians and if they come last in heaven then that is too bad.
    In my opinion the Southern Cone is only a safe harbour because people tend to see the grass is always greener on the other side. It would be far better if all the deserters stood their ground and fixed things here.
    i always stand to be corrected and I say what i say as I want to hear from “you” and over the years I have learned a lot by saying something and listening to the response. It is quite amazing at the brain power out there.
    Thanks.

    Like

    Reply
  4. Dan says:
    25 November 2007 at 12:41

    I’m not convinced they are Christians. Of course that is between God and them; but to me, they seem to have compromised the heart of the Gospel and have nothing of substance in its place. The doctrine of sin/grace, law/Gospel, confession/forgiveness has essentially been denied by them as outmoded. In their view, when you look at it carefully, there is really no need for a Savior. If there is no sin then there is no need for Jesus to pour His blood on the Altar of the Cross. This basic teaching is very offensive to them. So they are neo-pagans with a superficial christian gloss. Their point of view is not all that different from the theology of Oprah Winphrey. If we don’t need Jesus then why bother with church at all? If we are all fine without Christ why not simply shut down churches and watch Oprah? IT would be a lot cheaper and more honest.
    As far as the bishop who has affiliated with the Southern COne, What’s the big deal?? I don’t see why this is so offensive. ECUSA has priests promoting the gay agenda in africa, why can’t a traditional bishop go with the Biblically oriented southern cone??? As a conservative in a liberal denom. [Lutheran] I can tell you for a fact that it is EXTREMELY difficult for orthodox, confessional, evangelical, charismatic pastors to function within an apostate system. I do not want to subject myself, my children, my churches to false teaching which can easily destroy us spiritually. So to criticize the man for joining the southern cone makes no sense to me. Of course its not perfect, but right now it is much healthier than the US and Canadian Anglicans.
    For the orthodox within the apostate structures it is a very hostile environment. Let the man go where God and his conscience leads him.

    Like

    Reply
  6. white rabbit says:
    26 November 2007 at 01:23

    Thanks Peter. I’ll certainly read Packer’s talk and if I get up the nerve I’ll give my two cents worth. Dan could be right in that “they” are not Christian for Dr Bella Dodd warned us how the church was being penetrated by communists and Malachi Martin told us how Lucifer was enthroned in the Vatican (the Vatican is influenced by Lucifer not controlled by him)
    My Point about the bishop is that I don’t see how someone who has already retired from his post can then quit the same position. All these people are doing is abandoning our church and making it easier for it to drift onto the rocks.
    This mornings reading at church was from Jeremiah ch 23. Woe unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! sayeth the Lord. Are the gay bishops scattering the flock or are those who abandon the church scattering the flock or are we being destroyed by being caught between the two factions?
    And no offence Dan but do you have a TV in the house? Do your children attend state school? i wouldn’t be too concerned about an old sweetie in the pulpit if the answer to my two questions is yes. You might want to read Joe Dallas who is a reformed homosexual for some pointers.

    Like

    Reply
  7. white rabbit says:
    26 November 2007 at 01:29

    Peter. I read a bit of Packer and already i disagree with him. Packer. like Sellers doesn’t know who he is. Sure we are all sinners but the Holy Bible breaks us down into different tribes or nations. So which one does Packer think he belongs too? Esau? the Hittites? Or a new nation that has appeared from nowhere? I’ll read the rest and perhaps comment. Or perhaps not!

    Like

    Reply
  8. Dan says:
    26 November 2007 at 11:14

    WR, I have no problem with Joe Dallas. Why do you think I would ? nJoe Dallas is a great man; I’m not a raving gay basher, but I do think sin exists and needs to be dealth with as such. My question is why is it ok to get rid of the need for Jesus? Why should I put up with deceptive teachihngs and practices in church? The gay issue is beside the point. The issue is sin and forgivness. Yes we have a tv [unfortunately] and limit what our kids can watch the best we can. And we lay out quite plainly what Scripture teaches with the 10 commandments and so forth. I live in a rural area in the US so our local schools still don’t have to indoctrinate students in various unmentionable practices.
    As a pastor in an apostate denom. I have come to see that there is a difference- a huge difference – betrween the Church and the denom. The Churchoof Christ is not limited by institutional structures; the HOly Spirit blows where it will. And the HOly Spirit rests upon those who receive it. The Anglican communion is not theChurch, but some of its congregations and members are. These are the groups that are coming together both within and without traditional structures. What the bishop did was not wrong. I know we will disagree on that. I simply see it as a move of the HOly Spirit.

