The worldwide Anglican Church suffered a dramatic new split last night when a leading conservative archbishop approved plans to adopt breakaway American dioceses, the Daily Telegraph has learned.
Archbishop Gregory Venables is to allow conservative dioceses that are defecting from the pro-gay American branch of Anglicanism to affiliate with his South American province thousands of miles away.
The unprecedented realignment will rock the 70 million-strong worldwide Church and escalate the bitter civil war over gay clergy that is tearing it apart.
I had the pleasure of listening to ++Venables at a meeting in Dale City, VA several years ago.
He is a holy and witty and charming man who displayed strong leadership qualities at that meeting.
He definitely appeared to be a man who will be able to ‘face down’ ECUSA’s leadership on matters of Scripture, the Scriptural authority of ECUSA’s leaders and the essential elements of church polity starting from the Time of the Apostles.
He will be able to point out quite clearly, to the whole Anglican Communion, the inadequacies, distortions, and contradictions of ECUSA’s polities or lack of polity.
I would like to know more about this. ++Venables is term limited as primate and steps down soon. What will be the status of the “adopted” dioceses under a new primate?
I don’t understand why dioceses and parishes all need to affiliate with their own preferred primate. Its just leading to more division in the breakup. Why can’t they establish one American Anglican province now, and let that new province be recognised now by whichever provinces are willing to recognize that province. Then the members of that province get a new primate. That stops all the talk about boundary crossing, and lets the new province be united at the outset.
Greg Venables has just been relected unanimously as Primate.
If two dioceses join I think it will double the size of the Province!
A prayer has been posted at Lent & Beyond.
Observing (#3),
the anticipated outcome of the participation of “foreign jurisdictions” in the United States is that eventually, hopefully soon, all of those orthodox Anglicans falling under foreign jurisdictions will become a single Anglican jurisdiction, Common Cause (?), which will be recognized by a majority of the Anglican primates and by an Archbishop of Canterbury at some future date. Hopefully, that date will be soon and the ABC will be +++Williams.
In any case, when that indigenous Anglican entity is recognized by the important primates, the orthodox primates, of the Anglican Communion then there will be a clear choice between a drifting, increasingly heretical and highly polititicized ECUSA and a national Anglican church that is truly a member of the Church Catholic.
In this situation, it is most likely that ECUSA will continue its shrinkage into spiritual irrelevance and that the new Anglican Church of the USA will grow and grow because people seeking a spiritual/truly Christian church will be drawn to it.
Observing: Archbishop Venables…….and other overseas primates…….have made it clear that any such arrangement will be temporary until a new American province is up and running.
The arrangement is temporary and pastoral.
Bp. Venables #4
What wonderful news!
AnglicanFirst#7, Cennydd#8
Thanks, I accept that they are not in a position yet to start the new province because they have to follow the procedure to leave TEC. But it would be good to have a common statement from all the primates who support the establishment of a new province that they are ALL united in adopting the breakaway dioceses and that primate ‘x’ will act as the uniting primate for that province until such time as the new province is established. That would be a far more powerful statement, and would avoid further fragmentation.
Mark McCall #10
Thanks! Pray for us.
What we may see as fragmentation, may simply be a sharing of responsibility – if all these activities were undertaken by a single province, consider: (i) the practical burden on that province, distraction from internal mission, etc., along with the potential concentration of pastoral issues in a single province; (ii) difficulties accommodating the variety of pastoral needs presented, e.g., CANA (some WO) vs. Dio S.J. (no WO); and (iii) the vulnerability of a single province to reprisals.
I view the variety like a bundle of sticks – more difficult to break than a single stick.
I concur that it is definitely pastoral! Thank you for your faithful oversight, Bishop Greg! God be with you and protect you!
–a grateful adoptee
#13 Tired
[blockquote] I view the variety like a bundle of sticks – more difficult to break than a single stick. [/blockquote]
Yes, your points are valid. Maybe not such a good idea to concentrate everything on one place. I guess all I’m trying to say is it would be good if we could see what is holding the bundle of sticks together – if there is nothing holding them together that strength is lost.
Thank you so much, ++Gregory.
——-
The timing of this action combined with ++Peter Akinola calling for a Primates Meeting is interesting. I’ve already speculated (at link below) that perhaps the core of the GS Primates see that ++Rowan won’t lead and have therefore decided that they will.
Again, that’s just speculation on my part (and on a day when I’m NOT 100% to boot).
#3 Observing,
Our rector has made it clear that the oversight of our congregation by Uganda (for example) is designed to be TEMPORARY. Right now, we need the affiliation to remain part of the Anglican Communion. A separate declaration of an “American Province” would be meaningless until and unless recognized by Canterbury and the other primates. So right now, this affiliation is necessary.
It’s also great for inter-communion relationships. I’ve learned so much from Bp Jackson and his staff about the church in Africa in general and Uganda in particular and think it amazing that God is doing so much in that part of the world, and it makes us hunger for more of God in our part of the globe.
Just to clarify in case some commenters are wondering, the “Gregory” posting above is indeed Bishop Venables, and the facts of the Telegraph story are confirmed.
–elfgirl
Last chance for Canterbury to save the Communion . . . intervene by Christmas with APO, Lambeth disinvites, and protection for the orthodox, or the whole thing comes apart, I predict.
Is it better to lose a gangrenous appendage rather than let the whole body be poisoned?
