The Bizarre Other Lawsuit

In 2014, I reported on another lawsuit brought by the Bush-ACA faction that had come to the vestry's attention, The Rector, Wardens, and Vestrymen of St. Mary of The Angels' Parish et al v. Church Mutual Insurance Company et al. The "Rector, Wardens, and Vestrymen" in this case are not the actual vestry, but the Bush-ACA appointed squatters, whom the California appeals court ruled in 2014 were not the legal vestry.

I renewed my interest in this case when, in a meeting with the parish treasurer this past week, we found a bill from Lytton, Williams, Messina & Hankin LLP, presumably billing for services on this lawsuit. At this point, the vestry doesn't know how much money has been paid out to this firm from parish resources. Mrs Bush and the other squatters were never the vestry, were never authorized to retain Lytton, Williams, Messina & Hankin LLP, and never had standing to bring this suit. My understanding is that the bill has been referred to the vestry's counsel.

The suit was originally brought in Los Angeles Superior Court in 2013. In October 2013, it was moved to federal court, where not much seems to have taken place. However, on February 4 of this year, it was sent back to LA Superior Court. I'm told that the federal judge, Church Mutual Insurance, and the (legal) vestry's counsel were all happy that this took place. Mrs Bush's opinion is not known.

UPDATE: My wife says that the Bush plaintiffs would have wanted the case in federal court, in part to try to force Church Mutual to settle the case, and in part to avoid the adverse rulings against Bush et al in the California courts. To have it back in Superior Court is good news for Church Mutual.

As I noted in 2014, the plaintiff et als have pledged personal assets to pay their legal bills. However, they believe Church Mutual should pay those bills instead. Church Mutual's position is, first, that Brandt, Bush, Carolyn Morello, and Meyers AKA Omeirs are neither the policyholders nor the insured, none being the legal vestry as recognized by the courts. In addition, the policy covers only legal expenses, such as filing fees or court reporters, and not lawyers' fees. Beyond that, there is a fairly low cap on this amount.

But if you can spend someone else's money on this kind of legal action, who cares? Thus the bill in the mail from Lytton, Williams, Messina & Hankin LLP. I assume Lytton, Williams will have some sort of response when the vestry's counsel contacts them over this, although I also assume the vestry's counsel will, at minimum, instruct them to stop sending the bills.

Here's the puzzling thing: since last October, the squatters have gradually been running out of money. Since being evicted, they don't even have plate and pledge from Sunday masses, although a bulletin from their last mass discovered in the nave directs any remaining loyalists to make future checks payable to something called "Perseverance Mission". Perseverance Mission, I have a feeling, will not be in much of a position to fund further legal work.

What kind of alternate universe do these people live in?

I'm An Anglo-Catholic! I've Suffered! (Hire Me!)

I've mused now and then over the past week or so on what I've called the Anglo-Catholic Project. The odd thing is that, in musing, I keep coming back to the central problem of social media, to wit, that a 55-year-old guy named Al can post on chat rooms claiming to be a 22-year-old blonde named Ingrid, and quite a number of people will believe him. In fact, as a true-crime TV buff, I recommend a show called Web of Lies, which gives real cases of people who were murdered in the course of social-media deceptions.

Thus we come to the peculiar case of Fr Chori Seraiah, who "came out" as an Anglo-Catholic only in June 2010, when he was welcomed as a contributor to the old Anglo-Catholic blog. At the time, he represented himself as "a non-parochial priest of the Diocese of the Eastern United States in the Anglican Church in America". However, other sources seem to place him as pastor of a small REC parish in Abingdon, VA, which appears to have been the position he left to become rector of St Aidan Des Moines in 2011 as it prepared to enter the US-Canadian Ordinariate.

In a rambling and incoherent July 2010 post at The Anglo-Catholic, he said,

When I got to my teens and started thinking about my faith, I would say to people that I "used to be Catholic" and they would usually try to get me to accept their faith. Eventually, I accepted an invitation to a Protestant congregation and spent the next twenty-five years trying to find my way back to Mother Church.

Elsewhere, he characterizes his path as "labyrinthine". One source whom I quoted earlier puts him as the pastor of a Reformed Bible church in Arkansas before his time in the REC, which may or may not have been before or after or at the same time as his non-parochial service in the ACA-DEUS. The hints at chronology above suggest that as of 2010, he was at least 40 but still dithering about how to return to Mother Church, which seems to be maybe Catholic or maybe Anglo-Catholic, he's not sure.

A good first step for a returning Catholic, as I have come to understand these things, would be to find a priest and complete the sacraments of initiation. There are Catholic churches all over the place. I assume a call to any would get him an appointment with a priest to discuss his specific situation. In 25 years, this doesn't seem to have occurred to him. Instead, he's chattering logorrheically about how to bring 87% of all Christians, or something like that, back to Mother Church, whichever that one is.

But he's an Anglo-Catholic! He's told us so! Indeed, he was kidnapped from Mother Church as a child! He's suffered! Of course we believe him! Er, within two years, he became a Catholic priest. Given the circumstances, there seems to have been a certain amount of pressure and manipulation involved -- while, let's continue to keep in mind, candidates with far better credentials in Anglican priestly formation have frequently been bypassed by Houston.

The idea that latter-day Anglo-Catholics have somehow "suffered" is nothing new. Late last year, I referred to Mr Murphy's especially credulous post on a Hollywood-wannabe's crowdfunding project depicting, among other things, the "sufferings" of Andy Bartus as he uses beer breakfasts and whiskey-and-cigar get-togethers to bring suburban twentysomethings back to Mother Church. Indeed, Bartus has recounted his sufferings before. But an online claim to "suffering" is worth about as much as an online claim to be "Anglo-Catholic" (a term essentially meaningless in any case) -- and that's about as reliable as the 55-year-old Al's claim to be Ingrid.

A fairly small number of Anglo-Catholic clergy in the Church of England did in fact suffer in the mid-19th century, although this was primarily in matters of preferment, very occasionally through ecclesiastical discipline. Chori Seraiah and Andy Bartus somehow want to cloak themselves with this prestige, when in fact they seem to have used it to curry favor and enhance employment prospects. On one hand, no Anglo-Catholic in recent years has had suffering comparable to other Christians in places like Nigeria, Egypt, or Syria.

On the other hand, if you're looking for an Anglo-Catholic priest who's actually suffered, you might reflect on Fr Kelley.

Meeting With Ms Cohen Of The Los Feliz Ledger

I went over to the parish for a meeting with the treasurer on financial issues, and we had planned to meet at 1:00. At the same time, Fr. Kelley had agreed to an interview with Allison Cohen, the editor of what the vestry calls the "Lost Feliz Legend". So as I headed for the treasurer's office, Clare, a young friend of the parish who is volunteering as secretary-receptionist, came by to say, "Allison Cohen is here, and she wants to meet with Fr Kelley."

"Clare," said the treasurer, "you are to make absolutely sure that she is never alone with Fr Kelley." The vestry does not trust Ms Cohen, and Prudence is a cardinal virtue. As it happened, we all trooped up to the parish courtyard and eventually introduced ourselves. Those of us with Fr Kelley decided we would all make absolutely sure she was never alone with him, and we jointly announced we would all be in the meeting.

