[Received via email]

February 4, 2010
Clergy in the Diocese of Southern Virginia
Dear Sisters and Brothers:
I am writing to inform you that I have decided not to consent to the election of the Rev’d Mary Glasspool as suffragan bishop of Los Angeles.  This decision comes after much prayer and reflection and after considerable struggle with what I believe to be a most difficult situation.
Everything I know about Mary Glasspool assures me that she is an experienced, faithful priest with extensive diocesan experience and strong leadership skills.  I believe she would make a wonderful bishop and that she is an excellent match for the Diocese of
Los Angeles.  Her election there was logical and appropriate.
Nevertheless, it is clear to me that the ordination of an openly Gay woman to the episcopate will - at this time - have a serious negative impact on our relationship with the wider Anglican Communion, and that it may very well strain - to the breaking point - those bonds of affection which we have come to value with others, even with those who may agree with us.  This, in turn, would limit or damage our future ability to offer leadership to the wider church around matters of sexuality and social justice, as well as limit our participation in shared programs for mission.
Let me assure you that this decision has not been an easy one for me.  I believe that Mary Glasspool is the “right” person for the Diocese of Los Angeles.  I am and will continue to be an advocate for the inclusion of Gays and Lesbians in the Church.  Yet, I also believe that timing does matter and that sometimes it is necessary to practice restraint for the sake of preserving and maintaining relationships.  At this time, there are precious relationships at stake in this decision, ones that go a long way in defining who we are as people of a common table.
During the next few months in particular, please keep the entire leadership of the Church in your prayers.
In Christ,
+ Herman Hollerith IV

So he’s sacrificing gays and lesbians on the altar of unity?

Wow.

Wait ‘til Susan and Louie hear about this.

Deposition to follow on Monday….
Intercessor

it is clear to me that the ordination of an openly Gay woman to the episcopate will - at this time - have a serious negative impact on our relationship with the wider Anglican Communion, and that it may very well strain - to the breaking point - those bonds of affection which we have come to value with others, even with those who may agree with us. This, in turn, would limit or damage our future ability to offer leadership to the wider church around matters of sexuality and social justice, as well as limit our participation in shared programs for mission.

This statement reeks of condescension - he wants to give we poor benighted troglodytes time to become enlightened into the higher truths.

But at least he recognizes that the actions of ECUSA will have an impact the larger Anglican church.  The trouble is, he does not recognize that we conservatives hold our position out of conviction that God has spoken clearly in Scripture, and that our rejection of those who engage in same-sex sexual activities as proper candidates for ministry is based on Scriptural teachings, not on ignorance of what same-sex attracted people are really like.

On the plus side - a “no” vote is still a “no” vote.

While I disagree with Bishop Hollerith (who as a young priest was my high school theology teacher)on the fitness of Ms. Glasspool to be elected the office of bishop, it is good to see that he recognizes that TEC has made certain commitments to the rest of the communion and that it ought to keep them.  I wish he had said so more clearly.

RSB

Good letter…
Blessings

seraph

I hope another bish has the courage to write the same letter but quote Holy Scripture as to why her choice to have a homosexual relationship is a sin, and therefore she is unfit for being a priest much less a bish.

A fellow student from the year “Mr. Hollerith” [aka Holly] taught at S.S.S., it saddens me that his reason for denying consent is to remain engaged so that the false teaching of TEC can be spread. It makes me wish he gave consent.
And yet I will always remain grateful to him for speaking to us about faith in Jesus Christ. He was an important influence in my coming to the Lord.
By the way Radford, it is good to see you are holding up the faith once delivered. Rob Holman+

This letter is startling.  Perhaps this consent process may be a greater struggle than anyone anticipated. I am still expecting the consents to come in.

[3] AnglicanXn

On the plus side - a “no” vote is still a “no” vote.

It’s better if she is confirmed.  TEC would be wise to reject her as bishop for exactly the reasons stated:

This, in turn, would limit or damage our future ability to offer leadership to the wider church around matters of sexuality and social justice, as well as limit our participation in shared programs for mission.

It’s better if TEC admits its true nature for all to see.  The duplicity must be ended so that the Anglican bureaucracy cannot hide behind fig leaves of credible deniability.  Every ‘Yes’ vote pushes TEC one step further across the Rubicon.  When TEC reaches dry ground on the other side, there will be no possible doubt about what TEC is doing or where TEC wants to go.  Then the bureaucratic nabobs that have protected TEC for so many years will have to choose a side.

As Lenin would say, encourage the contradictions.

carl

In the third paragraph, Gay is capitalized. Why?

I am confused. How can she be an

“excellent match for the Diocese of Los Angeles. Her election there was logical and appropriate.”

on the one hand, and be bad for the Anglican Communion, but somehow the one trumps the other? Does this also mean that the Bishop recognizes that the Diocese of Los Angeles by itself already puts a strain on the Anglican communion even without Ms. Glasspool?

To my understanding, this is a wimpy “No,” but still a “No.” Come on Bishop, put some backbone into it!

#7 Rob
It is good to see that there is at least one other Saint holding true. 

I’ve heard only a little from Randy, but he seems to be in line with his older brother’s theology.

RSB

What a steaming load.  I guess we should count a “no” as a “no” and be thankful for that.  But, once again, a bishop of the church makes a decision based upon “relationships” and politics rather than the Word of God.

#12 RSB, Yes, I was sad for them as they both seem to have drunk the kool-aid. I checked out Randy’s church’s website once and he seems to be more of an institutionalist in nature while Holly is being a revisionist more clearly, but that is on limited data. I haven’t spoken with either of them—maybe at the 2012 reunion if I can get over to the east coast for it.

Clearly he’s more afraid of what others may think then her true suitability as outlined in the Gospel.

Perhaps “Holly” realizes that it is unlikely that the Virginia Supremes will overturn Judge Bellows. Planting an “inclusive” flag now in what has become a shaky diocese (financially and otherwise) over the last several years could be a major strategic blunder,since Virginia currently gives ownership and allegiance say to the Parish. Especially so if we get good news from the COE synod with regard to ACNA. His diocese could come apart like a zipper.

What a steaming load.

Subscribe.

There is not one once of principle involved in Holly’s statement.  This is nothing more than an argument about timing and the potential for a massive negative reaction around the AC.  There is also the factor of trying to hold his shaky diocese together, as Creedal Episcopalian (#16) pointed out.

Carl at #9 and hanks at #17,

Right on. There is nothing admirable in this bishop’s statement. Just an attempt to conceal his true beliefs from other Anglicans instead of stating them honestly. Mind you, it is easy to see why he would be ashamed of his beliefs, which he obviously is.

Better that Ms Glasspool’s election be confirmed so that the Anglican Communion (which is overwhelmingly conservative) can see clearly the nature of the TEC hierarchy and react accordingly.

The more that the Communion publicly affirms its rejection of TEC leadership, the more that the orthodox in both TEC and ACNA will be supported and empowered.