Earlier, we posted about the appalling allegations of sexual assault, sexual harassment, and retaliation against a male member of St. Thomas’ Fifth Avenue, the storied former church home of Brooke Astor, the Vanderbilts, and other pillars of the Gilded Age. Since then, there have been multiple developments, none of them good for St. Thomas’ or the Diocese of New York.
By way of background, we previously sent a demand to the St. Thomas’ wardens to put up or shut up over their seemingly defamatory comments about “Michael,” a pseudonym for the male victim of sexaul assault at the church. Specifically, we asked them to provide proof of their claims that the church is working with the NYPD and the district attorney to address the victim’s violent and threatening behavior, and that the victim had been arrested.
Pretty straightforward, right?
If they really are dealing with a dangerous parishioner, providing the names of the law enforcement officials involved would allow us to quickly assess the matter and, if the church’s claims are true, publish a retraction, and move on to other topics.
You guessed how that turned out.
Total silence.
Meanwhile:
- Paid media blasts across Manhattan and the boroughs have brought forth a raft of additional alleged victims, with several associated with the church’s famed choir school.
-
Matthew Mortiz The Rev. Matthew Moritz, St. Thomas’ Vicar and Chief Operating Officer, once considered a promising young priest, has allegedly responded badly to allegations of abuse within the church, including treating complainants with open hostility and contempt. To be clear: If he doesn’t even have the integrity to treat allegations of abuse with respect, Moritz can do us all a favor and resign holy orders.
- Rumors are swirling of possible lawsuits over sexual abuse and defamation, with one group exploring the possibility of a class action lawsuit.
- Additional evidence of retaliation by New York Bishop Matthew F. Heyd and persons acting under his direction and control against alleged victims of abuse has emerged. For now, we’re withholding specifics, but look for details in the coming week or so.
- The Diocese apparently took it upon itself to contact “Michael’s” employer with its seeming fabrications. All we can say is, “Do the phrases ‘defamation per se’ and ‘intentional interference with contract of employment’ mean anything to the Diocese and the church’s captive insurance carrier, the Church Pension Group (CPG)?” Regardless, peering into our crystal ball, we predict major litigation in the church’s future, as well as profound chaos and reputational damage at St. Thomas’ and the Diocese of New York.
- Despite the stupid and unethical conduct of the Diocese, “Michael’s” employer is solidly behind him, as are we.
- Other news media are following the story, and we predict additional coverage over the coming weeks. Further, we will gladly assist other media outlets that want to cover the story, while acting to protect the victim.
- In addition to the current Title IV clergy disciplinary complaint against Bishop Matthew F Heyd, another complaint on related charges will be filed shortly.
- Anglican Watch is actively investigating additional claims of questionable behavior from within St. Thomas’, and we expect to have additional news in the coming days.
- As an aside, while we support the full inclusion of LGBTQ+ persons in the life of the church, that doesn’t extend to acting like a**holes. Priests who do so do the cause of equality no favors.
- The case is an important reminder that men, too, can be sexually assaulted, often by someone they trust. The denomination must not assume its ongoing failure to prevent and address sexual harassment, assault, and abuse are limited to any particular group. Indeed. men often have a particularly difficult time speaking up about these issues due to factors like embarassment, the potential effect on relationships, and the possible employment-related implications.
The human side of things
In the meantime, one of the enjoyable aspects of publishing Anglican Watch has emerged, which is that we get to meet some really good people along the way.
And so it is with the primary victim, “Michael.”
We’ve had the chance to talk with him several times, and it’s very clear to us that he’s neither violent nor dishonest.
Socially adept, “Michael” is a cradle Episcopalian, coming from a family of prominent Episcopalians.
And like the volunteers at Anglican Watch, “Michael” is squeaky clean and comes from a career path that requires a high level of verifiable integrity. In fact, this author would, without question, trust him with my life. That stands in marked contrast to most Episcopal clergy, whom I would not trust to tell me the time of day.
(We invariably run a background check on key persons in any story, so we already knew him to be trustworthy, but nothing beats talking with someone directly to really guage the scale and scope of their integrity, sincerity, plausibility, and compassion for others.)
By way of contrast, it’s interesting how textbook the DARVO response is from persons at St. Thomas’ and the Diocese of New York that is directed at “Michael.” Indeed, despite being exactly the sort of younger Episcopalian any rational actor would hope to have in church pews, suddenly “Michael” is barred from all churches in the Diocese by the bishop — a power that Bishop Heyd doesn’t even legally have.
It’s also helpful to see DARVO for what it it: Not only is it a manipulation strategy commonly deployed by psychological abusers, but it’s behavior that correlates strongly with narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy and other behavior associated with the so-called “Dark Triad” of psychology.
It’s also conduct disturbingly common among Episcopal clergy, and even more prevalent about bishops.
To make matters worse, the organizational narcissism of the denomination typically leads to intake officers, bishops diocesan, and other judicatories brushing off these behaviors as “interpersonal conflict,” and thus not actionable as a clergy disciplinary matter. The result is that the church’s response to a Title IV complaint often is more traumatic than the initial offense.
The reality is these behaviors are abuse, and every bit as damaging as physical or sexual abuse.
