Meandering Thoughts on the Event of the Glasspool Consents

The Rev. Mary Glasspool, a partnered non-celibate lesbian priest, was elected by the Diocese of Los Angeles back in December to be their Suffragan Bishop. The Episcopal News Service, has announced that she has received the necessary number of consents from bishops and standing committees to move ahead with her consecration on May 5. This has severe ramifications in terms of further strain on our relationships within the Anglican Communion and, to a lesser extent, our ecumenical partners. There are both enough soap boxes condemning and toasts celebrating this event. But in reality, I do not think it will change things too much.

Why not?
1) She's not going to be a bishop with jurisdiction. She won't be at the Queen's Tea at Lambeth. She won't be making the hot and heavy decisions at House of Bishops meetings.

2) We already broke the mold with Gene Robinson. All told, this election was pretty much under the radar. No one is really surprised; there's no shock value, just grins on the left and head-shaking on the right.

3) It is a symptom of the larger problem of disunity that has largely existed since the inception of the Episcopal Church. This is a fact of history. After the Revolution, the Church of England was not really interested in keeping any formal connection with the colonial churches she birthed. It was only through the tireless efforts of people Samuel Seabury and Anglicans in Scotland that made it possible for us not to be Presbyterians, Congregationalists, or Methodists by default. Americans don't like being an equal (and never less important) partner. After the revolution, we ran our Church and kept our nose out of other national Churches' business as long as they left us alone. As the revivals of the 19th Century and new impetus for world missions was gaining momentum, we were in the front lines, heading up the charge--especially in Latin America and Asia. In the late 19th and early 20th Century, when ecumenical fever swept our hearts, we were leading the movement. Again, as the Church became more socially charged in its spirituality after the 1960s, we considered ourselves leaders, pioneers in justice. And that is what informs our actions--independence.

But the world is changing. Global Christianity's vibrant center is now in Africa and Southeast Asia, not the West. And we really aren't world leaders anymore, as developing nations have come into their own. So when ideas like the Covenant come along--an idea we aren't leading in or originating--we fold our arms and harrumph like the kid who normally gets picked first being passed over for the new neighborhood superstar. We want to take our ball and bat and go home. So passive-aggressive nose-thumbing is the order of the day until we grow up and learn what unity in the Body of Christ is all about now that almost 250 years have passed.