In response to the unholy mess and the endless games underway in the St. Thomas Church Fifth Avenue debacle, Anglican Watch is preparing Title IV clergy disciplinary complaints against DioNY bishops Heyd and Shin. We also are offering to provide support to anyone wishing to file a lawsuit against the Diocese and St. Thomas’.
Compliance with the canons is not optional
Specifically, our position is simple: Compliance with the provisions of Title IV is not a nice-to-have, or optional, or only-if-you-feel-like-it sort of thing.
Instead, Title IV is, or is supposed to be, a covenantal framework for the care of those injured by the church. As such, it is supposed to — in the words of Title IV itself — “support…members in their life in Christ and seek to resolve conflicts by promoting healing, repentance, forgiveness, restitution, justice, amendment of life, and reconciliation among all involved or affected.”
Additionally, there are specific expectations set forth in Title IV, including:
- Following the provisions of Title IV.
- Timeliness.
- Monthly updates.
- A prompt pastoral response.
- Care, concern, compassion, and respect for all those injured by misconduct.
- Confidentiality by Title IV officials.
- Non-retaliation.
- Recusal in the event of a conflict.
Despite these provisions, the Diocese and Bishops Heyd and Shin have played fast and loose with the allegations of sexual assault and harassment at every turn.
In fact, they haven’t even attempted to provide a pastoral response, or even to take the preliminary steps needed to do so. (Recall that allegations of sexual misconduct require a professional assessment as a precursor to providing a pastoral response. That has NOT happened.)
Additionally, both bishops have conflicts of interest, and Shin needs to recuse himself immediately.
On a personal level, we’re really tired of the Diocese’s fun and games and the utter lack of respect for the complainant and others injured by misconduct at St. Thomas’. Ironically enough, that includes folks at St. Thomas’, who have received zero pastoral response from the Diocese.
Moreover, last we heard, Heyd’s retaliation against the complainant, which banned the complainant from all churches in the Diocese, remains in effect.
How exactly does that foster healing or reconciliation? And why aren’t the felons who work at St. Thomas’ banned from all churches in the Diocese? Like maybe the one who sells heroin to high school kids?
And to be clear, it’s not like folks at the Diocese made arrangements to bring communion to the complainant or otherwise care for him or his girlfriend. Instead, this was a case of making it clear to the complainant that he is unwelcome, and the Diocese doesn’t give a red rat’s rear end what happens to him.
Nor has the parish retracted its defamatory comments about the complainant, even though it’s now been almost seven months.
Come to think of it, we could do without Diocesan officials making disparaging comments about this publication, which is also a complainant in the matter.
Several have made their way back to us, but then, that is how the Diocese rolls.
Indeed, we see a consistent pattern of corruption on the part of the Diocese, which involves trying to discredit the complainant whenever possible while taking zero responsibility for its own issues.
To be clear, we are entirely within our rights to be irritated by the Diocese’s behavior. The Diocese is doing its utmost to protect its reputation, and it shows zero concern for those it hurts. There is nothing Christian about this behavior.
We’re also shocked and appalled at the diocese’s foot-dragging. Seven months later, and it still hasn’t completed its “investigation.” As we said earlier, the Warren Commission’s investigation into the murder of President John F. Kennedy only took 10 months. So what’s the deal?
Timeline
We’ll post our Title IV complaints in the next day or so. We’re available to help litigants in any manner possible, at any time.
We’ll support civil litigation
In the meantime, we encourage those considering suing the parish and the Diocese to proceed.
Further, we’re more than happy to help attorneys for the plaintiffs wade through Title IV, including parsing what church canons require of judicatories, versus what church officials have actually done. That includes those who have come forward with allegations of misconduct at St. Thomas’ but not reported it to the Diocese.
Come to think of it, we can certainly understand why people would not contact the Diocese. After all, next thing you know, they may also get banned from all churches in the Diocese.
Leave a Reply