Archbishop Greg: 'Why I'll be at Lambeth'

In an interview with me while he was in Canada and before heading to Fort Worth, Archbishop Gregory Venables explained why he will be attending both the Global Anglican Future Conference next month in Jordan and Israel, and the Lambeth Conference in Canterbury, Kent in July.

The Archbishop of the Southern Cone said: 'I will be at Gafcon and also I am going to be at Lambeth. I think that is pretty important from the point of view of you guys [meaning the Press. rg].

'Someone's got to be there to talk to you about what is going on.' [Too right, and initial impressions indicate we're going to have even less access than last time. It's nice to know that at least one Bishop is prepared to sup with us sinners, the few there are left. rg]

AB Greg continued: ''That was one of the reasons why I eventually made a final decision to go, which was only recently.

'I think someone has got to go and show their face and speak to the situation.'

So how many Gafcon attendees will also be at Lambeth?

'I don't know how many are going but there will be some. There are those who think as a matter of conscience they should not be there, those who think it is not worth while. But I think we have got to go, to continue working at this.

'It is clear the division is pretty final. Dialogue is the one thing that is lacking. I don't think we are going to change people's minds but I think it would be wrong for us to get to a point where we acknowledge a division and try to organise it without being together and talking about it. One of the most disgraceful things about all this has been the lack of dialogue and lack of relationship between the parties.'

Asked about San Joaquin, he said that in its actions Southern Cone was merely responding positively to the request to provide a temporary 'holding place'. He said: 'They have left and we are looking after them. We stand with them but the things within the situation, they are going to have to work through.'

He justified his actions further: 'If we do not help them, they will be lost to the Anglican Church. We cannot allow that to happen.'

He found it 'unlikely' that the split could be resolved and a more 'inclusive' church create. The two sides were too different.

'The Church as an institution is bound to have its limits. I think we have just hit the limit on this. The sad thing is that there seems to be no way the Anglican Communion can fully acknowledge that difference and find a way of gracefully dealing with it. I have not got a lot of hope for Lambeth. If we have not done it in the Primates' Meeting or if what the primates have proposed has not been accepted, I cannot see much hope coming out of Lambeth.'

He said the Anglican Communion would end being based on a Western, inclusive system of thought rather than of doctrine or faith. This was never going to be something the conservatives could go with.

He spent a couple of hours with the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams in March. 'We prayed together. We shared together. We just talked about where it was going as two brothers who are doing our best to look after the Church. It was a lovely meeting.'

Comments

[Leonel]

One. The interview took place ‘while he was in Canada’, and before heading off to San Joaquin, i.e. while he was crossing provincial and diocesan boundaries, spitting on the face of the Windsor Report, enlarging his pension and bashing gay people.

Two. Venables will attend Lambeth because he wants to keep the media ‘informed’, and he also wants to speak ‘to the situation’, ‘to continue working at this’. None of that is going to happen, since he will only talk to the media about and only about what he wants the media to hear about, and Lambeth is not going to be the place to ‘ speak to the situation’ (see program of conference).

Three, all of this talk about the Southern Cone accepting San Joaquin as a member diocese is pure nonsense, and Venables knows it. The very constitution of the province of the Southern Cone prevents it from doing so unless all the member dioceses AND the Anglican Consultative Council consents to the move. Of course they haven’t tried that and it’s highly unlikely that they will.

‘If we have not done it in the Primates' Meeting or if what the primates have proposed has not been accepted, I cannot see much hope coming out of Lambeth.'

And THAT is why Venables is anything but an Anglican.

[Lapinbizarre]

"Bishop" Greg, Ms Gledhill, ma'am. Why this apparent need on the part of the [snip] and presumably, since he never seems to correct the misconception, of Venables himself, to be "Archbishop" rather than "Presiding Bishop", which is his true title? We don't see TEC's Reappraising Liberals upgrading the PB to "Archbishop" Schori, do we?

