The Diocese of Missouri’s standing committee granted consent, and president Jane Klieve offered brief thoughts on that decision in a message to the diocese released on March 2. The standing committee began discussing the matter in January, but postponed its decision until Feb. 23, she wrote.
“As a body, we consider both the importance of supporting/ratifying decisions made by our brothers and sisters in other dioceses and the impact of these decisions on The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion,” Klieve wrote. “While the vote was not easy, quickly taken, or unanimous, we voted to grant our consent to the election of the Rev. Mary Glasspool.”
The standing committee of Northern Indiana declined consent. In a Jan. 28 letter [PDF] to the Rt. Rev. Jon Bruno, Bishop of Los Angeles, the standing committee said it was not of one mind on sexuality questions, and explained its decision to deny consent…
I would so love to know what the vote was on all those consenting to Glasspool’s election and how they voted in the election of +Mark Lawrence of SC, esp. since they use the logic of “the election was proper according to canon guidelines, etc”.
“Nevertheless, it is clear to me that the ordination of an openly Gay woman to the episcopate will — [b]at this time[/b] — have a serious negative impact on our relationship with the wider Anglican Communion…”
It seems like The ABC RW has provided the cop-out clause for the bishops who oppose Glasspool. The problem for me is the “not yet” part. It is a unity thing not a truth thing. It is a palpable inevitability.
Dcn Dale, while others may think it won’t have much impact on TEC’s relations with the rest of the Communion, I think they’re only fooling themselves.
Though I disagree with him when he praises Canon Glasspool, I think Bishop Hollerith may be right in his assessment about the effect that her election and consecration may have on TEC’s relations with the Communion.
There is a disaster in the making.
I still say that she may be refused. There are more TEC leaders who have looked at the numbers (than we are aware of, I believe) and have figured out what they mean and why. She may be appointed but I don’t think this is a shoo-in by any means. Larry