The Charismatic Episcopal Church And The US-Canadian Ordinariate

Yesterday I briefly revisited the Charismatic Episcopal Church in relation to Houston's policy (or not) on whether it will ordain clergy from denominations other than Anglican -- given the right circumstances, it apparently will. My visitor referred to a quasi-Lutheran denomination as a "typical fringe body with a bishop (or archbishop) for every ten clergy and a clergyman for every ten laypeople." This, of course, can refer to many "continuing" groups, as well as others, and it's hard not to think the CEC fits just as well.

The Wikipedia entry for the CEC says,

The Charismatic Episcopal Church began when a variety of independent churches throughout the United States, as part of the Convergence Movement, began to blend evangelical teaching and charismatic worship with liturgies from the Book of Common Prayer[.]

The CEC was founded de novo in 1992 and was never a part of TEC or any other denomination in the Anglican Communion. Further, according to Wikipedia,

The ICCEC states that it is not a splinter group of any other denomination or communion, but is a convergence of the sacramental, evangelical, and charismatic traditions that it perceives in the church from the apostolic era until present times.

As we saw yesterday, there are various groups, like the Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church, which are not Anglican but choose to use liturgy from the 1979 TEC BCP. This doesn't make them Anglican, and apparently there's no strict requirement that CEC parishes rely exclusively on the 1979 BCP. According to Wikipedia,

Many parishes follow the liturgy of the American version of the Book of Common Prayer (1979). A provisional sacramentary drafted by the Worship & Music Committee of the Northeast [US] Diocese, which includes Roman, Anglican and Eastern rites, is in wide trial use. Some parishes use other worship rites, such as the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, or other Anglican, Roman, or Eastern rites.

Like other fringe groups, not excluding "continuers", the CEC has suffered from frequent scandal and schism. Again, according to Wikipedia,

In 2006 the US church experienced a crisis resulting in the departure of approximately 30% of its clergy and congregations, including seven actively serving bishops and one retired bishop. Though from diocese to diocese a variety of reasons were given for these departures, the crisis stemmed from allegations against some ICCEC leadership in America. These allegations were heard and adjudicated in June and September 2006 by the Patriarch's Council. In September 2006, the council issued a statement of its findings, which was then followed by several more US departures. Some of the departing clergy and congregations found new homes within the Antiochian Orthodox Church as Western-Rite clergy and parishes, some became Roman Catholic, while some are now affiliated with various Anglican bodies.

Given the small number of OCSP clergy, the fairly large proportion of Ordinariate priests who have at least passed through the CEC is remarkable, especially given the Anglican Use Pastoral Provision's position specifically excluding the CEC from its definition of Anglican. A visitor reports,

I believe four current OCSP clergy were formerly CEC: Frs Ed Meeks, Randy Sly, Vaughn Treco, and John Worgul. Fr Meeks was originally a Catholic seminarian; at a later point his CEC parish (Christ the King, Towson, MD) joined the Anglican Church in America. Fr Worgul also left by 2007, possibly for the same denomination Fr Sly had been a Wesleyan Methodist minister before joining the CEC. So only Fr Treco relied entirely on his CEC credentials to be accepted for Catholic ordination as a married man. Fr Meeks was until recently the Vicar for Vocations, but as I recall Fr Treco's interview on some local Catholic media he credited his charm offensive on the Archbishop of Minneapolis and St Paul for his acceptance for ordination. Despite the fact that then-Mr Treco was living in the area, the Potomac Falls, VA group, St John Fisher, was allowed to fold when Fr Sly moved to Kansas City, MO for family reasons and Mr Treco moved to Minnesota where he took over the community of St Bede, which had been ministered to by a former Anglican, now Catholic monk. The Ordinariate group there meets twice monthly.

Staffing priorities are never transparent in the OCSP. After noting that the former administrator (Fr Jon Chalmers) of the group in Greenville, SC had left for a school position in Birmingham, AB and been replaced by the former administrator of St John Vianney, Cleburne, TX, (Fr Jonathan Duncan) who has been replaced by no one (clergy at St Timothy's Ft Worth doing double duty) I see that St Anselm's, Greenville celebrates a mass only on Wednesdays.

What Happened To The Anglo-Lutherans?

I noted the other day that The Episcopal Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America have been "in communion" since 2001. Exactly what this means has never been completely clear. However, a visitor noted,

I have read your post today. It reminded me of one of the things that particularly perturbed me of the heady days when the American ordinariate was just getting started.