It wasn't as bad as we expected. Early in the meeting, she simply asked, "Where did I go wrong?" Not much later, she said, "Mrs Bush has completely destroyed her reputation in this community. Her reputation had been outstanding. That's what's happened. Why would she do something like that?"

We all contributed views on some of the questions she asked. I weighed in on some of the financial issues. She was actually quick on the uptake. At one point, she said, "Hold on here. How much money are we talking about?" I told her the parish had an annual income from all sources before the troubles of about $330,000. Mrs Bush estimated to Ms Cohen in a prior interview that the legal costs on her side alone were $2 million, something Ms Cohen ran in her paper.

"Where did all this money go? Where did it come from?" were her questions. Those have been my questions, too, along with how the parish might get some of it back. Clearly Ms Cohen has stopped relying on Mrs Bush's version of events, at least not exclusively. At minimum, she's begun to reflect the profound disaffection of other community leaders.

I left the meeting after about 90 minutes; it seemed to be continuing enthusiastically at that time. I'm told that Fr Kelley characterized her experience as having "her mind blown".

Eventually, other people are going to have to learn the true story. If the parish is to succeed, this will have to happen in Houston, and for that to take place, I would guess that heads besides Steenson's will eventually have to roll.

Ms Cohen has said that the restoration of St Mary's will be the lead story in next month's issue. We'll have to see how it eventually turns out. I'll be posting a link to it here.

In the meantime, please continue to pray for the parish, its vestry, and Fr Kelley.

A Small Step Toward Clarity

Yesterday I posted my developing view that the restoration of St Mary's is cause for larger reassessment and recalibration in the Anglo-Catholic project. One factor I mentioned was the massive embarrassment at St Aidan Des Moines: Louis Falk, a major figure behind the Portsmouth Letter and the Patrimony of the Primate, was going to bring his former ACA TAC parish into the Ordinariate -- except that, on the verge of this consummation, it turned out that most of the members just weren't clear about their Anglican annulments or whether it was OK to stay in the lodge.

Jeffrey Steenson came up at the last minute to give them the real skrinny, upon which the parish voted overwhelmingly to say, "Never mind". I would say that this is a pretty good illustration of the term "bungling", which I've used in reference to the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter in the past. A visitor has sent me some additional background:

Fr Seraiah [the prospective Ordinariate priest for St Aidan's] was a blogger on the Anglo-Catholic, but he was not an Anglo-Catholic, IMHO. His background was Protestant evangelical and then Reformed Episcopal Church, where he ran into trouble for his views on "headship" and support of the preterist Quiverfull movement, a bit too conservative even for them. I am not surprised that he failed to make an attractive case for the Ordinariate to the St Aidan's flock.

My visitor said in a later e-mail,

Many people expressed sympathy that [Seraiah] moved his family from Abingdon, VA to Des Moines to be rector of St Aidan's, only to have them ultimately decide not to enter the Ordinariate. In fact he had recently lost his job in as pastor of a small REC parish in Abingdon in a church split over Vision Forum and the Quiverfull movement, as I mentioned. Before this he was the pastor of a Reformed Bible church in Arkansas. The St Aidan's job was a bailout for someone who had been a very enthusiastic blogger, latterly, about AC. After St Aidan's made its decision he was ordained and given a parish in the Diocese of Des Moines. One hand washes the other.

This goes to some of the odd assumptions behind the establishment of the OCSP. Up to January 1, 2012, Msgr Steenson's identity was a closely-held secret (except that an in-group had clearly known the score for years). But as soon as he was designated, all sorts of candidate parishes and groups were going to be received, poof! The level of actual catechesis they got was, however, clearly inconsistent. Just how much Seraiah knew of Catholic doctrine prior to his reception and ordination is an interesting question -- I would have reservations about whether he was even capable of instructing the St Aidan's parish in much of anything. Somehow, nobody around Cardlinal Wuerl or Msgr Steenson asked any questions.

In a corporate situation, heads would have rolled. It took a few years for this to happen in the OCSP, but the people lower down are still running things, at least so far. But as Admiral Beatty (an Anglican) once said, “Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today.” I have a hard time avoiding the impression that Steenson, driven by opportunism and careerism himself, had a difficult time recognizing it among his subordinates -- I've noted before that the changed career paths in the Anglican Communion disadvantage straight males, and Anglicanorum coetibus offers tempting opportunities for clerics seeking an easier path. I repeat, we have cause for larger reassessment and recalibration in the Anglo-Catholic project.

The circumstances that led to the emergency ordination of a Protestant evangelical with highly uncertain theological background into the Catholic Church don't seem to be a one-time glitch. Mr Glenn Baaten, who spent his career as a Presbyterian pastor, but latterly had a brief period of months as an ACNA priest without specific pastoral duties, will be ordained an OCSP priest this coming June. My understanding is that several candidates with much better Anglican credentials were bypassed in favor of Baaten.

St Mary Of The Angels And The Anglo-Catholic Project

I had several e-mails over the weekend that were food for thought. In one, a gentleman who is a member of an Ordinariate group in Canada said he'd found himself in Los Angeles on a recent weekend and, given recommendations he'd heard, went to mass at St Mary of the Angels. He was sorry that this was the Sunday before the squatter group was evicted. (A knowledgeable party told me that, among other things, Williams the phony bishop never genuflected at the altar, so the visitor missed that and probably a great deal else.) But that's an indicator of where St Mary of the Angels stands even now in Anglo-Catholic estimation, and occupied by squatters.

Another e-mail reiterated the view, notably publicized at The Anglo-Catholic blog shortly before its demise, that the US-Canadian Ordinariate has hobbled itself with in-groupery, nepotism, and even class bias -- emulating a certain style of Anglicanism a bit too much, it would seem. This view was definitely not popular in 2012 (it predated the start of this blog, and I had no opinion about it at the time), but it's hard to argue that it hasn't been borne out by events. In retrospect, it comes off like one of those initially outrageous pronouncements by Mr Trump that, on reflection, turn out to be telling.

The US-Canadian Ordinariate has failed to thrive. At the same time, the Anglo-Catholic blogosphere, only a few years ago optimistic and supportive, has practically disappeared. I think two big events were responsible: the change of mind at St Aidan Des Moines, which left a prominent Anglo-Catholic blogger stranded without the parish he'd meant to lead into the Ordinariate, and the protracted disaster at St Mary of the Angels. Steenson was prominently involved as he belatedly explained to the St Aidan parish about things like Freemasonry, and he was prominently uninvolved as, deprived of the effective protection the parish had had from David Moyer, he stood aside to let Anthony Morello and a clique of ranters seize the property.

Clearly, going back over posts from 2012, the Anglo-Catholic blogosphere foundered and broke up over Steenson and, to a lesser extent, Abp Hepworth. The dilemmas surrounding the bungling of St Mary's, St Aidan's, and overall failures to thrive dissipated the atmosphere of optimism and support pretty quickly. A visitor who frequently sends me his comments suggests that events, reflected in fundraising crises and declining statistics, are simply proving that there is no market for the sort of Anglo-Catholicism promoted by the Ordinariates.

