First lesbian bishop to be consecrated by Anglican church in America

[larkin31]

Excuse me I was first turned down for ordination in the Episcopal diocese of Delaware because I was NOT black female or homosexual and told so to my face….

I don’t know you, I admit, but this is hard to believe. I don’t believe it, actually. (the bolding is mine).

 

[FrJohnB]

Excuse me I was first turned down for ordination in the Episcopal diocese of Delaware because I was NOT black female or homosexual and told so to my face. Please do not hide behind “theology” when there is NONE to hide behind. When Asked about the Homosexual issue and theology the bishop said “Jesus never spoke against it” so I asked them to explain Matthew 19: 4-5 when Jesus was explaining the purpose of marriage where it said “FROM THE BEGINNING God created them MALE AND FEMALE and the two shall become one flesh” and he could not explain this. I would like to hear YOU explain Jesus’ own words that God created marriage to be between man and woman and tell me that this is not a political issue that you are pushing for.

When priests are ordained they vow to teach nothing contrary to what is clearly in scripture so by supporting this they are in open apostasy.

You are correct what runs contrary to scripture is apostasy.

 

[Padrej]

I don’t know you, I admit, but this is hard to believe. I don’t believe it, actually. (the bolding is mine).

Funny the the truth hurts your theory of the Episcopal Church being and “inclusive” church. I was not the only postulant for Holy Orders turned down for the same reason. To be truly inclusive you must include ALL but not exclude those who hold traditional values. This is what is happening. So cut the bull and admit that you do not know all.

I know Mary Glasspool from when she was rector at St Margret’s in Annapolis and do not have any personal animosity towards her as a person. I have no problem with a person who is TRULY CALLED being in the position that they are IF they are celibate if not married and faithful in marriage. Mary has at least one child so her dislike of men was not always there. When she was canon assistant to Bishop Ihlof of Baltimore they were grooming her to be a bishop. This WAS a political move as the positions she held in the Episcopal church were all preparing her for this move to bishop.

What positions did you serve in the Episcopal church while I was serving in the diocese of Maryland and diocese of Delaware that you know better?

 

[benidict]

Funny the the truth hurts your theory of the Episcopal Church being and “inclusive” church. I was not the only postulant for Holy Orders turned down for the same reason. To be truly inclusive you must include ALL but not exclude those who hold traditional values. This is what is happening. So cut the bull and admit that you do not know all.

I know Mary Glasspool from when she was rector at St Margret’s in Annapolis and do not have any personal animosity towards her as a person. I have no problem with a person who is TRULY CALLED being in the position that they are IF they are celibate if not married and faithful in marriage. Mary has at least one child so her dislike of men was not always there. When she was canon assistant to Bishop Ihlof of Baltimore they were grooming her to be a bishop. This WAS a political move as the positions she held in the Episcopal church were all preparing her for this move to bishop.

What positions did you serve in the Episcopal church while I was serving in the diocese of Maryland and diocese of Delaware that you know better?

:clapping: bravo!

 

[FrJohnB]

Excuse me I was first turned down for ordination in the Episcopal diocese of Delaware because I was NOT black female or homosexual and told so to my face. Please do not hide behind “theology” when there is NONE to hide behind. When Asked about the Homosexual issue and theology the bishop said “Jesus never spoke against it” so I asked them to explain Matthew 19: 4-5 when Jesus was explaining the purpose of marriage where it said “FROM THE BEGINNING God created them MALE AND FEMALE and the two shall become one flesh” and he could not explain this. I would like to hear YOU explain Jesus’ own words that God created marriage to be between man and woman and tell me that this is not a political issue that you are pushing for.

When priests are ordained they vow to teach nothing contrary to what is clearly in scripture so by supporting this they are in open apostasy.

If I remember correctly you started under bishop Tennis in Delaware and he was very liberal, so I am not surprised as I know of others he turned down who were conservative. He should have remained a lawyer rather than become a bishop, just like the presiding bishop of the Episcopal church should have remained a marine biologist.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don’t understand why you don’t believe him? PadreJ has no reason to be lying? He’s always been a frank, sincere, plain-talking poster. What leads you to believe he’d be so desperate to make a point as to make up a phony interview dialogue? I believe him.

