Thursday, 9 September 2004

Americans in London

This story is getting more confusing.

Doug LeBlanc thinks it is impossible for Bishop Robert O’Neill of Colorado to be present in London on the timetable Jonathan Petre has proposed:
Through the space-time continuum with Bishop Robert O’Neill.

ENS has issued an explanation from the Diocese of Massachusetts about why the meeting is happening in the first place:
Massachusetts diocese issues clarification about Bishops’ Meeting in London

The meeting was first discussed among the group in April as an opportunity for two newer bishops and two established bishops to meet with the Archbishop of Canterbury and was subsequently scheduled in June.

This shows that Petre also had one name wrong: it is the current Bishop of Ohio, Mark Hollingsworth, not the retired bishop thereof whom he named, who is involved.

Earlier, ENS had issued this note about Griswold’s preaching engagement at St Paul’s Cathedral.

Kendall Harmon asks various questions about why this reporting is happening now, not earlier, and other matters in More on the Trip of the four Bishops to London (scroll down to the part in italics).

Personally, I think that Rowan Williams is entitled to keep his engagement diary private.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Thursday, 9 September 2004 at 8:49 AM GMT | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: ECUSA

I notice that the Bishop of Rome’s private audiences are listed on a daily basis AFTER THE EVENT. Perhaps the ABC could follow suit.

Posted by: Observer at September 9, 2004 02:18 PM

You still have the name of the Bishop of Ohio wrong. It’s MARK Hollingsworth, not Clark. Close, though, so points for that!

Simon adds Thanks for the correction. Fixed now.

Posted by: Stephen White at September 20, 2004 12:39 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?