That's hard for me to understand. My wife and I, finally fed up with the liturgical and musical abuse at our local declining diocesan parish, fled to one a few miles down the road that has good music (with hymns recognizable to those brought up on the 1940 TEC Hymnal) servers in procession with red cassocks and cottas, genuflections at the altar, and, during Lent, the Sanctus, the Memorial Acclamation, and the Agnus Dei sung in Latin. There's a fanny in every seat. The budget is double that of our former parish.

In the middle of last week, I went to the pickup first noon mass at St Mary of the Angels -- no choir, just Fr Kelley, his deacon, and the sense that the Holy Spirit was present. If the atmosphere at the new diocesan parish was great, this was even better. There's a market for this.

Right now, what remains of the Anglo-Catholic blogosphere is dominated by cranks like Mr Chadwick and outliers like Fr Hunwicke. Smuts, I think, has been shown up as a phony, just as much as the phony bishops he serves. This is almost certainly why he's mostly quit blogging. If he hasn't, I challenge him to address his role in defaming Fr Kelley and the St Mary's parish. But Gill and Marsh will never allow it. That Smuts will knuckle under speaks volumes.

I think the restoration of St Mary's is cause for larger reassessment and recalibration.

Lead On Books?

A vestry member tells me that Owen Williams stopped by the parish late last week to pick up some papers. (The parish offered him a courtesy the squatters never gave Fr Kelley.) When asked about what had happened to the parish library, he said it had been given to Bishop Stephen Scarlett at St Matthews Anglican Newport Beach.

This reminds me of what I often see in the police ride-along shows you can see on cable: the cops will stop a car that's been reported stolen. On asking the driver what's up, he'll say some guy have it to him, but didn't explain why. "Huh?" the cop will say. "Some guy gave you a new BMW, and you didn't ask any questions?" I have the same feeling about Bishop Stephen Scarlett. In fact, a year ago I sent Bp Scarlett an e-mail that said in part,

[T]he St Mary of the Angels legal situation is winding down in favor of the parish’s elected vestry. The ACA has never had canonical authority under its canons to remove or appoint vestry members. It never had authority under California corporation law or the parish bylaws to remove or appoint vestry members. It attempted to do this, as well as to excommunicate many in the parish, in April 2012. Two California courts have already ruled that the elected vestry is the legal corporate board of the parish. The elected vestry never hired Williams. Any money paid to Williams was never authorized. Williams was never hired as parish rector by either the illegal ACA-appointed vestry or the legal elected vestry. At best he is only a curate.

[T]he biographical profiles for you and your assisting priest at the St Matthews web site make it clear that you believe a priest should have a seminary degree. Williams never attended seminary and at best has a Master of Fine Arts degree. My exposure to him suggests that he probably is less well informed about Christian theology than an average candidate for confirmation. It now appears that even the ACA is having its reservations about him.

I’m puzzled, if you’re providing any sort of assistance to this individual, what your reasons might be. It seems to me that this is a very fluid situation, and any involvement on your or St Matthews’ part with either Williams or the ACA could have a potentially very controversial impact. Depending on what sort of assistance you’ve provided to Williams or the ACA, you could also involve yourself, your parish, or individual parishioners in legal trouble, as the elected vestry of St Mary of the Angels observes its fiduciary responsibility to recover damages.

Scarlett never replied to this e-mail.

I suppose a low-key call from Fr Kelley to Scarlett might go some way to determining how willing he might be to return the books and possible other items transferred to St Matthews Anglican. A number of items that were Fr Kelley's personal property, including books, were never released to him by the squatters when they seized the parish, although he identified them clearly and requested their return. It's possible that some, especially the books, might have been included in what went to St Matthews and Bishop Scarlett.

Unfortunately, when someone says "continuing Anglican bishop", I get a certain definite mental picture. We'll have to see if Bp Scarlett confirms the expectations I've built up.

Deborah Gyapong on Abp Hepworth

I received the following e-mail from Ms Gyapong yesterday, which I am posting with her permission:

Dear Mr. Bruce,

Thank you for running that letter about Archbishop John Hepworth from a former TAC priest who traveled with him to Japan.

His description more closely matches my experience of the man: larger than life; a tremendously gifted speaker and writer; wickedly (in the Boston-sense of wicked, meaning great!) funny; an inspiring leader and serious about the need for our coming into unity with the Holy See. He was a tremendous evangelist for unity and for the Catholic Church.

Interestingly, from my position up here in Canada, the bishops who remained loyal to Hepworth to the end, who trusted him, are now Catholic priests, two of them monsignors. They, however, did not have impediments in becoming Catholic such as delict of schism or being in an irregular marriage.

Now that we are in the Ordinariates, I can see 90 per cent of what Hepworth was "selling " to us regarding what our new life in the Catholic Church would look like regarding our liturgy, our married priests, our property, our patrimony, turned out to be true. I also think if more bishops had been loyal, and "catholic" in their behavior vis a vis their archbishop, perhaps more parishes could have come in.

There were some significant things he got wrong, perhaps from wishful thinking on his part, but I do not think malice, or chicanery had anything to do with it.

Sadly, whatever flaws or blind spots or inconsistencies in his behavior can be explained by the abuse he suffered. For most of his adult life he had suppressed it and tried to move on, but, in the run up to the TAC's approach to Rome, he also began to face what had happened to him. Though he had a naive view, perhaps, of how his story would be received, and how that might mitigate the view of his leaving the Catholic priesthood,and so on, it saddens me greatly how terribly he was treated by some in the hierarchy when he first came forward. I remember encountering outright contempt towards the man in some quarters.

In a sense he was revictimized at the very same time he was trying to keep the TAC together so as to approach Rome in unity. I look at our small, but happy and holy little Ordinariate communities in Canada and am extremely grateful for what John Hepworth did for us and suffered for us.

And for those who think the sexual abuse claims were bogus, Archbishop Hepworth went through the special counsel the Melbourne diocese had set up to deal with sexual abuse claims since one of the abusive priests was from there. (This independent counsel was set up by Cardinal Pell when he was Melbourne archbishop). He was examined by experienced people who have assessed the credibility of hundreds of victims, and who knew evidence no one else would have known from any public record. They found Hepworth's accounts of abuse credible.

The ordeal of going public with the abuse claims, abuse that caused him tremendous agony and shame, eventually led to his being taken more seriously by the Catholic bishops who helped get the ordinariate off the ground. I think Hepworth played a key role in the fact there's an Ordinariate in Australia at all and that a former TAC priest, Msgr. Entwistle, heads it.

I suspect one of these days we'll hear John Hepworth has quietly reconciled with the Church he loves, but to me he is like the captain of a sinking ship, waiting until everyone's safe on the Barque of Peter. If it's only for the sake of St. Mary's in Hollywood, he'll do so. I'm delighted he has stepped forward out of his voluntary exile to help St. Mary's get justice after what looks like an unbelievably painful ordeal.

