Responses have been swift and vigorous to the election of the Rev. Canon Mary Douglas Glasspool as a suffragan bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles.
The Archbishop of Canterbury issued a statement on Nov. 6, one day after Canon Glasspool’s election.
Canon Glasspool’s election “raises very serious questions not just for the Episcopal Church and its place in the Anglican Communion, but for the Communion as a whole,” Archbishop Rowan Williams wrote. “The election has to be confirmed, or could be rejected, by diocesan bishops and diocesan standing committees. That decision will have very important implications.”
“This decision represents an intransigent embrace of a pattern of life Christians throughout history and the world have rejected as against biblical teaching,” said the Rev. Dr. Kendall Harmon of the Diocese of South Carolina. “It will add further to the Episcopal Church’s incoherent witness and chaotic common life, and it will continue to do damage to the Anglican Communion and her relationship with our ecumenical partners.”
The Rev. Canon Chris Sugden and the Rev. Philip Giddings of Anglican Mainstream characterized the election as a test of the Episcopal Church’s willingness to remain part of a global Anglican Communion.
“Unless their diocesan bishops and their standing committees decline to endorse the election, it will confirm that TEC have no intention of respecting the mind of the Communion and halting their current trajectory,” they wrote, adding that “TEC’s latest announcement, made in full knowledge of its negative effect on the Communion’s Covenant process, will confirm that TEC, rather than wanting to remain within the Communion’s bonds of affection, is determined to walk away and follow its own path.”
Some of the archbishop’s critics have contrasted his rapid public response to Canon Glasspool’s election and his quiet diplomacy regarding proposed anti-homosexuality laws in Uganda.
Under the archbishop’s leadership, religion journalist Andrew Brown wrote on his blog for The Guardian, “the church that marries two women who love each other is to be thrown out of the Anglican Communion. The church that would jail them both for life, and would revile and persecute their defenders, stays snugly in his bosom.”
The Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno, Bishop of Los Angeles, said it would “be a violation of the canons of this church” for bishops and standing committees to deny consents to Canon Glasspool because of her sexual orientation. “They just as well might have withheld consent from me because I was a divorced man and, in my case, it would have been more justified than in withholding them from someone who has been approved through all levels of ministry and is a good and creative minister of the gospel.”
In a statement issued within an hour of Canon Glasspool’s election, the Rev. Lowell Grisham, a co-convener of the Chicago Consultation, offered a pre-emptive defense of her election.
“God has clearly been calling Mary to challenging and important ministries over and over during the course of her career,” said Fr. Grisham. “While there may be a temptation in some quarters to use Mary’s election to foment further controversy in the Anglican Communion, those of us who know her understand that this is simply the next chapter in a lifetime of service to her church. We are grateful to her and to her partner, Becki Sander, for answering a new call in Los Angeles.
Lionel Deimel, a founder of Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh, cast the election in strategic terms.
“Demonstrating that Gene Robinson’s election was not a fluke will send the message to the Anglican Communion that our commitment to the gospel, as we understand it, is more important than indulging the prejudices of the Nigerias and Ugandas of the Communion,” he wrote. “Consenting to the consecration of Mary Glasspool, as we must do, will create facts on the ground that will make acceptance of a covenant like the one presented to the Anglican Consultative Council last spring impossible to accept.”
The Living Church has a new look! Get the next 52 weeks of The Living Church Online, plus convenient access to more than a year of archived issues, all for just $25! Click here to start your subscription to the TLC Online Edition today!
2 Comments
Andrew Brown makes a very serious and valid point. Which position reflects the Gospel as preached by Jesus Christ? Based on the narratives we have, it is the position that is rooted in love rather than hatred or cleansing or worse.
Rowan Cantaur is truly missing an opportunity here. He could begin the process of educating members of the Communion about the ability to live together with conflicting views of what Scripture "says" and how it should be applied in our lives today. This is a field ready for planting. Instead he seems to have chosen to side with the "power and authority" crowd. He could exercise leadership in helping everyone understand that we are a Communion of differences of opinion but that gathers around God's table to share in the Eucharistic feast. Instead he will remain silent and let folks think what they may about his positions. Truly sad to miss such a wonderful opportunity for evangelism.
I have to wonder if perhaps Canon Glasspool's stellar qualifications and experience are making a lot of the "boys" feel inadequate in their own accomplishments in life. Rather than praise her election and noting how truly well qualified she is, they choose to denigrate her and cling to a patriarchal system that brings nothing but harm to all.
One also wonders if the fact that she is brighter than a number of members of the House of Bishops might be casting her in the role of a threat to their masculinity. But why bring one's own personal anxieties about inadequacies into the decision making process? I would think others might want to take advantage of the opporunity to learn from her.
Bruce Garner
How can you educate people as the previous commenter does, "He (++RW) could begin the process of educating members of the Communion about the ability to live together with conflicting views of what Scripture "says" and how it should be applied in our lives today." I do not believe that this is a conflict about what Scripture says but one of the authority of Scripture in the first place.
It was Windsor that spoke of this, and I must paraphrase, when the report stated that we have no need of a Pope since we have the Scriptures as our authority. My objection here is so fundamental since I follow Hooker in that the plain meaning of Scripture is what we must adhere to, only after that do reason and tradition have a role to play as authorities. In this instance Scripture is clear, even though some complain of there being only six verses and none of these six are specifically from the mouth of Jesus, (all sorts of questions are being begged there). Meanwhile Canterbury has been clear in the words attached to the moratorium that the teaching of the Church cannot change unless there is a Communion consensus.
The actions over VGR and now this current election are in spite of the fact that there is no consensus. Indeed they are seeking to create "facts on the ground," which only inflame the divisions. The election here is inflammatory on a Communion level. To quote from the Living Church editorial comment regarding the election and the possible consents, this is "an election that will further tear apart an already torn fabric."
For my part the tearing and its developments are not reparable in my lifetime.