    Like

    Reply
  9. Dan says:
    26 November 2007 at 11:16

    Peter, you are right. Packer says it much better than any of us could.

    Like

    Reply
  10. white rabbit says:
    26 November 2007 at 15:23

    Hi Dan, The mention of Joe Dallas was just a floater to see how ell known he was. You certainly sound well positioned for the , er cough, cough, approaching recession and the survival of your family.
    I am not saying what the bishop did was wrong I am just saying that a retiree quiting his ex place of employment doesn’t carry much weight. It sounds more as if he is topping up his pension by getting a job as many retirees are forced to do these days. Also, if all the faithful clergy quit the church then who will protect the remaining believers? Traditional churches are not the answer for too many have divorced priests or even priestess. But Jesus did warn us that after he had departed spoilers would enter the church. I am of the opinion that we are to stand and fight for the church that he established and not start a new one; for there is no end to that.
    But at least here we are on the same page and I find the responseses here interesting and informative.

    Like

    Reply
  11. Dan says:
    27 November 2007 at 09:37

    Thanks for the response WR. My own expereince as a Lutheran Pastor in the states is that some pastors and lay folk have the gift and the God given grace to remain a faithful remnant within the system without the constant stress damaging their spiritual well being. I have a tremendous amount of respect for these folks. I, however, do not have that gift. The never ending fighting makes me a less effective pastor and leader. The people I know who have left the denom. or joined confessional/evangelical associations within their denoms. did so to give their energies to a positive endeavor. Constant fighting brings the spirit down, and depletes energy for ministry. Those who have left see their exodus as an act of stewardship to use their gifts and graces in the best way possible [of course not all have done this for healthy reasons, but many have].
    I heard Bill Easum say at a conference that he deeply regretted staying in the United Methodist system because he could have done alot more quality ministry if he hadn’t been constantly fighting his denom.
    I think whatever decision congregations, lay folk, pastors make on these issues are very difficult. Some are called to be a witness within, some are called out. Either way it is very painful, and sad that it has come to this.

    Like

    Reply
  12. mrsfalstaff says:
    27 November 2007 at 12:48

    White Rabbit – unfortunately, the Anglican Church of Canada, old sweetie though she may be, is no longer Christian. Essentials has been fighting since 1994 to correct her course; you can hardly call the leaders quitters.

    What Bishop Harvey has done is surrender his licence to be a priest in the Anglican Church of Canada. Retired priests still take services,etc, if they want to. He has come out of retirement to be a priest in the Southern Cone.

    Like

    Reply
  13. white rabbit says:
    28 November 2007 at 02:08

    Thanks mrsfalstaff for succinctly explaining what +Harvey had done. NOW I understand.
    But you say the Anglican Church of Canada is no longer Christian. Surely it is for it declares Jesus to be the Saviour and only way to God and the church still promotes the resurrection and the usual fundamentals. Doesn’t it?

    Like

    Reply
  14. Peter says:
    30 November 2007 at 12:12

    Heh, well that’s a big question now isn’t it? Fundamentally, that’s something for God to decide. However, it’s fair to say that the ACoC is shot through with heresy, and this is not addressed but celebrated.

    I think the best way of putting it is that institutionally it is corrupt. I can’t make a judgment on individuals or churches, every situation is different, and it’s not my call anyway. But instituionally it is a very sick animal.

    As our primate put it:
    “It is fundamental to the values and mission of our Church that we welcome and respect freedom of individual conscience and the theological convictions of a diverse membership”.

    That puts it pretty well and explains why things are in such a mess. I would suggest it is more fundamental to adhere to the ‘faith once delivered’. In many cases folks are playing with the words and interpreting things to mean what they want them to mean.

    That’s my take, in a nutshell.

    Like

    Reply
  15. white rabbit says:
    30 November 2007 at 12:40

    That was well put Peter, thanks.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment