Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles selects a gay bishop [Addendum]

Something significant happened during the silly yammering about gay public sex tents which San Francisco will never see erected.

The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles chose as a bishop the Rev. Canon Mary D. Glasspool, a lesbian who has been in a partnered relationship for two decades, and was rebuked by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. Spiritual leader of the world's 77 million Anglicans, Williams said:

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.

Glasspool’s selection is incomplete. She could be rejected by the U.S. bishops or standing committees. If she is rejected, Williams said, "That decision will have very important implications." He implied that her selection a threat to the "bonds" that tie 77 million Anglicans together.

A moratorium on election of gay bishops by the U.S. Episcopal Church was agreed to at the request of Anglican leaders after V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire was selected six years ago as its first openly gay bishop. Glasspool is the first major departure from the moratorium since it was put aside in July.

Williams did not address whether he believes the breaking of the moratorium via Glasspool's selection is more of a threat to the Anglican Communion than the pending gay genocide legislation in Uganda. But he has chosen not to speak out publicly on the latter. He works against it privately.

Ekkleasia writes that "Despite his attempts to maintain a balance in church disputes over sexuality, Williams is likely to be accused of speaking out against the extreme on one side but not the other."

Yes, vocal regarding Glasspool. Silent regarding Uganda.

Is he not guilty in fact?

J'accuse.

Addendum

Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori took a stand against "the pending Ugandan legislation that would introduce the death penalty for people who violate portions of that country's anti-homosexuality laws."

In a Dec. 4 statement of concern she wrote:

The Episcopal Church joins many other Christians and people of faith in urging the safeguarding of human rights everywhere. We do so in the understanding that "efforts to criminalize homosexual behavior are incompatible with the Gospel of Jesus Christ" (General Convention 2006, Resolution D005).

This has been the repeated and vehement position of Anglican bodies, including several Lambeth Conferences. The Primates' Meeting, in the midst of severe controversy over issues of homosexuality, nevertheless noted that, as Anglicans, "we assure homosexual people that they are children of God, loved and valued by him, and deserving of the best we can give of pastoral care and friendship" (Primates' Communiqué, Dromantine, 2005).

. . /

We urge continued prayer for those who live in fear of the implications of this kind of injustice and discrimination, and as a Church, commit ourselves anew to seek partnerships with the Church of Uganda, or any portion thereof, in serving the mission of God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That Gospel is larger than any party or faction. It is only in mutual service and recognition that we will begin to mend our divisions.
. . /

Re-Excommunicate Holocaust-denying Bishop Williamson?

When Cardinal Roger M. Mahony of Los Angeles banned the Holocaust-denying Bishop Richard Williamson from Archdiocese of Los Angeles churches, he went a step beyond the Vatican. A long step. He said:

Holocaust deniers like Williamson will find no sympathetic ear or place of refuge in the Catholic Church, of which he is not --- and may never become --- a member.

Mark Silk at SpiritualPolitics observes:

Without criticizing the pope, [Mahony has] seized on Williamson's Holocaust foot-dragging to take the next step and send him back into outer darkness. It will be interesting to see if any of his peers follow his lead.

Most importantly, what plans does the Pope Benedict XVI have now?

Cardinal Mahony bans Holocaust-denying Bishop Williamson from Archdiocese of Los Angeles Churches

Cardinal Roger M. Mahony of Los Angeles today announced he is barring the Holocaust-denying Bishop Richard Williamson from entering any church in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

In an extraordinary move, Mahony and two Jewish leaders penned a joint op-ed piece published in both the archdiocesan newspaper, The Tidings, and a local Jewish newspaper, the Jewish Journal.

Cardinal Roger Mahony, Rabbi Gary Greenebaum and Seth Brysk wrote in part:

Williamson's recent "apologies" fall far short of satisfying the letter or the spirit of the Vatican's directives. Yet while Williamson seems unwilling or unable to reject his odious positions, many religious and civic leaders have used his situation to acknowledge the Holocaust and to affirm its unique and terrible place in history.

We are heartened by the many leaders around the world who have rejected Williamson's views. In particular, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and Argentine Minister of the Interior Florencio Randazzo, whose country recently expelled Williamson, not to mention nearly 50 Catholic members of the U.S. Congress who wrote to the Vatican to express their concerns.