I don’t know you, I admit, but this is hard to believe. I don’t believe it, actually. (the bolding is mine).

 

[Padrej]

If I remember correctly you started under bishop Tennis in Delaware and he was very liberal, so I am not surprised as I know of others he turned down who were conservative. He should have remained a lawyer rather than become a bishop, just like the presiding bishop of the Episcopal church should have remained a marine biologist.

You are correct father because both are second career clergy and bring their own slant from the working world to the church which should be left outside the doors of it. Not all second career clergy are like this but these two are particularly outspoken. I was amazed the higher I got in the church how political the people were. They try to bend theology to fit those political agendas but it does not fit close to what God’s word says.

 

[Padrej]

I don’t understand why you don’t believe him? PadreJ has no reason to be lying? He’s always been a frank, sincere, plain-talking poster. What leads you to believe he’d be so desperate to make a point as to make up a phony interview dialogue? I believe him.

I noticed that Larkin31 also avoided the Matthew 19 issue altogether by trying to cast doubt rather than facing truth of scripture that is the real issue.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

You are correct what runs contrary to scripture is apostasy.

Yes, this goes well beyond simple error, all the way to another place - the literal meaning of apostasy.

Cardinal Arinze, in a speech, spoke of marriage being “mocked by homosexuality.” Mockery, too, is more than simple error.

The local Anglican bishop in these parts is one Michael Ingham. He has shattered his diocese - the court cases are in full swing - by blessing same sex “unions.” He told the Anglican homosexual activist group, Integrity, at one of their meetings, that if any of them did not think that what he and they were out to accomplish involved politics, they were naive. So if anyone wonders if there’s in fact a coordinated campaign under way in Anglicanism, Bishop Ingham says yes, there is, and it’s naive to think otherwise. His words.

Let the record show that the most ravaged victims of that campaign are those Anglican Christians struggling to hold and defend what truth they possess. For them, this is another wound.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Bluegoat]

I don’t understand why you don’t believe him? PadreJ has no reason to be lying? He’s always been a frank, sincere, plain-talking poster. What leads you to believe he’d be so desperate to make a point as to make up a phony interview dialogue? I believe him.

I can see that he would actually, if he isn’t really involved in Anglicanism. It rather strains credibility. But I have no difficulty believing such a thing, we have had our past bishops do things along the same lines, including actively plotting to make life so miserable for older more conservative clergy that they would leave.

As for standing up for their views, in my experience many have, but they are not heeded. Eventually many simply become tired and demoralized, or it ruins their health or family life.

 

[larkin31]

Funny the the truth hurts your theory of the Episcopal Church being and “inclusive” church. I was not the only postulant for Holy Orders turned down for the same reason. To be truly inclusive you must include ALL but not exclude those who hold traditional values. This is what is happening. So cut the bull and admit that you do not know all.

I know Mary Glasspool from when she was rector at St Margret’s in Annapolis and do not have any personal animosity towards her as a person. I have no problem with a person who is TRULY CALLED being in the position that they are IF they are celibate if not married and faithful in marriage. Mary has at least one child so her dislike of men was not always there. When she was canon assistant to Bishop Ihlof of Baltimore they were grooming her to be a bishop. This WAS a political move as the positions she held in the Episcopal church were all preparing her for this move to bishop.

What positions did you serve in the Episcopal church while I was serving in the diocese of Maryland and diocese of Delaware that you know better?

Being turned down for being too conservative or not following church dogma is different from being turned down because you were not a black woman or gay yourself.

 

[larkin31]

I noticed that Larkin31 also avoided the Matthew 19 issue altogether by trying to cast doubt rather than facing truth of scripture that is the real issue.

I don’t argue with Matthew 19. Jesus was referring back to the line from Genesis, which I am also quite familiar with. No one denies that marriage in the Bible is defined by the union of man and woman. Culturally, too, this has been the case.

I just can’t believe that your superior said straight out to you that because you were not a black woman that you could not be ordained. Were only black women and gays ordained that year? How about the next year?

 

[nhylan]

I know, especially after you laid it out so clearly for us. How could we reach any other conclusion?