At that time, there was a group of high-church Lutheran priests with their congregations scattered about the Northeast. They worshipped using our Book of Common Prayer and aspired to be received into the ordinariate, along with the rest of us run-of-the-mill Anglican groups.

Notwithstanding, Jeff Steenson turned them down. He directed them to make their own petition directly to the Vatican, as they were not Anglican enough for Anglicanorum coetibus. What a narrow-minded bureaucrat!

Where these men and their people have gone since then, I do not know, but Steenson certainly missed a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity delivered to him on a silver platter. Fiddlesticks!

I remember this as well from mid-2011. The existence of Anglo-Lutheran groups was noted on various blogs covering the Anglicanorum coetibus process, though I think these have dropped off the radar since then.

However, the Steenson Ordinariate was never consistent in its policies -- as Ms Chalmers, the disappointing then-chancellor told me in 2012, "We're making things up as we go along." Another visitor pointed out,

Fr Gonzalez y Perez of the OCSP was an ELCA clergyman who was licensed to assist at an Episcopalian parish for about two years before he was ordained as a Catholic priest. He would not have been able to go from the the ELCA directly to the Ordinariate, I assume. I know of other circumstances where Lutheran clergy have received appointments in Anglican churches, and vice versa.

However, I don't believe Fr Gonzalez y Perez is currently connected with an Ordinariate group. The US-Canadian Ordinariate does plan to ordain Glenn Baaten, a former Presbyterian pastor whose Anglican ordination was only months long, without pastoral duties, and must be considered pro forma; Fr Vaughn Treco was a former Charismatic Episcopal Church pastor, from a denomination not recognized as Anglican under the Anglican Use Pastoral Provision.

Houston has a pretty clear record of doing, or not doing, precisely as it pleases. UPDATE: But now a visitor adds,

The "Anglo-Lutherans" of which you speak were not just "high church" Lutherans; they were members of a denomination called the Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church which had no connection with the ELCA. They popped up on the Anglo-Catholic, as I recall As the comments make clear, this is a typical fringe body with a bishop (or archbishop) for every ten clergy and a clergyman for every ten laypeople. The American leader, Abp. Gladfelter's one academic qualification seemed to be in dentistry Whatever opportunities Houston may have missed I do not believe that closer association with this body was one of them.

OK on that one. But I still have concerns about how Houston states and implements policy. Is the Charismatic Episcopal Church all that different from the Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church? Does the recognition by Houston (and the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis) give them more prestige than they would otherwise have?

More Changes In The Works?

A visitor reports,

Bp Lopes has inherited some very damaged goods in the leadership department, IMHO, and it will be a test of his abilities in this area to discern who can be rehabilitated and who needs to be mercifully put down. I gather that the plug is being pulled on at least two micro-groups. The function of OCSP military chaplains is another issue: do these men ever encounter an Ordinariate member, or say a mass from Divine Worship? What about OCSP communities that use the Ordinary Form? Are they in step with the mission?

Going forward, I gather the policy under Steenson was to direct any men (not ex-Anglican clergy) considering attending seminary to their local diocese, on the grounds that the Ordinariate did not have funds to support their studies. This was clearly a form of slow suicide, and has to change.

Presumably one group on which the plug will not be pulled, based on yesterday's post, is the one in Springfield, MO.

One thing I'm beginning to learn as a new Catholic is that vocations are a sign of a parish's success. The modernist parish from which we escaped last year had only one vocation in its 90-year history. Our new one has a fair number, including one transitional deacon from the parish scheduled to be ordained a priest in June. It doesn't appear to be a coincidence that the archdiocese's associate director of vocations was taking masses at the parish during Holy Week.

If a parish or diocese has a shortage of vocations, it seems to me that one problem is there aren't inspiring examples for those considering vocations to follow. I don't see any of those in the current roster of prebendaries at Houston.

Ordinariate Assignment For Fr Chori Seraiah

A visitor reports,

After languishing in a diocesan parish in Atlantic, IA since his ordination in 2012, Fr Jonathin Seraiah will be taking over the newly-named OCSP community of St George in Springfield, MO in May. Up to this point the Springfield community has been lay-led; an OCSP military chaplain stationed about a hundred miles away has said mass for them four times a year for the last two years or so, so this is a big step forward. Fr Seraiah has already visited the community and according to the St George Facebook page (where he was pictured but not named) several baptisms and receptions took place at that time.

