The Archbishop of Canterbury has been slower to respond to the consecration of the Rt. Rev. Mary Douglas Glasspool as a bishop suffragan than he was after her Dec. 5, 2009, election.
When the Diocese of Los Angeles elected Glasspool the Archbishop of Canterbury responded the next day.
“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,” Archbishop Rowan Williams said then.
A few months later, in a video greeting to the fourth Global South to South Encounter, the archbishop referred to consultations regarding possible consequences for Glasspool’s consecration.
“All of us share the concern that in this decision and action the Episcopal Church has deepened the divide between itself and the rest of the Anglican family,” he said April 20. “And as I speak to you now, I am in discussion with a number of people around the world about what consequences might follow from that decision, and how we express the sense that most Anglicans will want to express, that this decision cannot speak for our common mind.”
Glasspool and her fellow bishop suffragan, the Rt. Rev. Diane Jardine Bruce, were consecrated May 15 at the Long Beach Convention Center.
One man stood early in the service, before the designated time for challenging the consecrations of either bishop. He waved a placard and shouted: “Repent of the sins of the homosexual. Repent of the sin of abortion.”
After the man was led out by security, a boy stood, held aloft what appeared to be a Bible and said “Repent” repeatedly. He too was led away by security.
Security did not arrest the man or the boy, diocesan spokesman Bob Williams told the Los Angeles Times.
Outside the convention center, protesters waved placards promoting OfficialStreetPreachers.com and urged repentance on people walking to the service.
Anglican leaders and activists have offered their interpretations of what Bishop Glasspool’s consecration means.
The Rev. Susan Russell, a past president of Integrity, wrote on her weblog, An Inch at a Time, that she thought repeatedly about the hymn “The Strife is O’er” during the consecration.
“I sang out of faith that the God of peace, who brought again from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep in the Easter that trumped Good Friday, is leading us forward into God’s future — a future beyond schism and division, beyond pain and polemic,” she wrote. “I sang out of hope that the steps we took Saturday in the Diocese of Los Angeles would be a beacon of light and life to all who are looking for signs of God’s love, peace, justice and compassion.”
Dr. Philip Giddings and the Rev. Canon Dr. Chris Sugden of Anglican Mainstream wrote that the consecration “shows that TEC has now explicitly decided to walk apart from most of the rest of the Communion.”
They urged three consequences to the consecration: “First, TEC withdrawing, or being excluded from the Anglican Communion’s representative bodies. Second, a way must be found to enable those orthodox Anglicans who remain within TEC to continue in fellowship with the Churches of the worldwide Communion. Third, the Anglican Church of North America (ACNA) should now be recognized [as] an authentic Anglican Church within the Communion.”
The Rev. Tobias Haller turned the language of walking apart back on Anglican Mainstream.
“It is important to remember that any ‘rift’ or ‘tear’ or any such ‘transection’ is at this point ‘a rift in the Anglican Communion’ — it is not a rift between the Anglican Communion and some entity not a part (or no longer a part, as Anglican Mainstream and others would have it) of the Anglican Communion,” Haller wrote on his weblog, In a Godward Direction.
“No one has ‘walked apart’ from the rest of the Anglican Communion, except perhaps those portions of it, such as Nigeria and parts of GAFCON/FoCA [Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans], who have chosen actually to reject the See of Canterbury as a focal point for gathering the Anglican episcopate for consultation, or who have established separatist outposts within the confines of other Anglican jurisdictions, declaring they are out of communion with the larger body.”
Like Anglican Mainstream, the Rev. Todd H. Wetzel of Anglicans United sees the Glasspool consecration as proof that the Episcopal Church is rejecting fellowship with the broader Anglican Communion.
“As the Anglican Communion moved towards a more conscious and clearly defined commitment to biblical authority and the [conciliar] tradition of the Church Catholic, TEC moved in the opposite direction,” Wetzel wrote. “As the Anglican Communion moved towards increasing collegiality and interdependence, TEC moved (albeit with few other Western allies) to affirm greater independence. While the public rhetoric of the Episcopal Church continually affirmed their care and consideration for the rest of the Communion, the actions of this insular body made those statements empty sentiment.”
2 Comments
Canterbury will of course be cautious in giving a response. One would hope that Christian love and charity would cause the Archbishop to welcome this inclusive move, but the politics of church governance will likely cause a more measured response unfortunately. Those who feel that the Episcopal Church has moved away from the Anglican communion forget that the communion is not based on Scripture alone, and certainly not on one narrow definition of Scripture, but tradition and reason as well. Reason allows for the church to remain vibrant, alive, and relevant. I would hope that there is room in the true communion of Christ for ALL, regardless of what narrow minded people might do to try to keep power money and influence, for that is what this debate is truly about.
The Episcopal Church has not chosen to walk apart from anyone. The table, and it is indeed God's table and no one elses, is large enough to accommodate all of us. True, historical and orthodox Anglicanism has always been the broad road with many travelers working their way along it. Of course it is a bit messy and uneven at times and there are edges on both sides of the road. Yet there is no curbstone to enclose us. We flow along. Those who now try and say that The Episcopal Church has chosen to walk apart are not being truthful. Those choosing to walk apart are those who seem most ignorant of their Anglican heritage.
Some still try to "clean up and solidify" the Anglican muddle over issues of gender and ordination. Others try on the basis of sexual orientation. And others try on the Scripture being inerrant and to be taken literally in every way. But for every passage of scripture cited as being required to be taken literally, I can cite a multitude of passages that are ignored. It's a theological "all or none" proposition my siters and brothers in Christ.
Jesus' ministry was one of inclusion, usually the inclusion of those others would cast out. We seem to forget that little tidbit of information. He didn't put a barrier around the saving grace of the Gospel, so who are we to do so? The ministerial road Jesus traveled was not a neat and tidy, contained by curbstones road. It was messy and dusty and meandering. The important aspect of that ministry was its foundation in love, not judgement. So why are we so arrogant as to judge? We are insecure when things are not as black and white or cut and dried as we want them. Life isn't all black and white issues, why should our faith be so? It's called faith for a very good reason: It's not something we can prove or quantify or even control.
So, Todd and others, The Episcopal Church is not walking apart. It's on the same path where it has always found itself: the messy and unkempt path of orthodox Anglicanism.
Bruce Garner
Atlanta, GA USA