(rg writes: thank you for correcting me, I called him Bp in the headline, but AB is what lots of people call him. It is confusing. If TEC or a number of people in TEC started referring to the PB as Archbishop, I can assure you we would follow suit. Or I would. But I don't understand why TEC can't arrange things so that the PB can be an Archbishop? Can't they give her a diocese and make it an archiepiscopate? There must be a way round it. I agree that position should be an AB's position. In the meantime, just get lots of people to start calling her AB, and I will follow, on the blog at least.)

[Lapinbizarre]

As I understand it Leonel, the constitution of the Southern Cone limits its presiding bishop to two terms of office. Greg Venables was elected last year to a third consecutive term. Given this, don't hold your breath on whether or nor the secessionist group that was formerly part of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin may affiliate with the Province of the Southern Cone.

[John]

If LEONEL actually listened to the Archbishop's talk in San Jaoquin and in this interview, then you'd understand that your assumptions are entirely wrong.

We may disagree, but that disagreement shouldn't be used to distort the reality of the what was said in Canada and during the Archbishop's visit to the US.

The Archbishop is holding fast to the faith of the Church---The Anglican Church and helping to hold our members together. What we have now in the US is some strange new Unitarian-like Church with a liturgy. All are welcome as long as you wink at the Bible and ignore the historic teachings of the Church.

[Leonel]

Lapinbizarre, which is why, as I've said also at Jake's, all the correspondence currently being addressed to Venables should be sent instead to the Executive Council (or equivalent) of the Province of the Southern Cone, asking them to put a leash on their chair, the Southern Cone primate, and keep him from straining the global bonds of affection, crossing diocesan and provincial boundaries and in all behaving like an ill mannered 3 yrs old.

Should this request go on unattended, TEC and the Canadian Church would be in every right to request the Anglican Consultative Council to act accordingly.

Someone's gotta do something about this, and writing and sending letters to Venables won't do.

[Malcolm+]

The Primate of Canada has no diocese and that does not prevent the office from being called "Archbishop."

Though he isn't Archbishop of Canada, since that would potentially confuse the office with the Metropolitan of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada (Atlantic Canada and parts of Quebec).

[Dr Alan Marsh]

What a curious allegation, that Bp Greg was "enlarging his pension and bashing gay people" while he was visiting Christians in Canada and San Joaquin who are no longer members of the Anglican Church of Canada or of TEC.

Perhaps even more bizarre, to object to Bp Greg attending Lambeth to put his own side of the debate. The tactic seems to be to howl down anyone like Bp Greg who has the temerity to disagree with the TEC agenda.

[Robert Ian Williams]

Archbishop Venables is fairly inclusive accomodating the contradictory gospel interpretations of Jim packer and the Anglo-Catholics. The weak leadership of Rowan Williams has provided him with a field day.

[Lapinbizarre]

I have assumed that the "presiding bishop" title was adopted, and has been maintained, to emphasize the bishop's position as the elected - for a finite, single term - first among equals rather than as a hierarchical superior. This can be seen as a strength of TEC (I see it as such) though unquestionably the lack of a strong, centralized, authority is a principal factor in the success to date of the attempted secession of parishes and now dioceses. Difficult to envision a similar procession of events in Nigeria, isn't it?

[Ian Welch]

When titles become a matter of discussion, rather than issues, I think we are, to quote Private Frazer from Dad's Army, 'doomed, doomed,'

A church with limited jurisdiction bishops, and 'flying' bishops;, and dissident bishops, and 'no-mixing with nasties' bishops is scarcely an edifying sight.But of course, principles are always more important than people, at least for zealots.

Add to that the sad reality that all this gas is burning away in a faltering organisation of not more than 5 million people in the so-called 'West.'

In due course, the conservative or 'orthodox' as they like to label themselves will add up to less than a million worldwide. The other four million 'liberals' will fade away through simple disbelief, a bit like the Unitarians or the Shakers etc.

Twenty years from now, given the age profile of Western Anglicanism, both the orthodox and the liberals will be long gone.