By their fruits ye will know them and I think the TAC parishes in Canada, the United States and Australia are John Hepworth's fruit in many ways---and I think most of my fellow Ordinariate members would agree.

You may publish this on your blog if you like,

Blessings

Deborah Gyapong

I find it very difficult to disagree with Ms Gyapong's argument. The circumstances of St Mary Hollywood's case bear it out: there can be no question that Abp Hepworth opened up the opportunity for TAC parishes to take advantage of Anglicanorum coetibus. There can be no question that the ACA bishops took legal and canonical actions, in particular (and most severely) against St Mary Hollywood. Hepworth set up the Patrimony to protect it and other parishes from such actions. That protection has proven ultimately effective and was a key element in the parish's legal defense. His reemergence as the parish's legal situation becomes more favorable is an indication of his continued wish for the process begun in the TAC with the Portsmouth Letter to continue.

I'm very grateful to Ms Gyapong for her support for Abp Hepworth and by implication the parish's continued intent to join the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter.

Bp Lopes, Let's Get Real

A visitor reports that Houston is launching a $200,000 appeal next weekend to support the Chancery operation and the episcopal travel budget. He added, "I guess a look at the books was a bit discouraging for Bp Lopes."

When I prepared the 2012 annual budget for St Mary of the Angels, assuming at the time it would be received into the Ordinariate in early 2012, I provided for a 10% diocesan tithe, which would have amounted to $34,000 per year based on 2011 income, or $136,000 for the four-year period since early 2012.

In addition, my wife and I generously support the parishes of which we've been members and their diocesan mission funds, and I'm sure other St Mary's parishioners would have stepped up to the plate as well. It's a prosperous parish in a prosperous community. I can only suggest to you that this is one more data point that might lead you to recognize that the prior Ordinary badly bungled at least one important job, and it might be in your interest to investigate how this serious error might be corrected.

Or maybe your fundraising is doing OK. In that case, sorry to bother you.

This All May Be My Doing!

Not quite a reaction to the parish restoration, but Mr Chadwick now suspects the reemergence of Abp Hepworth is something I may have cooked up myself, which would be disgraceful, since I claim to be a devout Catholic. Mr Chadwick, let me put you in touch with Fr Davis. You, he, Mrs Bush, and Ms Akan can commiserate.

Down in the comments, there seems to be general agreement that Fr Z is a sociopath, and they've already excommunicated him. Or something.

Reactions To Parish Restoration

Here's a puzzle: as far as I'm aware, there has been no reaction anywhere in the blogosphere (other than here) to this week's restoration of the parish to its property. This is a puzzle because the events of 2012 involving the seizure of the parish by the Bush-ACA group were extensively covered by David Virtue, Stephen Smuts, Ms Gyapong, and others. In particular, Virtue and Smuts allowed their comment sections to be freely used by partisans of Bush and the ACA to publish defamatory rants about Fr Kelley and the parish. Correcting the record now is seemingly too controversial.

I've just received an e-mail from David Moyer apparently relaying a message from Virtue that "David Virtue will NOT post anything about St Mary's". Except that he posted extensively about it in 2012 -- but now the effective resolution of the legal issues isn't news. (Oddly, he's been all over the story of St James Newport Beach, CA, in which a liberal TEC parish led by a woman priest is bringing charges of bullying against a liberal TEC bishop. Somehow this fits Virtue's agenda, but the resolution of St Mary's in favor of its legal vestry does not!)

Stephen Smuts (as I've pointed out, he calls himself "Father" but would not be eligible for ordination in any but a "continuing" denomination) had a lengthy hiatus from blogging, resumed in a brief frenzy last fall, then quit again -- but not before he published an announcement from Samuel Prakash, reinforcing his status as the de facto spokesman for the TAC. To date, he has ventured no opinion on the reemergence of Abp Hepworth nor the restoration of St Mary's. Some time ago, he said he'd been "asked" not to publish anything on the ACA, which suggests that Marsh and Gill had premonitions even then that things would head south.

So far, I see no news on the ACA web site or that of the Diocese of the West, which still lists St Mary of the Angels as a parish, with Fred Rivers as rector and Owen Williams as cipher in residence. If anyone sees anything from the ACA, I'll be delighted to learn of it.

The Los Feliz Ledger has posted a story in its online edition. Ms Cohen, the editor, has begun to reflect the community's gradual disaffection with Mrs Bush, who got off the reservation last year by trying to rent the commercial space to an utterly supererogatory liquor store, then closing the community meeting room.

Linda Demmers, head of the Los Feliz Neighborhood Council, one of the groups shut out of the meeting room, sent out the following e-mail:

I am delighted to report to you that this morning, Father Christopher Kelley handed me the key to 1965 Hillhurst Avenue. The internal issues of the church have been resolved and the court’s decision has been rendered.

We can go home.

This has been a long process for the church, for both sides, and I wish them speedy healing so we can get back to the business of serving our community and our better selves.

Below, is an invitation from Father Kelley to attend his first service in St. Mary’s in over three years. All are welcome no matter your beliefs. I hope to see you there to support the parish. If you’ve never been inside the sanctuary, it is a little jewel in our neighborhood.

Further, I invite anyone who is “in the neighborhood” on Sunday afternoon to stop by later in the afternoon. Help pull the weeds, pick the coffee cups out of the bushes, and help restore the church property to its glory. Mark Mauceri and I cleaned up the second floor this afternoon and it is ready for our next meeting. (Let me know if you can come on Sunday or we will reschedule.)

Our future meetings will be back in the second floor community room and our use of that room is protected by a covenant executed at the time of construction of the building.

Join me in welcoming Father Kelley, his lovely wife Mary Alice, and their son Andrew back to the community.

But the overall silence outside the local community is remarkable, and I'll have more to say on this.

More On The Patrimony Of The Primate

A visitor asks, "What will St Mary's be affiliated with, besides Hepworth? Are there any other parishes or groups in the Patrimony?" As far as I know, there are no others active, but this leads me to further examination of the Patrimony issue.

A couple of years ago, I sent an e-mail to David Moyer asking him if he could provide a list of parishes that had been in the Patrimony, and what their ultimate fates had been. Moyer never replied -- this is too bad, since he, as bishop, would have been the definitive source.

In a "To Whom It May Concern" letter dated February 3, 2014, Abp Hepworth refers to the Patrimony as a provision of the TAC that had been in existence prior to Anglicanorum coetibus, which he used in the early 2000s to resolve conflicts between Bishop Robin Connors and a Portland, OR parish. He said, "The US bishops were unhappy, but accepted the legitimacy of my actions." Hepworth went on to say that he implemented the provisions of the Patrimony once again to prevent canonical and legal action by US bishops against parishes that had determined to enter the US-Canadian Ordinariate.

