Dallas Bishop Lambert Laments Glasspool’s Presence
As soon as I learned (from Arizona’s Bishop Smith) that Mary Glasspool would participate in this week’s House of Bishops’ meeting, I expressed my gratitude that there would now be two honestly gay bishops in the house. I said happily to friends, “The bishops will no longer be able to talk abstractly about ‘them,’ with two gay bishops in the house.”
I also knew that, even with merely two gay bishops among the hundred of so, a bunch of the conservative guys would be clapping their knees together in terror.
Until 2003, the bishops could pretend that they were all faithful heterosexuals … even though many of us knew otherwise. We knew about the philanderers, and we knew about the closet queens.
Bishop Robinson’s admission into the club challenged the bishops’ ability to talk about GLBT Christians as “them.” This month, Bishop-Elect Mary Glasspool has also joined the House of Bishops meeting.
And what does Paul Lambert (Dallas suffragan bishop) have to say about it? Reflecting on the discussion of sexuality issues in this week’s meeting, he said of Bishop-Elect Glasspool: “Of course, her presence at our meeting makes it difficult to discuss this openly and honestly, both for her and the house gathered.”
“Of course”????
So a bunch of straight white guys couldn’t talk openly and honestly about adultery if there were women present?
A bunch of white people couldn’t talk openly and honestly about racism if people of color were present?
If Bishop Lambert finds his freedom of speech curtailed because two gay people are present, then I suspect he wanted to make comments that had no resemblance to the Spirit of Christ in the first place.
I can and do talk about racism when people of color are present. I can and do talk about church politics when conservatives are present. I can and do talk about homosexuality when heterosexuals are present.
If Bishop Lambert felt his freedom of conversation was curtailed because Bishop Robinson and Bishop-Elect Glasspool were present, then I strongly urge that he look into his heart and consult page 447 of the Book of Common Prayer.
Shame on you, Bishop Lambert. You are the one who is an embarrassment to our church.
Addendum: When I posted this yesterday, I only had the snippet quoted in the ENS story. Today, I have learned that the full text of Bishop Lambert’s letter is available at the uber-schismatic Anglicans United site. Click here to read his complete letter. Then you might ask yourself, as I did, why he chose to release his letter to such a right-wing-nut site.
Addendum: Katie Sherrod (a lay deputy from Fort Worth) has even more to say about Lambert's statement. Read her comment here.
I also knew that, even with merely two gay bishops among the hundred of so, a bunch of the conservative guys would be clapping their knees together in terror.
Until 2003, the bishops could pretend that they were all faithful heterosexuals … even though many of us knew otherwise. We knew about the philanderers, and we knew about the closet queens.
Bishop Robinson’s admission into the club challenged the bishops’ ability to talk about GLBT Christians as “them.” This month, Bishop-Elect Mary Glasspool has also joined the House of Bishops meeting.
And what does Paul Lambert (Dallas suffragan bishop) have to say about it? Reflecting on the discussion of sexuality issues in this week’s meeting, he said of Bishop-Elect Glasspool: “Of course, her presence at our meeting makes it difficult to discuss this openly and honestly, both for her and the house gathered.”“Of course”????
So a bunch of straight white guys couldn’t talk openly and honestly about adultery if there were women present?
A bunch of white people couldn’t talk openly and honestly about racism if people of color were present?
If Bishop Lambert finds his freedom of speech curtailed because two gay people are present, then I suspect he wanted to make comments that had no resemblance to the Spirit of Christ in the first place.
I can and do talk about racism when people of color are present. I can and do talk about church politics when conservatives are present. I can and do talk about homosexuality when heterosexuals are present.
If Bishop Lambert felt his freedom of conversation was curtailed because Bishop Robinson and Bishop-Elect Glasspool were present, then I strongly urge that he look into his heart and consult page 447 of the Book of Common Prayer.Shame on you, Bishop Lambert. You are the one who is an embarrassment to our church.
Addendum: When I posted this yesterday, I only had the snippet quoted in the ENS story. Today, I have learned that the full text of Bishop Lambert’s letter is available at the uber-schismatic Anglicans United site. Click here to read his complete letter. Then you might ask yourself, as I did, why he chose to release his letter to such a right-wing-nut site.