Ian Welch, Canberra

[EPH]

According to the Anglican Journal, Bishop Venables pastors 30,000 Anglicans in Latin America. His efforts in North America are likely to garner him more English speakers, with whom as a British ex-patriot, he is likely to be very comfortable than he already represents in his province of Southern Cone. He has been asked by three primates to cease his activities in their provinces. The Windsor Report is clear that such intrusions are inappropriate. He has ignored them. By contrast, this week he is visiting in the Diocese of Fort Worth as the "honored guest" of its Bishop Iker. The Fort Worth Star reports that he will spend Friday and Saturday with the clergy and delegates to the November convention. His intent in being there is clear, to move them to join him in Southern Cone. An "honored guest" does comes to join others at the table in fellowship and good will, not to steal the silver. He will use Lambeth to make his point with the press, as will Bishop Robinson. Incredibly, however, Bishop Venables still seems to have an invitation.

[saint]

I love the way the bunnies whinge about boundary crossing while happy to have the Anglican church in the west at least, become a cult for [snip] [snip] (yes that's Steyn's phrase and I'm sticking to it).

If it wasn't so tragic it would be the stuff of the comedy channel.

The Americans at least should wonder about the behaviour of their own [snip] (yes as an Aussie I reserve my right to call people by their nicknames). People are beginning to talk and it is quite easy, in these days of the new media to find out the other side of the story. Let's not mention the Canadians.

The constant bleating about boundary crossing from those who have nothing to say about the gross moral turpitude of their own bishops and priests who live with partners outside of matrimony never mind same sex partners, who bully their brothers and sisters in Christ, and who have no idea much less concern for the apostolic preaching of the gospel above their own political and social agenda is just that.

Bleating.

They don't even have the [snip] to confront their own canonical violators.

You might as well stop speaking of the Anglican Communion. It has ceased to exist in all but name only.

[Bill Channon]

I am sorry that you hear Archbishop Venable's remarks as purely political ones. As I see it, the archbishop is either a conniving and wicked liar, or a man who cares so very deeply about fellow Christians who find themselves in an impossible place, and that he is responding purely and simply to their requests for help.
When I listen to him speak and read what he has done, the latter speaks to my heart, and politics is trumped.
You sound very angry. I am sorry for that. But first and foremost, ++Venables is a Christian. However, I don't understand why you think that 'he is anything but an Anglican'. Anglicanism is not a political party.

[Milton]

Leonel, would you please post a quote with a link to the original source of ANYTHING +Venables said that was in any way bashing gays. Otherwise, refrain from bearing false witness, to put it politely. (Easy to translate that into less polite terms, but unnecessary.) As far as spitting on the face of the Windsor Report, you are rather selective about the spit flying in the direction away from the communion, which is the direction TEC and ACC seem determined to walk, like the captain of the Titanic scoffing at the reports of icebergs ahead.

Don't worry about +Venables giving what you obviously consider a one-sided view of Lambeth and the issues facing the communion to the media. +VGR and his new bride will be in the Marketplace giving opinions more to your liking, for balance.

[EPfizH]

In +Cantuar's Advent Letter, he stated:
"And while (as I have said above) I understand and respect the good faith of those who have felt called to provide additional episcopal oversight in the USA, there can be no doubt that these ordinations have not been encouraged or legitimised by the Communion overall....

Second: I have underlined in my letter of invitation that acceptance of the invitation must be taken as implying willingness to work with those aspects of the Conference's agenda that relate to implementing the recommendations of Windsor, including the development of a Covenant. "
Although +Jefferts Schori is the presiding bishop of TEC and its House as effected a moratorium on the Consecration of gay bishops, and the issue of same sex blessings has not been fully resolved, clearly she, as primate, has provided leadership in moving to effect, at minimum, such a moratorium. She, by her example, has given witness to work within Windsor. Even so, the response of the Communion to the actions of The Episecopal Church on the issue of Windsor complaince was mixed.
By contrast, the reaction of the instruments of Communion regarding the cross-province intrusions was not. They were not approved. Despite this clear disapproval and, a presiding bishop of Southern Cone setting an example for others, +Venables has engaged in flagrant, constant, intrusion into the affairs of other provinces. The intrusions have been to the degree that the Canadian House has met and requested that a letter of objection be sent to +Canterbury. Brazil and TEC have made similar requests both to +Venables and to +Canterbury. As stated in the above quoted section does his acceptance mean that he intends to work with implementing Windsor?