In a separate move, Bishop Louis Campese of the ACA Diocese of the Eastern US resigned as an ACA bishop in early 2011 and withdrew about half the parishes in that diocese into the Pro-Diocese of the Holy Family, which was not in the Patrimony of the Primate. The reason was the same, to protect parishes from the actions of Presiding Bishop Marsh and others. Beyond that, the exact status of other ACA parishes or ACA-derived groups, like the Fellowship of St Alban, Rochester NY, isn't completely clear to me, as the circumstances of that group's formation involve opposition by Bishop Marsh and the ACA parish's ACA priest, who, however, passed away during the transition. (UPDATE: Prof Jordan has clarified that his group was not in the Patrimony.)

So there is a class of ACA or ACA-derived parishes or groups that intended to enter the Ordinariate and suffered adverse action from the ACA but may or may not have actually been under the Patrimony of the Primate, Moyer, and Hepworth. At this stage, I would invite anyone with specific knowledge of what happened in those circumstances to let me know the details, as the historical record should be preserved.

Without better confirmation, I am fairly certain that the following groups or parishes were in fact in the Patrimony during 2011-2012:

• St Mary of the Angels Hollywood
• Holy Cross Mission Honolulu
• St Columba Lancaster CA
• St Aidan Des Moines
• Holy Family Payson AZ

I will be extremely grateful for corrections and additions to this list and will update it here as I receive them. The historical record is important. It's worth pointing out that of the current list, only Holy Family Payson actually entered the Ordinariate, a symptom in part of the bungling that characterized the establishment of the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter. Indeed, I've had e-mail exchanges with two clergy associated with these groups who emerged embittered from the unsuccessful process of trying to join the OCSP. However, the specific circumstances for each group's non-entry were unique.

It's important to note that the St Mary of the Angels parish voted to revise its bylaws in early 2011 to reflect its exit from the ACA and membership in the Patrimony of the Primate. Due to a technicality, counsel advised the vestry to hold a second election on that question in August 2012, which also passed. It was this election that the courts eventually recognized as legally establishing the parish's membership in the Patrimony.

The parish's bylaws have established its membership in the Patrimony, which, according to Abp Hepworth, whose personal creation the Patrimony is, continues in existence. Whether other parishes or groups are currently active in it is not really relevant. The most important thing is that the affiliation is legally and canonically valid, it has protected the parish from the most severe attacks, and it keeps the parish's options open.

Whether, as my visitor has subsequently mused, the Patrimony as a denomination currently of one parish gives anyone leverage is an interesting question. I would point out, though, that the fact that St Mary of the Angels remains outside the OCSP is a major conundrum for the whole Anglo-Catholic project, not just Anglicanorum coetibus. I'll discuss the implications of this in future posts.

Photos Of Parish Property

I took some photos of the parish property yesterday. The most important is this one, which shows the legal rector and the parish's affiliation with the Patrimony of the Primate:

I have forwarded copies of this via e-mail to David Virtue and Allison Cohen, editor of the Los Feliz Ledger.

As Fr Kelley indicated in his letter, the parish library has been stripped and the books presumably sold. My understanding is that there was a lengthy meeting with the vestry's counsel yesterday morning, and I assume this was among many topics covered:

There is evidence throughout the property of the peculiar priorities of the ACA-Bush squatter group. The undercroft parish hall appears to have had little or no use over the 3-1/2 year period, and all evidence of parish history was hidden away -- including the 20 years when the parish was in the ACA. All the portraits of past rectors had been hidden in the organ's bellows room! Here they've been rescued and are being re-hung:

Not only Fr Kelley, but all the others were Unpersons, apparently! Still on the floor and partly behind a chair is the Second Rector, Fr Jordan. Yesterday was the anniversary of his death, February 17, 1971.

A photo of a parish group under Fr Wilcox that had previously been hung in the parish hall was hidden unceremoniously among detritus behind the stage:

On the positive side, it appears that the squatter group simply did not expect ever actually to be evicted, and the property, other than the library and some of Fr Kelley's personal property, was intact -- and no provision had been made for removing financial records, which will give some indication of where the money went (and, of course, where it came from). UPDATE: These include unpaid utility bills and overdue property tax on the bank building since its evacuation, with penalties

An individual who had been a member partly during the Bush-ACA tenure said, however, that Mrs Bush had installed many hidden spy cameras throughout the building. (I didn't get a chance to have him point some out to me so I might take photos!). My wife and I think the dissident group was so untrustworthy that Mrs Bush knew they had to be spied on!

Where Now For "Bishop" Owen Williams?

A source privy to ACA Diocese of the West opinion reports that Canon Fred Rivers stated recently that Owen Williams traveled to one of "his" churches in Portland, OR a few months past. Rivers appeared to suggest there might be a "U-Haul moving event" for Williams. However, the current rector of St Francis Anglican is Fr Michael Costanzo. Williams was a protégé of the late Robin Connors, controversial sometime ACA Bishop of the West, who became rector of that parish after being forced out of the then-ACA St Mark's Portland parish. Sounds like they may not want him back in New Hampshire.

Any confirmation, clarification, or correction will be much appreciated.

Letter From Fr Kelley

Fr Kelley has sent the following e-mail to members and friends of the parish:

Dear Friends & Parishioners,

Yesterday just after 9am, the LA County Sheriff turned over the keys to St Mary's to our attorneys, and they to us. We have done a video survey of the damage and dispersal of the parish assets, etc. and will continue this survey in more detail today. For instance, it appears the entire content of the Theological College Library has been sold off; the Relic of the True Cross is missing from the Sacristy; the 400th Anniversary Cross is no where to be found. . .

Nevertheless, the Mass will be offered today at Noon, at the High Altar, where Fr Jordan's ashes rest. The Sanctuary as we know it today was remodeled as his memorial in 1973, and the gold-leafing of the mandorla of Our Lady in the Tympanum arch was done also in his memory just a few years ago, the first step in completing the Tympanum to the original specifications. Already, a neighbor who had never been inside until yesterday, has come & promised to attend. A long-lost Canadian Anglican. Let us pray for the return of many "Lost Sheep", and many who had never considered themselves "Christ's Own" before.

However, today there is a shoot out [filming] at the bank, so the lot and street parking will be difficult. [Mrs] Bush set this up, got paid, and ran off with the money. But we've changed the lock already, and our Attorney contacted the studio, informing them they will need to pay US, to proceed today. Our security is there to manage this. You might think of parking today at Albertson's, or at similar distance.

Sunday Mass, LENT II, the Sunday of the Lord's Transfiguration, will be at 10:30. If you would like to bring something toward a potluck, that will be just great! If so, please give me, or Jackie Yeager a heads-up. Thanks!

God bless you for all your prayers for us. There may be "bumps" on the road ahead; but we Know that The LORD has brought us thus far, and will not leave us. The battle has made us stronger in Him.

Grace be unto you, in a glorious, vigorous, & joyous Lent!

Fr Christopher P. Kelley +
Rector,
St Mary of the Angels' Parish
in the Patrimony of the Primate

I'm told that Mrs Bush and the dissidents' nonagenarian treasurer were on site when the sheriff arrived and were taken completely by surprise.

Breaking News -- Vestry Regains Possession Of Property

I received a phone mail message that, as of about 10:00 this morning, Fr Kelley was on site. I'll have updates as information becomes available.

