A.S. Haley on the New Questions the Presiding Bishop needs to Answer Re: Bede Parry

Posted by Kendall Harmon

Bishop Jefferts Schori, it is time for you to come out of your cocoon of silence on this topic, as well. The entire Episcopal Church (USA) deserves the truth as to why you regarded a Catholic priest with such a prior record -- known to you after being "warned" by his Abbot -- as morally fit for reception as a priest into your own Diocese.

Particularly, your Church deserves to know how you reconciled the version of the facts which Father Parry admits he gave you, which was incomplete and admitted only one prior offense in 1987, with the version you heard from his Abbot -- and then decided to receive him despite his lies to you.

More particularly, we need to have your own word on the record as to whether or not you received and read the psychological report on Father Parry which Abbot Polan had in his possession and which ended, as Abbot Polan apparently admitted he told you, with a conclusion to the effect that Bede Parry had a propensity to offend again. (This is the same report which the lawsuit filed by one of Fr. Parry's adolescent victims alleges was sent to you for your information, even though Bishop Edwards of Nevada now denies that it is in the files he has on Fr. Parry.)

Read it all.

Filed under: * Anglican - EpiscopalEpiscopal Church (TEC)Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts SchoriTEC ParishesTEC Polity & Canons* Christian Life / Church LifeParish MinistryMinistry of the Ordained* Religion News & CommentaryOther ChurchesRoman Catholic* TheologyEthics / Moral Theology

Posted October 28, 2011 at 6:21 am [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]

1. Cennydd13 wrote:

TEC won’t be able to wriggle out of this mess, and KJS will be held accountable for her actions.  I now predict that, as time passes, more is bound to come to light, and when it does, the time bomb now sitting under them will explode with results which will positively devastate them.

October 28, 10:52 am | [comment link]
2. evan miller wrote:

One can only hope, Cennydd13.  One can only hope.

October 28, 11:24 am | [comment link]
3. Archer_of_the_Forest wrote:

I don’t think a thing is going to happen about it. They will just wait long enough and people with either forget or they will quietly expunge the reality from the group consciousness.

October 28, 12:51 pm | [comment link]
4. Pageantmaster ن wrote:

Well, I suppose there is the possibility that KJS will be required to give evidence in one of these pieces of litigation, and rather like the Virginia Deposition, she will have to decide whether in this instance she will tell the truth, or risk being in contempt of court and its consequences.  In that Virginia testimony one could see her pause, and the wheels turning as she assessed just how far she was prepared to push her luck.

Court deposition is the only time you can place any reliance on anything she says, but it looks as if in relation to Nevada, the truth is seeping out, drip by drip. 

It is always the little but honest people who nobody notices who tell the truth and bring the mighty ones down - or so I have invariably found.  Truth will out eventually, and KJS has it appears serious questions she is avoiding answering.  Why is that?  Who knows the answer?  Will they tell?  Who will stand up and do the right thing for the sake of the children?

October 28, 12:51 pm | [comment link]
5. evan miller wrote:

I’m afraid I have to agree with you, Archer.

October 28, 1:20 pm | [comment link]
6. Hakkatan wrote:

She will stay through her term, and she may not ever have to deal with this - unless a certified revisionist or three begins to ask questions.  As long as those raising questions are those who already think Schori is a mistake, there will be no problem for her.  We are on the outside, and those inside will not listen except to their own.

October 28, 3:29 pm | [comment link]
7. sophy0075 wrote:


That is my hope, that KJS will be called to testify, under oath. Only in the glare of a courtroom, where evidence exists to prove she is lying under oath, will there be a ghost of chance that she might admit to the truth. Only then, or only if she actually admits to the truth, will there be a ghost of a chance of repercussions against this person, who has repeatedly shown herself to be unfit to hold the office of PB.

October 28, 6:10 pm | [comment link]
8. Cennydd13 wrote:

The penalty for perjury could be rather severe, and in her case, could TEC afford to keep her in office, knowing what effect the bad publicity would have?  I don’t think so.

October 28, 8:08 pm | [comment link]
9. c.r.seitz wrote:


Write Patrick Marker and indicate the character of the Title IV process, and the Intake Officer, Rt Revd Clay Matthews.

He is a good person to pursue this, as it has been his ‘vocation’ to do so.

October 28, 8:54 pm | [comment link]
10. Cennydd13 wrote:

I have done so, and I hope others will follow suit.  It needs to be done.

October 29, 11:57 am | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.

Next entry (above): To Be Young, Hip and Mormon

Previous entry (below): Fascinating Email Exchange raises even more questions about the Presiding Bishop/Bede Parry Case

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)