[Leonel]

Malcom, the Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada is, by virtue of his office, ‘archbishop and primate’, according to the Canadian constitution and canons. The office is held continuously until retirement which is mandatory at 70yrs of age.
We might as well note that Venables has been ‘elected’ to a third term as Southern Cone primate, when the constitution of that province actually limits the primacy to two terms. Go figure.
Milton, as for finding what may have Venables done or said which could be understood as gay bashing, dude, you’re on your own. Do some homework. By the way the sky is blue, just wanted to get that off your way.
This is really funny: you write “As far as spitting on the face of the Windsor Report, you are rather selective about the spit flying in the direction away from the communion, which is the direction TEC and ACC seem determined to walk, like the captain of the Titanic scoffing at the reports of icebergs ahead”
You mean that, in your view, two wrongs make a right?
Bill, I know, you know and Venables well damn knows that if he really, really was so concerned about Christian brothers and sisters in distress, beyond the limits of his tiny, missionary agencies-subsidized province, there are hundreds of places in the world where his Episcopal services and gifts could be so much better used. Funny he has chosen to rape the Constitution of his province, whore his office off to the highest bidder in North America, play the dumb while breaching every conceivable Anglican understanding of provincial and diocesan autonomy, and keep his own province in a stagnant condition while pouring his Episcopal affection in the terrible conditions that Right Wing, Gay Bashing people have to endure in the Episcopal Church and, increasingly, just about anywhere.

Angry? Because of, what, a guy who travels thousands of miles in order to cater to the needs of, yes, gay-bashing motivated people, when his own province is reeking in hunger, poverty, corruption and decay? (and I’m talking about their social realities here). O yes of course I am angry.

On the other hand, I do tend to sleep very well at night, thank you very much.

[Malcolm+]

Leonel, my reference was in response to another poster who had suggested that the American Presiding Bishop's lack of a diocese was an impediment to styling the office Archbishop. I was merely pointing out that it seems to be no impediment to styling the Canadian Primate Archbishop.

Also, in Canada, there is no canonical provision for retired / former Archbishops to be styled Archbishop - yet it has become the standard in practice - including one former honourary assistant of mine.

[Leonel]

O thanks for the clarification Malcolm... Is that the some time Malcolm Brandon, by any chance?

[Cathy S.]

It is my humble opinion that the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal church is so called because when the church was set up in America, we still wanted nothing that smacked of British hierarchy, hence a PB instead of an AB.

Next, I am an unlearned child of God, but one who knows enough to not be led down the garden path by this new religion being touted in the U.S. If I want to continue to believe in the Word of God, once delivered and worship according to the rites of the Anglican Church, and my priest supports my religious journey as I believe it to be right and good, what am I supposed to believe when you shout down every Christian idea & position he tries to speak in general convention, and then inhibit him because he is not falling into the new religious line the Episcopal church is forming. Do you believe that I am I so dumb, uneducated and sheep-like that I am going to let the PB and the HoB tell me what to do and believe? Just as the pew sitters need oversight, the priests need bishops and the bishops need PB or the AB for oversight Because you don't want me to believe as I feel God would like me to believe, feel and act, the bishops of the U.S, the PB and even up to the ABC have removed themselves my religious oversight with inhibition & deposition and left me dangling in the wind. Why can't I have oversight if I don't choose to believe as you do. I haven't left the Anglican Communion, the new leaders of the church have left me and in order to protect me, the priests & "orthodox" priests & bishops have requested assistance elsehwere in the Anglican Communion. If I believe my soul to be in mortal danger & do not choose to believe as the TEC what is so wrong with looking elsewhere for assistance?
You learned people are so busy trying to "win" in this earthly and utterly human contest that you forget about us pew sitters.

The TEC is not the keeper of my conscience. I am ambivalent about homosexual behavior. Practicing that behavior is a choice of the hetero- and homo- sexual being. I am ambivalent about abortion, as I have been faced with just such a choice. BUT, this, all of this, is between me and my God for He has given me grace & free will. It seems that free will is something the TEC would rather I not have.

[Malcolm+]

I'm certainly not the former Malcolm Brandon - he and I are on opposite sides of the present unpleasantness. He now considers himself canonically resident in Buenos Aries or some such.