A Different View Of Abp Hepworth

A visitor, former ACA/TAC priest, comments,

A few years ago, there was a terrible controversy caused nationwide in Australia by Abp. Hepworth’s legal suits against some prominent Roman Catholic priests for homosexual molestation while he was a seminarian. That whole sordid matter gave me pause, to say the least. Furthermore, I have little knowledge of the primate’s day-to-day conduct while he was still the official primate of the Church in Australia and the TAC, financial circumstances included.

All of that notwithstanding, for what it is worth, I would like to vouch for the archbishop’s performance during a couple of trips that we made together to Japan in the early ‘00s to help found the Nippon Kirisuto Seikokai. I was there on my own dime as the interpreter.

The first trip was made toward the end of Abp. Falk’s long reign as primate of the TAC. That was when he and Abp. Hepworth converged on Yokohama with disaffected Japanese Anglicans in revolt against the recent action to ordain a woman priest. We were met by Fr. Furukawa, of recent memory, God rest his soul, and Fr. Furutaké, my tutor from my freshman year in seminary, who sadly fell off the radar soon thereafter. Bp. Kajiwara, longtime ordinary of Yokohama, the largest and most Anglo-Catholic diocese in the Nippon Seikokai (Anglican/Episcopal Church in Japan), was present as an observer. I recall that Abp. Falk acted petulantly, but Abp. Hepworth appeared to be more worldly, accustomed to the rigors of international travel and political negotiations, and eager to take the reins of the TAC.

The second trip came a year or two later, after Abp. Falk was out of the picture. and Abp. Hepworth had been selected as the new primate. Hepworth was a master preacher, clearly steeped in a knowledge of theology and bearing a compassion for fellow rejected Anglicans. He proved himself a deft negotiator, assuaging Bp. Kajiwara’s apprehensions, and paving the way for the latter to become the leader of the breakaway Anglican province, such as it was with a dozen members spread out all over the country. And, what an uproarious sense of humor Hepworth had! Still, all the while, one could sense the tremendous responsibility that he felt, especially as he coaxed the TAC toward on his mission toward some form of full communion with Rome, which came to fruition and exploded in our faces in the form of Anglicanorum coetibus. Hepworth was one of those men who are bigger than life.

Bp. Kajiwara has since gone on to become the first Catholic priest in Japan under the auspices of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross (Australia), but now an octogenarian, he confines his ministrations to his own household and the few who may gather in his house church in Tokyo. A protegé of mine and priest of the makeshift N.K.S.K.K., Fr. Yamaoka, has been (re)ordained a Roman priest in the Diocese of Hiroshima, with the blessing of the previous ordinary and the papal nuncio, but he has had to endure bullying from the other diocesan clerics in that diocese. Church politics never dies, what!

My own sense is that John Hepworth is much like the protagonist of a Greek tragedy: inspired, passionate, and determined. I hope that our narrow Anglican history will treat him kindly, for my own brief encounters with him proved to be rare brushes with genius, if not purity and holiness.

So, Can Samuel Prakash Actually Dissolve The Patrimony Of The Primate?

Over the past week, I've mused on whether anyone in the TAC ever actually dissolved the Patrimony, although this reminds me of the exchange in Henry IV, Part I:

GLENDOWER
I can call spirits from the vasty deep.

HOTSPUR
Why, so can I, or so can any man,
But will they come when you do call for them?

A visitor points out that as far as he knows, Abp Falk's source for much of his deposition was David Virtue, who tended to "filter" things a bit. "What Prakash actually said was 'I will not have the Patrimony in my Administration.'"

My visitor says,

In the end, Prakash was NOT elected Primate. So he cannot HAVE a "Patrimony of the Primate." He was only made "acting" Primate. This was to allow Marsh & Gill to keep a tight rein on him. I think the TAC website still lists him as "acting" -- last I looked.

. . . . Hepworth did nothing to let go of his "personal property" (as the TAC College of Bishops had already recognized it to be).

The accounts I've seen of Prakash's succession say that he was made "acting" Primate solely because he was the most senior bishop. I sort of think that if he could dissolve a Patrimony, he could also create one, which would not be what Marsh and Gill had in mind at all. I suspect the policy of the TAC College of Bishops has been to say nothing, which in effect allows Hepworth's Patrimony to continue. But even if it were otherwise, as I've said before, the TAC's only recourse would be to expel him again (and maybe denounce him to David Virtue as well).

But let's keep this in perspective. Within the TAC, perhaps two dozen people take any of this seriously -- but none is sending Marsh or Gill any money. Outside the TAC, this is mainly mild amusement. Nobody's sending Marsh or Gill money from anywhere else, either.

Mr Smuts is so far silent.

The Patrimony That Won't Die!

As I noted earlier this week, three bishops in the Patrimony of the Primate, including the Primate Emeritus himself, have made a declaration to the court that the ACA bishops who allegedly dissolved the Patrimony in January 2012 never had the authority to do so. In a 2012 declaration, however, retired TAC Arshbishop Louis Falk said,

I was aware that Archbishop Hepworth was retiring as of April 15, 2012, and that his named Successor, Archbishop Samuel Prakash of India, stated his intention to dissolve the Patrimony in his administration and upon his assumption of duties on April 16, 2012, which Archbishop Prakash in fact did. A unilateral abolition of the Patrimony, however, without consulting the United States Bishops, such as myself, who had voluntarily set aside our voting rights in matters that did not pertain to us, is an act that I see to be Ultra Vires (beyond their competence). In any event, if the Patrimony automatically dissolved on January 1, 2012 upon the erection of the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter in the United States, as I understand to be Bishop Strawn’s position in this matter, then Archbishop Prakash would not have been required to take the action he did on April 16, 2012, because there would be no Patrimony or Primate in existence to dissolve.

Abp Falk says Prakash did in fact dissolve the Patrimony, but I can't find any reference to this on the TAC website. The closest thing I find to it is the October 2012 Statement by a TAC Tribunal expelling Abp Hepworth from the TAC College of Bishops, a gesture perhaps more comic-opera than Orwellian, though there are certainly elements of both. The Tribunal imposed a sanction

THAT all licences for any EPISCOPAL or PRIESTLY function within any affiliated church of the TRADITIONAL ANGLICAN COMMUNION, be with immediate effect withdrawn.

However, I doubt that the Patrimony of the Primate was ever an "affiliated church", being in effect Hepworth's personal creation. But let's assume that treating the Patrimony as still in existence is something utterly outside Hepworth's ecclesiastical competence, and this is anathema. What's the TAC to do? Expel him again?

And of course, the TAC itself is the outcome of the highly controversial 1991 Deerfield Beach Consecrations, felt by other "continuing Anglican" denominations to be uncanonical themselves.

Speaking as a Catholic observer who was formerly Episcopalian, I've got to say that the "continuing Anglican" movement comes off as pretty much of a canonical wild west in any case. I can't imagine Strawn or Marsh seriously complaining that Abp Hepworth has done something uncanonical!

