Episcopal or Anglican?

Gay Anglican U.S. bishop enters into civil union 

bishop-160.jpgBOSTON, June 8 (Reuters) – The openly gay U.S. Episcopal bishop at the center of the Anglican church’s global battle over… 

Get your facts right and have some intellect about what you write. Robinson is an Episcopal Bishop, not an Anglican.

S.M.

Several readers commented on this one. We corrected: GBU Editor

REUTERS photo by Brian Snyder 

4 comments

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Actually the original wording is correct, the commenters are wrong, yes Robinson is an Episcopal bishop (as the article states), but the US Episcopal church is currently part of the Anglican communion, so its members are indeed also Anglican. One of the points of disagreement concerning Robinson relates to his invitation (or otherwise) to the fortcoming Lambeth Conference. That is an Anglican conference.

Posted by Mark Ayliffe | Report as abusive

Get your facts right. Every bishop in the Episcopal Church is also an Anglican bishop. There no bishops that are only Anglican. They all belong first to the province of the Anglican Church that consecrated them. It really is that simple!

Posted by Mad Potter | Report as abusive

“Get your facts right and have some intellect about what you write. Robinson is an Episcopal Bishop, not an Anglican.”

Is this a political statement? Or is the poster just ignorant?

As part of the Anglican communion, all Episcopalians are “Anglicans”, but only American Anglicans are Episcopalians.

If, on the other hand, the poster was stating that only the Episcopalians recognize Robinson as a valid bishop, and therefore he’s specifically an “Episcopalian” bishop and not an “Anglican” one… well, then I agree.

Posted by Jim | Report as abusive

Actually, Robinson is 1. a legitimate Bishop in the catholic apostolic tradition; he is also both 2. Anglican and 3. Episcopalian.

Like it or not, he was legitimately elected (overwhelmingly) and ordained (by FAR more than the required three bishops in the apostolic tradition – I think I remember a number like 40 bishops doing the ordination).

Even to those who do not like that an openly gay man was ordained a bishop, he’s legit. Anything else is a heresy that was put down in the catholic tradition way back in the 4th century; it was called Donatism: it claimed that a priest had to be perfectly pure for his ordination and the sacraments he administered to be legitimate. No one makes this requirement in the catholic tradition today.

He was also legitimately (and overwhelmingly) confirmed by both houses of the Episcopal church’s governing body (the convention) and not just by the House of Bishops. He was ordained after legitimately fulfilling all of requirements of the canons (laws) of the church.

Anglican usually means in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury (ABC). Since the Episcopal church is the only body in the United States which is in communion with the ABC, the Episcopal church is the only body which can be legitimately called Anglican. All othes who use that name are doing so Fraudulently.

Posted by bookguybaltmd | Report as abusive