I have suggested multiple times that people check out this issue, all you have to do is a google search. Clearly people are far too content to prattle on with their biased misinformed opinions without getting all the facts for themselves. You should WANT to know what TEC says on this instead of just saying how terrible it is, you should want the facts. Obviously people here aren’t interested in that, far more interested in sarcasm i guess.

 

[Stephen168]

I have suggested multiple times that people check out this issue, all you have to do is a google search. Clearly people are far too content to prattle on with their biased misinformed opinions without getting all the facts for themselves. You should WANT to know what TEC says on this instead of just saying how terrible it is, you should want the facts. Obviously people here aren’t interested in that, far more interested in sarcasm i guess.

An excuse is not necessarily a fact. Why they do it doesn’t change the fact that they do it. If there was any meaning and significance to why they do it, you would tell us and provide at link. After your first post I was curious and was hoping you would tell us. But after five posts of this nature I for one believe there is no significance to why they do it. The facts are; they do it.

 

[larkin31]

I have suggested multiple times that people check out this issue, all you have to do is a google search. Clearly people are far too content to prattle on with their biased misinformed opinions without getting all the facts for themselves. You should WANT to know what TEC says on this instead of just saying how terrible it is, you should want the facts…

nah…

(sarcasm feels good, though)

 

[Padrej]

I don’t argue with Matthew 19. Jesus was referring back to the line from Genesis, which I am also quite familiar with. No one denies that marriage in the Bible is defined by the union of man and woman. Culturally, too, this has been the case.

I just can’t believe that your superior said straight out to you that because you were not a black woman that you could not be ordained. Were only black women and gays ordained that year? How about the next year?

The next year I went into Maryland where Mary Glasspool was a priest. I served down the road from her in Crownsville. As to the “black” thing I am racially mixed but do not look it. The Next year in Delaware only ONE female was ordained whose only calling to ministry was that she “played church with dolls as a child and wanted to play church as an adult.” These are her words NOT MINE. When bishop Tennis tried to shove her down the throats of the more conservative churches they fought back for that reason- she was not called by GOD.

 

[Padrej]

Being turned down for being too conservative or not following church dogma is different from being turned down because you were not a black woman or gay yourself.

That is still not being INCLUSIVE as the Episcopal church claims to be. They EXCLUDE those who hold traditional values. Once I learned how to do the “political dance” and sound not so conservative I got further. With all due respect you are not in the clergy and I know that this is coming as a shock to you. Fr John who is Catholic knows the area I am from and can back me up on much of this as he knows the clergy situation too. I am sorry if this is destroying your perfect picture of the all inclusive and perfect church but they are only doing this for political reasons. There is NO reasonable theology to back up what they are doing

 

[benedictus2]

Its also a shame when repeatedly on this forum people choose to ignore the TEC’s theological reasoning for choosing to ordain gay bishops and instead belittling their leadership and turning it into a “homosexual” agenda thing. You are certainly entitled to disagree but what say we stop pretending this is a political move and try and work towards a better mutual understanding of our belief in Christ.
I have not read much of the posts but can you give share a quick summary of why do?

If it has already been posted here, can you tell me the post number.

 

[benedictus2]

The next year I went into Maryland where Mary Glasspool was a priest. I served down the road from her in Crownsville. As to the “black” thing I am racially mixed but do not look it. The Next year in Delaware only ONE female was ordained whose only calling to ministry was that she “played church with dolls as a child and wanted to play church as an adult.” These are her words NOT MINE. When bishop Tennis tried to shove her down the throats of the more conservative churches they fought back for that reason- she was not called by GOD.

No woman is called by God to be a priest. But it seems pester power does work.

 

[larkin31]

That is still not being INCLUSIVE as the Episcopal church claims to be. They EXCLUDE those who hold traditional values. Once I learned how to do the “political dance” and sound not so conservative I got further. With all due respect you are not in the clergy and I know that this is coming as a shock to you. Fr John who is Catholic knows the area I am from and can back me up on much of this as he knows the clergy situation too. I am sorry if this is destroying your perfect picture of the all inclusive and perfect church but they are only doing this for political reasons. There is NO reasonable theology to back up what they are doing

I asked you specifically about the claim about needing to be a black woman or a gay to be ordained.

If this is what you believe, then why are you pursuing ordination from them?

And believe me, I see NO church as “perfect.” lol.