Stephen Strawn And Letters Dimissory

Accoding to Merriam-Webster. a letter dimissory is "a letter given by a bishop dismissing a clergyman to another diocese and recommending him for reception there". It is pronounced DI-mis-so-ry (or possibly in the UK and Australia, DIM-sreh). The question of Fr Kelley's letter dimissory is related to, but separate from, the question of the St Mary of the Angels parish affiliation.

Fr Kelley's Letter Dimissory as an Anglican priest originated in Canterbury, England, in 1974, at the time of his ordination under the hands of Archbishop A. Michael Ramsey. It was well before the Anglican Church in America (ACA) had even come into existence. Thereafter, his Letter was transferred to appropriate bishops in the US, when Fr Kelley returned to this country to serve in successive Episcopal Church jurisdictions. It was transferred to the ACA's Diocese of the West (DoW), in Spring 2007 when Fr Kelley became rector of St Mary of the Angels.

It was duly transferred in 2010 by Daren K. Williams, then Bishop of the DoW, to the Patrimony of the Primate (PoP, based in Australia), when St Mary's began the process of leaving the DoW. By early 2011, Fr Kelley's Letter was held by Bishop David Moyer. bishop of the Patrimony. In late 2011, Williams abdicated. It is currently held by Abp Hepworth as the Patrimony of the Primate's bishop.

Stephen Strawn, the most junior ACA bishop in 2012, never possessed this required Letter, and thus never had jurisdiction or authority over Fr Kelley, who was under another bishop. However, on April 2, 2012, Strawn issued a "notice of inhibition" to Fr Kelley. It's worth pointing out that, during an attempt by Anthony Morello and others to seize the parish property on Strawn's behalf that day, Abp Falk explained to the Los Angeles police that Strawn had no authority to issue this letter.

The question of whether, or precisely when, the parish left the ACA for the Patrimony of the Primate is a legal issue that has been before the courts since 2012. The trial court found in October 2015 that the parish did in fact leave the ACA in August 2012. However, whether Bp Strawn had authority to inhibit or depose Fr Kelley is a separate canonical question, and this authority he clearly never had.

Thus Strawn's letter of inhibition was never valid, and beyond that, the ecclesiastical court that was held to depose Fr Kelley on October 11, 2012, never had authority to do this. As a result, the content of Strawn's allegations is not privileged, and is thus potentially libelous and defamatory.

Those who participated in this process, in the spirit of this Ash Wednesday, would seem to have something to repent. In particular, Fr Walter Crites of the APA, who participated in the proceeding to give it a veneer of objectivity, seems to have been derelict in not reviewing whether the "court" actually had jurisdiction over Fr Kelley.

On the other hand, Brian Marsh has said more recently that merger with the APA is "elusive". I suspect this sort of chicanery has been factored into the APA's review of the potential for merger.

Archbishop Hepworth Redux

A blogger asks, "What's Going On?" I've heard some skepticism via e-mail as well. The question Mr Chadwick specifically addresses is, "If a 'Patrimony of the Primate' is being resurrected, which Church does it belong to? Obviously, the present leadership of the TAC would deny any recognition of such an entity. Is there a 'true' TAC and a 'bogus' TAC?" The best answer we have is from several TAC bishops themselves:

We find that Bishops Stephen Duane Strawn and Brian R Marsh at no time had any authority to dissolve the still-continuing Patrimony of the Primate, the Primate's own provision, world-wide[.]

The TAC bishops involved were John Hepworth, David Moyer, and Wellborn Hudson. Bps Marsh and Strawn may wish to dispute this, and they may wish to summon other allies within the current much-diminished TAC, but I suspect Strawn and Marsh will have preoccupations much closer to home. This sort of disagreement is by no means unusual in the "continuing Anglican" movement. Just sayin'. If I were Marsh or Strawn, though, I wouldn't want to stir up new problems for myself.

I don't know Abp Hepworth, and I've never corresponded with him. A visitor who does know him feels that he's been the victim of character assassination, and that in person, he has a sharp wit and broad theological knowledge. I'm probably safe in saying he's a flawed human being like all the rest of us.

On the other hand, his leadership was responsible for the TAC's 2007 Portsmouth Letter. This was probably useful to the Vatican in that it served as a beard to deflect attention from Jeffrey Steenson's resignation as Episcopal Bishop of the Rio Grande -- there was resentment enough of that move in New Mexico, but if the reason for Steenson's meeting with Cardinal Ratzinger in 1993 had been more generally known, the outrage would have been much greater, possibly making Anglicanorum coetibus a harder thing to bring about.

There can be no question that Hepworth's leadership brought TAC parishes into the Ordinariates. It's also plain that his leadership within the TAC from 2007 to 2012 allowed this to happen, in the face of strong opposition. Beyond that, it's plain that, at least in the case of St Mary of the Angels, a very significant parish in this process, the job isn't complete.

If Abp Hepworth's health and morale appear to have been restored enough for him to consider resuming the work he'd begun, under whatever auspices, I can't see this as anything other than a very positive development. Please continue to pray for the St Mary of the Angels parish. its vestry, Fr Kelley, Abp Hepworth, and Bp Lopes.

Parish Annual Meeting February 7, 2016

With the improving legal environment, the parish held its first annual meeting as mandated in its bylaws since February 5, 2012. This was a remarkable event. My wife and I attended as invited guests and friends of the parish, but one of the remarkable features of the event was the number of other guests from the Hollywood-Los Feliz community who also attended, clearly supporting the parish and eager for it to return. Because the sheriff has not yet evicted the squatter group, the meeting was held at the Our Mother of Good Counsel Catholic parish nearby.

Another remarkable feature was the news that retired TAC Archbishop John Hepworth is actively supervising the parish. Its renewed or continued membership in the Patrimony of the Primate is active and not simply a legal formality. Abp Hepworth underwent a serious health crisis at the time of his "expulsion" from the TAC and the ACA's seizure of the St Mary's property in 2012. It appears that he has recovered and is beginning to resume an episcopal role.

For several years, the parish had been canonically isolated, with the US-Canadian Ordinariate denying any connection and the ACA impersonating a parish through a bizarre and disreputable group of phony priests and unbalanced dissidents. The renewal of the Patrimony is a very important event, visually as much as canonically.

It seems to me that it represents a restart of the Anglicanorum coetibus process. As Fr Kelley pointed out in yesterday's meeting, the original intent was for Steenson to receive the parish in January 2012 as the first to join the US-Canadian Ordinariate, since the first meeting that led to the establishment of Pope St John Paul II's Pastoral Provision was held at St Mary's in 1978. Forces both inside and outside the Ordinariate managed to derail that process in 2012.

My own view, not reflecting Fr Kelley's opinion but not necessarily inconsistent with it, is that up at least to Jeffrey Steenson's retirement, the process of growing the Ordinariate has been in the charge of people who seem to wither everything they touch. Indeed, the reconstituted "Anglicanorum Coetibus Society" has not borne fruit consistent with even its lukewarm introductory fanfare; its new members should, in my view, look toward using the upcoming Lenten season to reconsider their roles.

The disappearance of the once-enthusiastic Anglo-Catholic blogosphere also reflects the so-far disappointing outcome of Anglicanorum coetibus. The St Mary's parish has always been an important part of this process. The bungling that has so far characterized the startup of the US-Canadian Ordinariate isn't going unnoticed.

