The election of Mary Glasspool by the Diocese of Los Angeles as suffragan bishop elect raises very serious questions not just for the Episcopal Church and its place in the Anglican Communion, but for the Communion as a whole. The process of selection however is only part complete. The election has to be confirmed, or could be rejected, by diocesan bishops and diocesan standing committees. That decision will have very important implications.
The bishops of the Communion have collectively acknowledged that a period of gracious restraint in respect of actions which are contrary to the mind of the Communion is necessary if our bonds of mutual affection are to hold.
BB NOTE: Remember, my American friends, this is in British-speak. Make no mistake about it, this is a warning.
23 comments:
That and $4.50 will get you a grande decaf mocha latte with a shot of vanilla down at Starbucks.
Go away, you impotent fraud, no one believes a word you say any longer. Full stop.
Wow! I thought that only the PB got this kind of abuse here.
Having been raised by a Welsh mother, had she said anything like that, I would have known that any transgression was at my peril. However, it remains to be seen whether this Welsh Father will see this through after he has had time to ruminate on it for a few months. Chances are he will find another bit of fudge. Well, we shall know in 120 days, which turns out to be, approximately, Easter Sunday
I've grown tired of the "British-speak" warnings. The fact is, they're not warnings at all. Rowan has taken essentially no action at all. His "warnings" have been toothless, as evidenced by the virtually undiminished momentum in this direction by the Episcopal Church. The fact is, people have been saying, "Oooh! Look out! It might sound tame, but it's because he's British" since Rowan became Archbishop of Canterbury. Reality check: it IS tame. Rowan has been a complete failure as Archbishop of Canterbury. What can he do now? Nothing. Had he actually had the guts to *do* something six years ago, he might have had a chance. But the Episcopal Church saw Rowan's "warnings" for what they were: complete lack of will. And they were right. Which is why the American church is where it is right now, and why all Rowan is doing is issuing weak "warnings" that are nothing more than a finger wagging. He will be (as we all know perfectly well) completely ignored.
Given that the diocesan bishops did not approve the elevation of a priest who had integrated Buddhist teachings into his pastoral approach, I think there is a good chance they will not confirm anyone (male or female, homosexual or heterosexual) living in a non-matrimonial sexual relationship. Let's see what happens. The diocese of Los Angeles is probably considerably more comfortable with this than is the Church as a whole.
Scout
Ah, another "Double Secret Probation" is coming for the Church that shattered the Windsor protocols again and again.
Whew, that was a close one.
How's it feel Rowan to know that all of those TEC bishops who said that they agreed with Windsor to get to Lambeth have duped you? (Wasn't Bruno there saying that? The same guy who denied that he knew about SSBs in HIS diocese?)
Please.
So! Let us shine a light on this situation.
In Uganda and Nigeria it is permissible and agreeable to imprison and flog those whose lifestyle is found an abomination but in Los Angeles the election of a lesbian shatters the Anglican Communion.
God must have a sense of humor.
Perhaps someone who has kept track of such things can tell me when "The bishops of the Communion have collectively acknowledged that a period of gracious restraint in respect of actions which are contrary to the mind of the Communion is necessary if our bonds of mutual affection are to hold." I don't recall the bishops at Lambeth 2008 making such a statement and, if the Archbishop is refering to a statement by the Primates, then this would seem to be an exaggeration.
Peter Jensen has responded, urging the ABC to act:
Statement by the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Dr Peter Jensen, on the Episcopal election in the Diocese of Los Angeles.
“The election (yet to be confirmed) of a partnered lesbian as Bishop in the Episcopal Church (TEC) is sad but not surprising.
Confirmation of this election will make clear beyond any doubt whatsoever that the TEC leadership has chosen to walk in a way which is contrary to scripture and will continue to do so.
This settled path that the TEC chooses is contrary to the expressed will of the majority of the Anglican Communion.
Further, it confirms the rightness of GAFCON in producing the Jerusalem Declaration and establishing the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FCA).