Specific examples abound, including Holly Hollerith’s refusal in writing to address allegations of child rape over concerns about political expediency and Chilton Knudsen’s repeated refusals to act as a mandated reporter of child sexual abuse.
There’s another response that sometimes comes up in the Episcopal Church, and it’s every bit as damaging, both to the church and victims of misconduct.
In that scenario, the Episcopal Church issue a fauxpology, and then says, “And we’ll even give you three counseling sessions,” typically with a kindly but befuddled elderly priest who can’t remember your name, even while muttering reassuring inconsequentia about God’s love for you and the fact they are praying for you.
(Often, in clergy-speak, “I’m praying for you,” translates to “eff you and the horse you road in on,” in case you were wondering.)
But whether or not you recognize that you’ve just been told to pound sand, the end result is underwhelming and offensive.
The Episcopal Church talks about being “loving, liberating, and lifegiving. But the reality it’s a case of “lying (about the church’s commitment to respecting the dignity of every human being), leaving (as in 40 percent of church members over the past decade), and losing (members, resources, and, if you will, market share).”
Nor are laity or young clergy likely to be helpful.
Far too often, such individuals treat any perceived criticism of the denomination as a matter of fight or flight.
In fact, this author recalls an amusing time when Anglican Watch editor Eric Bonetti was introduced to a young seminarian following a church service. The conversation went well, right up until the seminarian recognized the connection with this publication, whereupon the seminarian literally ran out the front doors of the church.
Pro tip: If you’re afraid of criticism, you are not cut out to be clergy.
Nor is it uncommon to see junior clergy try sneaky, duplicitous tactics to come to the perceived defense of colleagues engaging in misconduct. And we’re seeing plenty of that behavior coming from St. Thomas and the Diocese of New York.
Of course, the other party likely to become involved is CPG.
On that score, CPG is about the only part of the church that runs like a business. Indeed, it’s nothing more than a multi-billion dollar slush fund that would rather deny, equivocate, avoid, evade, and litigate, versus simply apologizing and doing what it can to support the church and the victim.
In other words, CPG is anything but “loving, liberating, and life-giving.” And by acting like it’s legal counsel for a Fortune 10 company, CPG is causing irreparable harm to the Episcopal Church and its members.
Instead, it’s a bunch of indifferent bureaucrats who’d rather spend a $1 million in legal fees, versus acting with integrity and solving the problem. Indeed, it’s amazing how often an apology and a sincere plan to repair problems will fix a problem in record time. But leave it to the Episcopal Church to act in its own worst interest.
On that score, we want to be clear: One should not have to sue the church in order to obtain some semblance of integrity.
And even when the church does settle, it’s common for the offending clergyperson to continue in office and suffer no consequences — just like Chilton Knudsen, who in our experience is utterly lacking in integrity.
After all, if she can’t even report child sexual abuse, what good is she? (For the record, the Chicago case involving Knudsen, which settled for $750,000, is not Knudsen’s only case of failure to report child sexual abuse.
What next?
As we alluded to earlier, “Michael” is not only a cradle Episcopalian, but someone who possesses a genuine faith. He’s not the sort of person to easily throw in the towel, or to approach interpersonal challenges in a negative manner. In other words, the church’s conduct has been beyond appalling.
For the record, we categorically do not believe the church’s claims of criminal conduct on his part, and have been unable to locate any documentation that would support these claims. We expect an immediate retraction, in writing, and read from the St. Thomas’ pulpit.
Several of the clergy and individuals involved would be wise to resign immediately, including considering resigning from holy orders. If your behavior is this bad, you’re doing no one any favors by sticking around.
In other words, this is a case where the church would be smart to resolve the matter, sooner rather than later. But then, no one has ever accused the Episcopal Church, its judicatories, or its disciplinary process of having half the common sense God gave a goat.
As to posssible lawsuits, if those happen, we will gladly publish all the allegations, with the names of victims appropriately redacted. And rest assured, we will ensure millions of people learn of the allegations.
Doubt it? Try us.
In the meantime, those who have experienced sexual assault or harassment at St. Thomas’ can report the matter to:
Detective Caraballo
Phone/Email: (212)694-3000 / An*************@**PD.org
Office Location: 137 Centre Street, New York, NY 10013
The matter can also be reported to the Diocese:
The Rev. Alison Quin Intake Officer
Tel: 845-901-8103 or via email at in****@*******ny.org
That said, given Bishop Heyd’s history of retaliation against complainants in this matter, caution may be in order.
Those wishing to file a Title IV clergy disciplinary complaint against Bishop Heyd (who has now recused himself from the matter), can do so by emailing intake officer for bishops, the Rev. Barb Kempf, at bk****@*************ch.org. Note that while Barb appears to be taking her role in the church more seriously these days, thus far we are underwhelmed with her handling of abuse complaints, including those involving sexual abuse and retaliation by bishops (think George Sumner).
Those who want their story told or need advocacy are welcome to contact us using our online form.
Finally, while we continue to hope that the church will change its ways, we believe all involved must consider the possibility that the church is morally bankrupt and has, for all practical purposes, already died.
And don’t trot out the bit about us being a resurrection people: That would require repentance and restitution, both of which would require a major theological change on the part of the denomination.
We just don’t see it happening.
Leave a Reply