The parish wants to restore itself. The community wants it back. The Anglicanorum coetibus process needs it. Please continue to pray for the parish, its vestry, Fr Kelley, Abp Hepworth, and Bp Lopes.

A Couple Of Observations

My prediction over the past couple of months, that the Bush group would only be able to delay the inevitable for short periods, looks like it's turning out to have been correct. This leads to a couple of other questions. One is that we still don't have a clear picture of how the group financed what was, by Mrs Bush's own estimate, about $2 million in legal fees.

However, with the loss of the tenant in the commercial space and now the certain loss of the property, it's hard to imagine how they can continue the appeal of Judge Strobel's decision, which will involve hundreds of thousands more. My wife and I suspect they have been looting the parish of assets to meet expenses, but even this option will now be foreclosed.

The absence of Lancaster & Anastasia LLP from Mr Cothran's claim of possession may be significant -- it was a clear loser, but the Bush group's whole case has been a loser, and this hadn't deterred their intrepid legal team to date. Stay tuned.

The next question goes to the parish's affiliation. I have assumed up to now, and posted now and then to that effect, that the parish is unaffiliated. I now learn that the parish apparently intends to continue to identify itself as part of the Patrimony of the Primate. This was established by John Hepworth and Louis Falk in late 2010 to protect ACA parishes who intended to join the US-Canadian Ordinariate from adverse action by ACA bishops.

Although the ACA bishops unanimously requested that the Holy See erect the Ordinariates at the earliest possible time in March 2010, and in April 2011 pledged not to interfere with Patrimony parishes, they never acted in good faith over either move.

It seems more and more plain that their sole object was to seize St Mary of the Angels, a property worth somewhere in eight figures -- the only other ACA parish planning to leave with equivalent assets was Incarnation Orlando, which had put itself under a separate jurisdiction. Thus the ACA House of Bishops voted to dissolve the Patrimony in January 2012, when it became plain that David Moyer intended to continue to protect St Mary's from interference by Stephen Strawn.

However, court documents show that in John Hepworth's view, the ACA House of Bishops never had the authority to dissolve the Patrimony, since it was created by Hepworth himself as Primate of the TAC. As Hepworth put it in his deposition, the Patrimony still exists, St Mary of the Angels is still a parish in it, and Fr Kelley is still a priest in good standing in the Patrimony.

Samuel Prakash became the "acting primate" of the TAC following the retirement of John Hepworth (or his explusion by the TAC College of Bishops, depending on who you're talking to). He appears to be nothing but a figurehead, and the real power in the TAC, inasmuch as it exists, is with Brian Marsh and his ally Michael Gill. So far, none has made a move to dissolve the Patrimony on behalf of the Primate or the TAC.

They probably feel they don't need to. Remaining ACA clergy have either been cowed by Marsh and Strawn, or they stay out of their way and avoid direct confrontation. I would expect, though, that if the ACA's legal position continues to deteriorate in the St Mary of the Angels cases, we'll see an announcement of Marsh's "retirement". I wouldn't rule that out -- stay tuned.

Hearing on Cothran Claim Of Possession Feb 2, 2016

I attended this hearing, and in fact so did a substantial contingent of squatters: the phony "Bishop" Owen Williams, his tired-looking wife, an unkempt Patrick Meyers AKA Omeirs, and several others. Notably missing were Mrs Bush and Messrs Lancaster and Anastasia. We learned just before the hearing that they would not represent Mr Cothran, who turned out to be appearing pro per. As the wisdom goes, he had a fool for a client. It's difficult to imagine something going more disastrously for the squatters, although I'm afraid that for them and the property, there's more potential downside.

In fact, the apparent absence of coordination or effective legal counsel strongly suggests that the overall cohesion among the group is breaking down. The exchange between Mr Cothran and the judge was simply embarrassing. The judge started out by asking Mr Cothran how he has the right of possession to the property. He asked Mr Cothran if he lived at the church.

Mr Cothran answered that he lived in his home (in Sherman Oaks), not at the church. Nobody lived at the church. But the vestry has title to the property, and Mr Cothran claimed to be on the vestry.

The judge replied that the "plaintiff vestry" (i.e., the vestry elected in February 2012) had title to the property. The judge told Mr Cothran patiently that he was not on the vestry.

The judge then asked if Mr Cothran was paying rent to anyone at the parish. Mr Cothran replied that he was not, there were no tenants at the parish. The judge explained that only a tenant can claim right of possession, and Mr Cothran had not filed a correct claim. He went on to explain that, as outlined in the law, Mr Cothran would need to pay the court a deposit of several thousand dollars in rent to further his claim of right of possession.

Mr Cothran said he'd paid $300 (apparently just the filing fee), and he thought that was enough. The judge explained that the church was valuable property, and the rent would be a substantial amount. Mr Cothran had not paid it.

Mr Cothran became more and more exasperated. The judge made it plain that he was denying Mr Cothran's claim of possession, and this was going to restart the five-day clock for eviction. Mr Cothran insisted that the case was under appeal. The judge explained that this was an entirely separate matter.

Mr Cothran then asked, "So what form do I need to fill out?"

The judge said, "I can't give you legal advice. I would advise you to contact your attorney, and in fact, to contact him very quickly."

Increasingly exasperated, Mr Cothran said he'd already talked to his attorney, although he was apparently not represented by any who was present in court. Mr Cothran then began striding up and down the aisle, pointing angrily at me and the two wardens, who were present from the vestry. He strode back toward the judge, who repeated that Mr Cothran's claim was denied. Cothran then strode back to me and the wardens, poking his finger at us, and shouting,

"KNOW. THIS. YOU. WILL. NOT. GET. IT."

At this point, the bailiff ordered Mr Cothran to leave the courtroom, which he did, followed by the squatter contingent. I noted that "Bishop" Williams's face was beet-red. The vestry and legal counsel stayed in the courtroom for some additional minutes to avoid encountering Mr Cothran in the hall.

Once we went into the hall, an observer who appeared to be an attorney remarked that Mr Cothran's conduct warranted a protection order. Mmes Greer and Rineer, the vestry's counsel, made it plain that the squatters were not going to leave without being dragged out and informed the wardens that they should not be present when the sheriff arrives to lock the squatters out. My wife and I expect to raise our level of situational awareness over the next days and keep our cars in the garage.

However, counsel said that there could be no further claim of possession, and the court would inform the sheriff that this claim had been denied. I assume that the five-day clock on eviction has been restarted, and the squatters will be removed from the property in a matter of days.

I took the elevator down from the seventh-floor courtroom. It stopped on the fourth floor, and when the doors opened, Mr Cothran and the squatter group were in the lobby, with Mr Cothran yelling and waving his arms. I shut the doors in a hurry, and there was no further confrontation. I never saw any effort by Williams, the phony priest and bishop, to exercise any restraint over Mr Cothran at any time.

Fr Kelley and the vestry, as well as their counsel, are clearly aware of the risks in the situation as it develops.