Glasspool just five votes shy of Standing Committee consents

From the Diocese of Los Angeles:

The Standing Committee of the Diocese of Los Angeles reported Feb. 24 that within the last 50 days it has received 51 of the majority of 56 consents needed to the Dec. 5 election of the Rev. Canon Mary Glasspool as a bishop suffragan of the Diocese of Los Angeles.

Posted by Jim Naughton on February 25, 2010 4:01 PM | |
Comments (9)

Can I have and "Amen!" and a "Halleluia!"?
When she gets the next 5, I'll use all caps (yes, shouting for joy!)

Posted by EH Culver [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 25, 2010 4:54 PM

Is that consents both from Standing Committees and Bishops?
Lois Keen

Posted by Lois Keen [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 25, 2010 5:23 PM

Bishops' votes are kept by the PBs office and they don't tell until the 120 date passes

Posted by Ann Fontaine [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 25, 2010 5:26 PM

Actually, PB's Office does reveal once the magic numbers are both reached:

http://episcopalnews.ladiocese.net/dfc/newsdetail_2/153
2/17/2010
"Word has been received that the Presiding Bishop's Office has confirmed both the number of Standing Committee votes received for Bruce and that she has received more than the necessary number of consents from bishops with jurisdiction."

Just to emphasis, that's the result for Bruce, not Glasspool.

Posted by John B. Chilton [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 25, 2010 5:33 PM

Of course, these numbers don't mean much if we don't know how many dioceses (and maybe which ones) are outstanding.

For example, if she needs five consents from the six remaining, and those six include South Carolina, Dallas and Southwest Florida, that's significantly different than if she needs another five of the outstanding 50 including New Hampshire, Washington . . .

Posted by Malcolm+ [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 25, 2010 6:38 PM

I believe Connecticut had their Standing Committee vote today - I would expect a yes from CT.

Rev. Kurt Huber
St. Peter's, Monroe

Posted by Kurt Huber [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 25, 2010 8:46 PM

Is there any reason to believe that she will not receive the necessary number of consents? Sometimes I miss things.

Posted by Peter Pearson [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 25, 2010 9:59 PM

I think she'll get the standing committees. The bishops are a less sure thing. They did show some spine in 2009. But some of the fence sitters and duplicitous ones may use their "yes" vote at GC as cover for their "no" vote when it really counts.

Pray that they may act with more integrity and uphold the nondiscrimination canons of this Church.

Posted by Bill Carroll [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 26, 2010 10:23 AM

Malcolm is correct. Southwest Florida's Standing Committee last week voted not to consent to Mary Glasspool but did give consent to Diane Bruce.

Posted by Jim DeLa [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 26, 2010 3:48 PM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Advertising Space