The aim of the FCA is to recognise and give fellowship to those who wish to remain faithful to God’s revealed word and also to defend and promote biblical teaching throughout the Communion.
It is all the more urgent that those who share the aims of the FCA should associate themselves with the movement and express their disapproval of actions which are contrary to scripture and contrary to historic Anglicanism.
Further, this gives the Archbishop of Canterbury every reason to act decisively and dissociate from the Episcopal Church and to recognise the Anglican Church of North America.”
http://acl.asn.au/abp-sydney-on-los-angeles-election/
This is the same Archbishop whose diocesan synod last year approved a radical departure from traditional Anglican practice - lay presidency at the Eucharist. Is that departure "communion-breaking"?
Fr. Weir & I agree...to a point.
Lay presidency works in missionary situations where priests aren't available or where they won't get off their pensions to serve (such lay presidency as the Methodists have practiced - and have grown with). Shall we stop being a Church because of a shortage of Fr. Weirs and others?
In any event, the Eucahrist doesn't change it's efficacy or meaning because a priest isn't available. The liturgy teaches where...GASP!...the laity are in charge. Quite a different picture than of those dioceses who teach that marriage is now different because they say so...you know who does that, don't you?
Re: Lambeth & Fr. Weir:
Don't you remember that the ABC asked bishops coming to Lambeth to self-critique and respond/show up ONLY if they were Windsor-compliant, and able to go along with the current teachings of Lambeth 1.10?
Yes, it was laughable, but revealing about deception.
Allen,
Thank you for pointing out the ABC's pre-Lambeth request. I was not aware of that request and, had I been a bishop (thank God, I'm not!) I would have had a hard time attending on those terms.
Wow! I thought that only the PB got this kind of abuse here.
Her enablers get it, too. And no one has enabled her more than Rowan Williams.
And border-crossing Windsor-compliance, Allen?
Sadly, most (all?) of the border-crossing bishops stayed away from Lambeth in 2008. They might have discovered that the wicked Americans were faithful sisters and brothers in Christ.
Ah, Lapinbizarre,
Taking a break for the ever-shrinking circle at Preludium?
I'm not for border crossings, but please just try to tell me how TEC can claim to have so many dioceses around the globe? Whatever happened to those overseas dioceses being trusted to be more autonomous, or affiliating with Provinces outside of TEC? Hard to tell where all of TEC's borders actually ARE. But, one thing's for sure. I'd rather have mission-minded overseas bishops trying to hold the Church together by crossing borders, than lazy American revisionist bishops with small eyes and fat arses ruining the Church from the next city. That kind of leadership is more princely and slovenly than servant-minded. We've been ruined enough unless you count the great strides for sodomy and abandoned churches being achieved during the last 30 years.
Only shrinking I've noticed at Preludium is not seeing much of your deathless prose over there of late, Allen. Bit unhealthy, this "sodomy" obsession?
What does the size of a bishop
's eyes or his arse have to do with it? This is getting to sound a bit middle schoolish.
Scout
Let me break it (the metaphor) down:
Small eyes: they see little except what they want to.
Fat Arse: comfortable with little meaningful movement.
Hagrid's getting rather restless lately - having all ready "had words" with Mr. Jefferson outside, he's a bit on the cranky side. Let's remember to toss the popcorn, not the cream pies - okay?
bb
Right you are, BB. Will withhold comment on the svelte rears of certain ACNA prelates.
Allen said...
"Re: Lambeth & Fr. Weir:
Don't you remember that the ABC asked bishops coming to Lambeth to self-critique and respond/show up ONLY if they were Windsor-compliant, and able to go along with the current teachings of Lambeth 1.10?"
I checked with a member of the planning committee for Lambeth 2008 and was told that there was no "litmus test" for bishops.
This leaves me with the idea that what the Primates agreed to can now be said to be what the bishops affirmed.
Post a Comment