If ++Venables is still around, would he clarify whether his title is “archbishop”, as given in the “Telegraph” and often used elsewhere, or “presiding bishop”, the title listed in the Southern Cone section of the Anglican Communion Official Website. Thanks.
I suspect you might be right, Rick. The ABC has played a game of stringing the orthodox along since 2003. It appears the core GS primates aren’t playing that game anymore.
Why not create a single Anglican province right now? Because to do so would be a unilateral action on the part of a minority of primates to bring a new Province into being. That would not be the right move at this time. It would certainly alienate the moderate primates.
Instead, while messy, the plethora of Global South arrangements – all temporary – make it clear to the AC as a whole that action needs to be taken, all the while as the foundations for a new Province are being built. Remember that temporary arrangements have been accepted by the Primates as a whole as legitimate (no matter what the liberals will try to tell you). There has been no agreement as to a wholesale replacement Province.
But as the non-TEC Anglican presence within North America grows, and as more and more primates are being brought on board, and as TEC becomes increasingly draconian in its actions against the orthodox and increasingly flakey in its theology, and as Rowan Williams loses his leadership of the Communion through inaction, the likelihood of a primatially agreed upon replacement Province grows.
Based on +Schofield’s presentation to the Deanery last year, a plan or framework is in place. By this, I mean that CCP/Network and some of the Primates have discussed how they would like the situation to unfold. I think we all understand the situation is finally reaching critical mass. My hope is that Cantebury concedes the need for a conservative Province in the US.
We ask (APO). Cantebury denies the request. The primates speak (DeS), TEC – HOB ignores them. The HOB knows better! They yell POLITY! IF only they would yell JESUS, Save Us!
22, it’s simple. The ABC does not want to. He may very well wind up with two rival Anglican Communions. By playing to cute he may well loose it all.
This is truly exciting news!!!! Blessings on and thanksgiving for Archbishop Venables and the Southern Cone! I pray that the slings and arrows y’all will undoubtedly suffer from TEC for stepping up to the needs of conservatives will fall harmlessly to the ground. And may we all beat swords into plowshares! 🙂
#20 Lapinbizarre wrote:<>
Lapinbizarre (Isn’t that French for ‘Kwazy Wabbit’?). I served as Greg’s Chaplain for years. His official title in the Southern Cone is Obispo Primado, but in common parlance in the Province and beyond he has been referred to as “Archbishop” for years. It is not really a distinction of any consequence in this case.
Interesting that the article positioned the ABC as trying frantically to avoid the breakup. I think a “frantic” response would involve holding someone’s feet to the fire, but I certainly haven’t seen any of that.
KTF!….mrb
Can anyone explain to me why a communion can not theologically be “Anglican” yet not be beholden to Canterbury?
#28–supposedly, “real Anglicans” and Canterbury have a “lineage” that goes back to the 12 Apostles. Obviously not genetic, I don’t really know any more than that.
bl
Thanks for the explanation, Bishop Atwood. The discrepancy just seemed odd, particularly since TEC, regardless of primate, sticks with just PB & folks. But if it’s normal practice South of the Equator….. Maybe you should just go ahead & formally up the title to archbishop, which would end the confusion. Yes, Kwazy Wabbit it is!
Thanks again.
Kwazy Wabbit, I’ll have to have you over to the briar patch for a cup of blackberry tea one of these days.
…on leave from the Briar Patch,
#29:
If you’re referring to apostolic succession, that means that every bishop in the Anglican Communion has been consecrated by one or more bishops who were consecrated by bishops who were… [etc., etc., back to the apostolic era] …who were consecrated by bishops who were consecrated by one of the 12 Apostles.
The Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican churches, as well as some branches of Lutheranism, all claim to have valid apostolic succession. Rome doesn’t recognize ours as being valid; I’m not sure about the Orthodox.
There’s a certain amount of faith involved here, of course. We can’t actually prove that the chain is unbroken all the way back to the Twelve; but we believe that the practice of the early church was such as to ensure it down to the point where a formal doctrine of apostolic succession was articulated.
All of which has nothing to do with being in communion with Canterbury or not; if the Anglican Communion does split, then whichever portion is not on communion with Canterbury will still have apostolic succession, unless they radically change their ordination practices.
To answer the “theologically Anglican without being in communion with Canterbury” question — of course a church can be theologically Anglican, and have roots in historic Anglicanism, and practice worship in the Anglican prayer book tradition, all without being in communion with Canterbury. See, for instance, the various “Continuing Anglican” churches. But — according to at least one of the historical definitions — it cannot be part of the Anglican Communion without being in communion with Canterbury.
So….that’s what a certain bishop I know was doing in Buenos Aires.
33.Alta Californian
What about Buenos Aires?
A bishop friend of mine went there on vacation a while back. He told me Buenos Aires has more fine restaurants than Paris. With this news I’m fancifully wondering if he was there looking for a good orthodox place to retire.
Of course many of us are now questioning whether there is any value in being a part of the AC and in communion with Canterbury.
When Ab’p Venables states above (#9) that “the arrangement is temporary and pastoral”, is he referring – as I think he probably is – to the Southern Cone’s position vis-a-vis the US dioceses, or is he referring to his re-election as PB, which he announced in post #4?
37. Lapinbizarre
The affiliation of the US dioceses.
I figured that was almost certainly what you meant, but was unsure. Many thanks for the response.
I wonder how much it would cost to send Kevin Kallsen of Anglican TV or Matt Kennedy of SF lightning-live-blogging fame to cover meetings of the Southern Cone?
…on leave from the Briar Patch,