Guests:
Rt. Rev J. Jon Bruno, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles
Rev. Canon Mary D. Glasspool, Suffragan bisop-elect, Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles
Rev. Canon Diane M. Jardine Bruce, Suffragan bishop-elect, Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles
The lesbian respondant used rhetoric to elevate the presiding bishop (16 countries, 116 dioceses, etc, etc) to a like level with the Archbishop of Canterbury, and suggested that any “disquietude” engendered by her election should be resolved in a private conversation between these two world leaders.
The 120 days of the confirmation process should start this weekend.
In TEC’s eyes, the PB is co-equal, since TEC is international.
We quit singing “God Save the King” when the tea went in the Boston Harbor and cut the ties with the CofE in 1789. We owe respect and prayers to the Archbishop of Canterbury — not fealty.
well susan i hope he will return the sentiment to you and yours.
Who is the “we” in the statement, “we quit singing ‘God Save the king. . . ” I take it the we is US citizens. Given that Bruno said TEC was doing away with any distinction between the church and world, is it the case that TEC has simply dissolved into US culture? As an outsider I don’t see how that consequence, irrespective of one’s understanding of sexuality, can be denied. To be an episcoplian is to be a particular kind of American. Was it always?
#3 Don’t be ridiculous Susan Russell
You used LA as a trojan horse into TEC just as you are using TEC as a trojan horse into the Anglican Communion, with help from your chums in St Albans. You need to be part of the Communion otherwise you are just part of a small church, tiny and irrelevant even by the standards of North America – and that is no use to your agenda is it?
There was a perfectly good candidate who would have looked after the hispanic congregations in your diocese, who looked from laity votes as if he would win – but instead in was shipped in a partnered lesbian from across the continent – very inclusive of the Hispanics wasn’t it?
Pull the other leg – it has bells on.
The Anglican Communion is a community of faithful people – not a nation state. Good grief. Tea in Boston has nothing to do with it.
If Bruno is doing away with the difference between church and world – well, who needs the church? What is it then, just a dress up party for people to celebrate their Theirness?
Sarcasm on: Yes, speaking out about an issue is always much more important than actually doing someting about it personally. Sarcasm Off. Still waiting to hear that our friends comdemn the genocide in Sudan.
[blockquote] Susan Russell wrote:
We quit singing “God Save the King†when the tea went in the Boston Harbor and cut the ties with the CofE in 1789. We owe respect and prayers to the Archbishop of Canterbury—not fealty.
[/blockquote]
Except of course when you can use the invitations to his little party as “evidence” of TEC legitimacy within the communion, huh? Hypocritical much?
We cut ties with Cof E in 1789 and with Christianity in 2003. It is all about us.
Kudos, Pageantmaster, and ditto.
TEC has been set free of those cumbersome bonds of affection.
TEC should not (and cannot be forced to) follow the consensus of the Anglican Communion due to fealty. TEC should have followed the consensus of the Anglican Communion out of respect for the bonds of affection that used to hold the Anglican Communion together. Even better just quit what they are doing because it is not keeping with Christian morals.
Saving the Elves the trouble, since my comment would have been about Ms. Russell’s inane comment and not the posted interview, self deleted.
[i] This elf says thank you. [/i]
Bishop Bruno’s interview and Susan Russell’s comments demonstrate the true failing of the Episcopal Church vis-a-vis Anglicanism. Anglicanism tries to be the via media between the Church catholic and the radical protestantism. The leadership of TEC has no interest in the former and is obsessed with the individualism of the latter.
[blockquote] Anglicanism tries to be the via media between the Church catholic and the radical protestantism.[/blockquote]
Not so. The Church of England sought to be the Church catholic in England–a [i]via media[/i] between the presumption and revisionism of the [b]Church of Rome[/b] and the excesses of Geneva. In its earliest years either could earn one a spot on the block. There were boundaries to diversity; there were limits to inclusion.
To Susan’s remark, I would observe that in 1789 clergy and lay from the dioceses of Massachusetts, Connecticut (Samuel Seabury, bishop), Pennsylvania (William White, bishop), Virginia, New York (Samuel Provoost, bishop), Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware and South Carolina met in convention in Philadelphia to create the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America to be a national church both catholic and reformed. Notice that all of these dioceses are older than TEC, three of them already had bishops duly consecrated and that TEC is a creature of these dioceses, not the other way around. For many decades, the Presiding Bishop was the senior diocesan bishop of PECUSA, whose duties apart from being a diocesan were to preside over meetings of the bishops and to be the principal consecrator of new elected bishops. One might legitimately say that, at most, Episcopalians owe Schori respect and prayers, but not fealty.
Archdiocese of Los Angeles?
And the photo appears to show Anglican priests submitting to the Roman Church. They apparently fled to France to do so.