With the election of a non-celibate lesbian priest as Bishop Suffragan, the Diocese of Los Angeles has demonstrated its belief that membership in an international communion of churches is less important than unilaterally proceeding with an agenda of sexual liberation. We believe that this action is contrary to the best interest of the Episcopal Church and the health of the wider Anglican Communion. Where restraint has been respectfully requested by the leadership of the Communion, this action by the Diocese of Los Angeles is provocative, defiant and uncharitable.
We wish to distance ourselves from this action and urge our bishops and standing committees, as well as those of all the dioceses, to withhold consent for the consecration of the Bishop Suffragan-elect of the Diocese of Los Angeles.
Bravo!
And if the bishops and standing committees DO consent? Then what? Probably nothing, except wait until the next election of a non-celibate gay man/woman. Then another “open letter”. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. In the meantime, many are led down a path of spiritual destruction.
Fr. Darin Lovelace+
Park City, Utah
I see St Martin’s on the list – I think it is currently the biggest in TEC.
I had the privilege of sitting in the diocesan synod of the Diocese of Singapore two days after Gene Robinson was consecrated as the only American in the room. The room unanimously voted to affirm a resolution that with the said consecration The Episcopal Church had impaired communion with the Diocese of Singapore. It was a painful moment for me personally to know that my Church had been the cause to which the Synod of my friends and colleagues in Christ Jesus were then responding and rebuking. I wholeheartedly supported the resolution and said so on from the floor that night.
Three years later, in reflection on the events of 2003 and the direction of The Episcopal Church, the Windsor Report stated in paragraph 157, “Should the call to halt and find ways of continuing in our present communion not be heeded, then we shall have to begin to learn to walk apart.” Los Angeles has not heeded that call.
We are on the verge of repeating the events and demonstrating as a Church in this country our disregard of Scripture and the Communion of our brothers and sisters around the world. If the first consecration caused an international tearing of the fabric, we in TEC must be clear that it is now tearing the fabric within our Church.
Therefore, I would like to see the Communion Partners say,
“If the consecration of Mary Glaspool proceeds in light of Lambeth 1:10, in light of the Windsor Report, and in light of Scripture, then we shall understand that those bishops who participate in that consecration shall have walked apart from those of us who remain in The Episcopal Church and remain committed to the Faith proclaimed in the Scriptures, received by the one holy catholic, and apostolic Church, and affirmed by the Anglican Communion of which we remain a part.”
I can not turn my back on my friends and colleagues in Singapore, nor on those in the United States who have built this Church on the Word of God. I hope that we who remain in TEC will speak more boldly and confidently than we have (myself included).
In His hands,
Loren Fox+, Rector
Church of Our Savior
Diocese of Central Florida
“Agenda of sexual liberation”? That seems an odd word choice to me. Also, where were these same signers in condemning the border-crossing bishops for not showing “gracious restraint”?
Where were they when Bishop Robinson was consecrated bishop of New Hampshire?
[Slightly edited by Elf]
Dan, no such group existed in 2003, except for the American Anglican Council, and you can be sure that its leader, Anderson+ (now bishop) issued a letter at that time.
#5 – We need more plain speaking like that. Bravo for eschewing the mealy-mouthed language usually used by groups like this.
Oh, pshaw. When will these people get with the new thing the Holy Spirit is doing? Let’s not withold consent, but proceed and dialogue about it as brothers and sisters…
[sarcasm off] Ugh.