In the Los Angeles Archdiocese, Williamson is hereby banned from entering any Catholic church, school or other facility, until he and his group comply fully and unequivocally with the Vatican's directives regarding the Holocaust. Later this year, I, Cardinal Mahony, will visit Israel and pay my respects to the Jewish victims of the Holocaust at the Yad Vashem Memorial in Jerusalem.

Holocaust deniers like Williamson will find no sympathetic ear or place of refuge in the Catholic Church, of which he is not --- and may never become --- a member. . . .

For our part, as Catholic and Jewish leaders in Los Angeles, we recognize that only by working together with renewed vigilance will we be able to keep anti-Semitism at bay and prevent its reassertion as a legitimate expression.

Their entire statement is here.

Bishop Williamson has made himself an object of repudiation and placed himself in danger of being cast out of Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) by failing to recant promptly his repellent and historically unfounded views. Catholic thinking has suggested a suitably humble statement of the sort that has been overdue from Williamson, for decades.

Judgment Day (at last) for Cardinal Mahoney (and others)?

"It took way, way too long, but the U.S. attorney has finally launched a grand jury investigation into the actions of Cardinal Roger M. Mahony when dealing with rapist priests in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, " wrote William Lobdell.

For eight years Lobdell covered the religion beat for the Los Angeles Times, and specifically the priestly sex abuse scandals. He has a written a book which among other things chronicles how interviewing the victims broke his heart. Commenting on the grand jury investigation, he went on to say:

Reading the initial story, the legal tactic seems a bit of a long shot, but why not try–especially if it can be used to punish other bishops, archbishops and cardinals who covered up and hid rapist priests, many of whom went on to commit sex crimes on other children?

To review just a few of Mahony’s sins (click here to see them all), he quietly kept two convicted child molesters in ministry. A priest who admitted to Mahony that he had molested two boys was allowed to keep his job, the authorities weren’t told, parishioners weren’t warned, and (you guessed it), the priest went on to molest others. Mahony’s handling of serial rapist of little children, Oliver O’Grady, was laid out with sickening beauty in the Oscar-nominated documentary, “Deliver Us From Evil.” As late as 2002, Mahony had at least eight known molesting priests working in his diocese, and only removed them when forced to do so by a legal settlement.

You can see, then, why victims responded with quiet strength to the news of the Mahony investigation. The video snipped from their news conference (below) is, we think, clear enough:

Transcript here.

Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating resigned as chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' National Review Board examining sex abuse by Catholic Priests after Cardinal Mahony criticized him for comparing some church leaders to the Mafia.

In his resignation Keating wrote:

My remarks, which some Bishops found offensive, were deadly accurate. I make no apology . . . To resist Grand Jury subpoenas, to suppress the names of offending clerics, to deny, to obfuscate, to explain away; that is the model of a criminal organization, not my church.

The Honest Services statute was passed to overcome "conspiracies to deprive others of honest services."

Was that, or was that not the kind of problem Keating was describing? The answer is unclear to legal scholars. But L.A. Now was optimistic:

One federal law enforcement source said such a prosecution could be brought under a federal statute that makes it illegal to “scheme ... to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.” In this case, the victims would be parishioners who relied on Mahony and other church leaders to keep their children safe from predatory priests, the source said.

Your thoughts? Louder please, so they can hear you in Los Angeles.

Puzzled Cardinal Mahony gets 0 twitter love

"Mystified and puzzled" Cardinal Roger Mahony got no twitter love in his efforts to comprehend a federal grand jury investigation into the handling of alleged clergy child molestation cases by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

David Clohessy, director of Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said he was stunned but gladdened by the report.

The LATimes said the prosecutors are applying an honest services legal theory in an apparently novel way” by trying to determine whether church officials’ actions constituted a fraud against parishioners. The applicable federal statute that bars conspiracies to deprive others of honest services, and in this case, the victims would be parishioners who entrusted the safety of their children to church leaders.

If the approach is "novel," it's an interesting novel. One wonders whether other denominations might yet find their own pages in it. Others whose conspiratorial silence contributes to the serial abuse of young parishioners.

Proposition 8 foes hold “marriage equality training camps”

They want to win back the lost ground.

The LATimes reports:

Determined to avoid the mistakes of their last, losing campaign for gay marriage, gay rights activists are launching the first of what they hope will be many “marriage equality training camps” in Los Angeles this weekend.

The idea is to train activists in "the practical, hands-on skills to organize in their communities to restore marriage equality for same-sex couples to California."

The rest is here.