Addendum: Katie Sherrod (a lay deputy from Fort Worth) has even more to say about Lambert's statement. Read her comment here.
posted by Lisa Fox at 3/24/2010 08:26:00 PM
31 Comments:
Of course the HOB´s six day ¨study/discussion/prayer meet up¨ on LGBT people and their position (kind of like ballet) in the life of the Church ought not include *actual* LBGT Bishops attending and breathing in and out...afterall, what would Rowan do? Second Position, really bad manners and third rate leadership comes to mind.
Exactly my point, IT.
These are exactly the kind of statements the Benighted White Boys have been making for more than 150 years.
Nonetheless, I am gobsmacked that a "bishop" of our church would say the same thing in the Year of Our Lord 2010. Godsmacked!
Leonardo, I am pleased that "Bishop" Lambert's comment is so anomalous. I hope the rest of the House of Bishops is on another line altogether.
Thanks for calling my attention to that quote - somehow I missed it in my first scan of the article. Mary Frances really did a great job on the reporting - gathering up all the Tweets and blogs - I sent her a ty note ---
I agree, Ann. She did a fine job reporting on the meeting. You remind me I, too, should send her a TY note.
Someone might want to remind Bishop Lambert that if you have something to say about a person/group and aren't willing to say it in front of them, it's probably not something you should say out loud. And perhaps you should reconsider thinking it in the first place.
Also, this probably shouldn't be my favorite part of the post, but I heart the SHAME picture.
Amen, eighthsacrament. That's what I was trying to say, but you said it better.
That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard a bishop say, and I've begun to suspect that most of them were the product of first cousins marrying!
This isn't complex. This is something I was taught as a child by every responsible adult I knew - "If you can't say something about someone in front of that someone, it's something you shouldn't be saying."
This bishop has basically just outed himself as ashamed for what he would say and too cowardly to own it.
I see why they used to burn and behead mitred morons.
You'll get no argument from me, Mark!
Bishop Lambert has proven himself an idiiot.
All I have in response is curses.
After which of course I will attempt to pray for everyone involved, which is our calling.
I'm speechless about +Lambert's statement. It is outrageous on too many levels to count.
A good post as always, dear Lisa! but I am not able to read the picture...
Mitre or asshat, you decide...
Nicely done Lisa. Thank goodness most of the bishops are not like that or Glasspool would not have gotten consent.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Maybe God calls more gays and lesbians Brad. As to outing -- what purpose would that serve? That is up to each person unless as Barbara Harris says - "they use the closet for a sniper's nest."
The words of my bishop sadden me
I suspect that Mary Glasspool will have to put up with not a small amount of this sort of ignorant rubbish sadly, but she knows it and is well prepared for it too, I am sure.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
It's Lisa's blog - she can do as she wishes. It is not public space. God loves gays and lesbians - why not call them to become priests? Blessed are those who are persecuted - sermon on the mount
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bp. Lambert's line stood out to me, too! (Remarked at Episcopal Cafe/The Lead)
I wonder if he wants those words back now---or is he seriously THAT oblivious?
Dear friends, Brad Evans is a troll. He visits here, MadPriest's, and a few other Episcopal/Anglican blogs, even though he isn't Anglican and has no skin in the game. He isn't interested in dialogue, and I have told him I will delete any comment he tries to post.
Please don't feed the troll.
AJ, I'm sorry to hear this is your bishop. It must be very difficult to hear from one's own.
I consider myself blessed by my bishop. I know I am lucky.
Agreed, Jane.
But you're a better person that I. I can't muster the energy to pray for such a person. The best I can hope is to ignore him.
Göran, which picture could you not read? I tried to post small photos to conserve bandwidth, but perhaps I went too small. :(
Wise dog, Clumber. I think several of those definitions would apply here.
Click on the photos - they will get bigger
Yes, Cathy, Bishop-elect Glasspool has had nearly 7 years to see what Bishop Robinson has endured. Surely she's walking into this with eyes wide open.
But, yes, one would hope that our supposedly heterosexual bishops would be a bit more well behaved by now.
Good question, JCF.
Considering that he wanted his comments shared at Anglicans United ... tells me all I need to know.
There are so many closeted bishops - it's a wonder it does not burst open. Between the gay ones and the sexual misconduct ones -- arggh --
There are good and honorable bishops but they are sitting in a morass of lies IMO.
Post a Comment
<< Home