Sunday, August 03, 2008

The Bishop of Los Angeles


From the Bishop of Los Angeles:

“I can only say that inclusion is a reality in our diocese and will continue to be. For people who think that this is going to lead us to disenfranchise any gay or lesbian person, they are sadly mistaken.”

The Rt. Reverend J. Jon Bruno, Bishop of Los Angeles

17 comments:

Hugo Schwyzer said...

That's the Jon Bruno I have known and admired for many years. The strange events of his election seem more and more to have been the workings of grace in hindsight!

Brian Baker said...

Let's hope The General Convention can make inclusion more of a reality in the entire Episcopal church!

Cany said...

glad to hear this...

JCF said...

Susan, please give +Jon our heartfelt thanks for his witness!

SCG said...

Hope +Bruno will talk to others in the ECUSA.

john said...

If it were up to me, I'd prefer that our diocesan convention INSTRUCT our delegates to the General Convention to support an affirmative statement that blessing of same-sex unions (marriages in states which permit them) should become the practice in TEC and that there will be no "moratorium" on full inclusion of GLBT Episcopalians.

Father David Heron said...

You can include everybody but you can't make them a Bishop

JCF said...

You can include everybody but you can't make them a Bishop

That's a really silly Straw Man, Father David.

No one's talking about "making everybody a bishop". The question is whether TEC may call Godly, honest bishops---through our democratic polity---or whether we must deny God's call of some, because somebody somewhere is offended (and usually, prejudiced).

If you can't handle that, Fr. David, maybe you really should (per your repeated internet threats) "swim the Tiber." I promise you, you'll find no honesty (much less, democracy) there! ;-/

Father David Heron said...

It's not that I can't "handle it" jcf.
I don't make the rules: it's what's been proposed at Lambeth.

IT said...

No gay bishops? Then no divorced bishops, right?!

Oh, wait a minute....

Hmmmm......

IT

WilliamK said...

Father David wrote:
It's not that I can't "handle it" jcf.
I don't make the rules: it's what's been proposed at Lambeth.


Father,
"I don't make the rules" sounds painfully like "I was only following orders". Why not take responsibility for your convictions instead of appealing to "rules"? In any case, no "rules" were made at Lambeth. The conference doesn't, in fact, have the power to make rules. It's the General Convention of the Episcopal Church that makes rules for TEC, and--God Willing--the next General Convention will make it clear that ALL priests may be considered on their individual merits for elevation to the episcopate ... not excluding priests of gay and lesbian sexual orientation who are in or may enter into monogamous same-sex relationships.

john said...

Father, do you always let the purple shirts do your thinking for you?

Father David Heron said...

Perhaps "rules" should be replaced with "proposals".
Of course TEC can do what it wants. Personally I'm happy with gay Bishops, but inclusion in a world-wide Communion in which they are contentious is another matter.
For the US Church, this is a black-and-white issue of equality, which doesn't allow a more nuanced approach which respects the consciences of others.

IT said...

Well, no actually. The US is not insisting anyone else have gay bishops (or woman bishops for that matter)--that would be wrong. But others are saying that the US can't have gay bishops.

That's the black and white.

IT

WilliamK said...

For the US Church, this is a black-and-white issue of equality, which doesn't allow a more nuanced approach which respects the consciences of others.

Father,
I have to disagree with this characterization of the situation in the US Church. First, while I wish it were true that it is "a black and white issue of equality" for the whole church, it isn't in fact the case that we all agree about it. There are many different views (not only two sides as is often claimed). That said, for those of us who do see this is as an issue of Gospel Justice (not worldly justice), there is a strong desire to respect the consciences of those who disagree. This is reflected in the way in which most members of our House of Bishops continue to work together and respect one another, despite strong disagreements. Bishops who did not consent to Bishop Robinson's consecration continue to work with him, and he works with them--without expecting them to change their conscientious positions. The problem is that some folks on the extreme "right" are arguing as if respect for their conscience means absolute submission to their point-of-view ... if they reject "gay bishops" then everyone must reject "gay bishops." But, in that case, where is THEIR respect for the consciences of those who believe differently? Where is their willingness to regard others as faithful Christians who hold a different view? No one in TEC is saying that folks in the "Global South" or "conservatives" in TEC who do not believe that gay and lesbian Anglicans can hold holy orders must embrace TEC's approach. No one is saying that they must bless same-sex-unions. We are asking only that our decision be respected--in short, we are asking respect for our consciences. I think Jesus had something to say about doing to others as we would have them do to us.

john said...

"this is a black-and-white issue of equality, which doesn't allow a more nuanced approach which respects the consciences of others."

Just curious; what is the "nuanced" way to deal with bigotry?

Father David Heron said...

+Rowan's private views on gay 'marriage', and his public stance on trying to hold the Communion together are 'nuanced'