The Archiepiscopal honourary assistant was the sometime Frederic Qu'Appelle. We'd discuss who would do what in the service beforehand, and I'd always tell him to do the blessing a the end. He'd say, "But you're the rector." I'd reply, "But you're a bishop." He'd repeat, "But you're the rector," and I'd trump with, "That's right, Fred. I'm the rector. You're a bishop and you'll do the blessing at the end." Then Fred would do a little bow. Every week until he went into the hospital prior to his death.

Curiously, there had been a Malcolm Qu'Appelle with the same family name as the former Malcolm Brandon - but no known relationship.

[Milton]

Leonel, the burden of proof is on the accuser. But to go the extra mile, I Googled "Gregory Venables anti-gay comments" and found NOTHING in several pages of links that he said that even mentions gays or lesbians, let alone bashes them. Perhaps your standard for "gay-bashing" is if anyone doesn't proclaim that gay is great, is not associated with any higher percentage of mental and physical health problems than the rest of the population, does not violate the inevitable implications of all higher animals, let alone humans, being male or female and no new ones resulting except by male-female pairing (except for very unnatural and extreme scientific means), then they are gay-bashing.

Sexual orientation is apparently not genetic since the human genome has been mapped entirely and no gay gene found, and at least some gays and lesbians have apparently experienced a lasting change in their orientation and are happily married with children to their opposite gender. [snip]

Leonel, I challenged you to put up or shut up, and you tried to evade the most rudimentary standard of integrity, instead preferring to be a verbal sniper.

Funny, you admit TEC and ACC are in the wrong when you write "two wrongs make a right?" +Venables couldn't care less about the property. After all, you don't see him or any of the other Anglican primates who are providing TEMPORARY oversight passing anything remotely resembling the Denis canon, do you? Again, the burden of proof is on you should you choose to fling any more accusations.

No, something immeasurably more important and precious than property or indeed than all the riches of the world is at stake here to +Venables and those requesting his oversight. Leonel, you and me and every human being has an immortal soul that will either spend eternity in joy with Jesus by the salvation from our deserved judgment bought by His shed blood on the cross, or will spend it in eternal self-imposed banishment from His glorious presence, having denied Him and banished Him from lordship over them in this life and being granted their wish eternally in the next. After all, "the Lord gives to each the desires of their hearts" whether the desire is to "glorify God and enjoy Him forever" or thinking it "better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven".

[Father Ron Smith]

Having been one of the enthusiastic gathering at the St. Mary's, Putney, Book Launch of 'In the Eye of the Storm' by Bishop Gene Robinson, I was sad to hear of the ABC's refusal of Bp Gene's request to be allowed to preach/preside at the Eucharist while on his current visit to the UK.

My disappointment was shared by everyone present - especially in the light of the ABC's extant invitation to Lambeth of the likes of Bp.Venables and ++ Akinola and their colleagues of the Global South, who are parading their disloyalty towards the ABC by their insistence on the primacy of GAFCON. When will our beloved ABC show his resolve to excommunicate these dissidents?

Fr. Ron Smith, New Zealand.

[Leonel]

Milton,

You sound like a nephew of mine, when talking asleep: one could almost figure out what he’s saying, but it doesn’t make any sense.

One. Well you used Google and now you know everything you needed to know. Kudos. Since you are now done with that, you may want to go and check some of Dr Seuss’s books. Probably nothing there either, but you are after the truth, aren’t you?

Two. If you ever learn to read as you should, you’ll discover that I did write ‘so, in your view, two wrongs make a right?’. Your view. Yours. Got it? It may well be that you don’t actually have a view of your own, but there I go again assuming that you do.

Three. Venables is after the money, the power rush and the gay bashing. Your perspective on this issue will only let you see as far as the ‘s’ in ‘Venables’. Which is entirely understandable.

O and, talking about Venables… Milton, just as you seem to assume to know what weaknesses of character I may suffer from, I do happen to know, for a fact, that [snip

[David Cohen]

Leonel, simply hurling abuse does not constitute evidence, and you have not provided any for your wild assertions about Bp Venables.

[snip]