Yesterday I reflected on how well connected our diocesan parish is in the affairs of the archdiocese. A disadvantage, from my perspective, of potentially going into the Ordinariate is currently that so little seems to be happening there. But developments like this may reflect a change.

Continuers Moving Toward "Full Communion"

Several visitors have pointed me to recent announcements on various blogs covering a joint letter from four "continuing" primates announcing their intent to be in "full communion" by 2017. As far as I can see, this announcement is meaningless -- indeed even more meaningless than the 2001 announcement by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and The Episcopal Church that they had achieved "full communion". Just for starters, though, the definition of "full communion" is dodgy. The ELCA says,

Full communion is when two denominations develop a relationship based on a common confessing of the Christian faith and a mutual recognition of Baptism and sharing of the Lord’s Supper.

All Christian denominations, by definition, share the Creeds. However, specific interpretations of how both baptism and the eucharist are recognized do differ fairly widely among Christian denominations. It's worth noting that Lutherans are Lutherans, while Episcopalians are Anglican, which means Calvinist. Lutherans have two sacraments, Anglicans seven. Anglicans differ among themselves on the meaning of the eucharist, for that matter. But in general, while all Christian denominations recognize baptism by water in the name of the Trinity, Protestant denominations since the 1960s have also admitted all baptized Christians to communion, so by this definition, all main line Protestants are already "in communion".

A more precise definition of "in communion" I've seen is that each denomination recognizes the episcopal actions of the other. Those would be, at least from Anglican and Catholic perspectives, ordination and confirmation. TEC, for instance, did not recognize my Presbyterian confirmation. Rome did not recognize my TEC confirmation. I'm assuming that after 2001, TEC would recognize ELCA confirmations, if I have this right. TEC would presumably also recognize ELCA ordinations.

The best reaction I saw to the 2001 move was a Wall Street Journal op-ed that said in practice, this would allow the two declining denominations to merge marginal parishes -- Bethany Lutheran East Podunk could merge with St Athanasius Episcopal East Podunk and go off into the sunset together. As far as I can tell, this doesn't happen very often, and in fact, an Episcopal priest who sounded off on this in an adult forum I attended about 2005 said the whole thing is pretty much a dead letter.

He went on, though, to say a great many issues had never been resolved or clarified. Let's say the two parishes above do merge. Which diocese are they in, in which denomination? If the rector is TEC but the diocese is Lutheran, does he get letters dimissory? What does he teach in confirmation class, two sacraments or seven? The TEC priest who discussed this basically said nobody had asked these or other questions, and the whole thing was basically a PR gesture.

Moving to the continuers expressing their own direction to move into "full communion", it seems to me the same issues apply. By and large, the continuing groups already recognize confirmations and ordinations from themselves and pretty much any other Anglican denomination -- about the only exception might be women from TEC or the ACNA. Take my word for it, there are gay continuing priests and bishops. For that matter, qualifications for ordination among the continuers are typically minimal no matter what. The same would apply to confirmation and catechesis -- look at "Bishop" Owen Williams, who has basic problems with things like the church calendar and should never have been either confirmed or ordained.

The ACA recognized Anthony Morello's ordination in the Philippine Independent Church, simply because the PIC is in communion with TEC, and TEC recognized it. I assume it didn't even ask his TEC Bishop Schofield for letters dimissory (I would have enjoyed seeing Schofield's reply). The ACA recognized Robert W Bowman's REC ordination, though it didn't bother to do a simple web search to discover his child pornography arrest.

But the ACA and the APA are already in full communion. I e-mailed APA Presiding Bishop Grundorf and asked whether, if the ACA recognized Bowman's orders, did the APA? Grundorf dodged this and said the APA did its own background checks. Considering the general level of competence among all these little splinter groups, they can say they're in full communion, but it will have as much effect as me claiming to be Holy Roman Emperor.

But I strongly suspect that none of the others wants to let Marsh or Strawn get in any position where they could threaten their own parishes.

Radio Silence From The ACA

So far, there is no Easter Message from either the Presiding Bishop or the Episcopal Visitor to the Diocese of the West. As far as I can tell, there have been no public pronouncements since the ACA-sponsored squatters were evicted from St Mary of the Angels on February 16. I do note that the ACA Executive Council and House of Bishops will meet in Timonium, Maryland on April 13 and 14. I assume there will be some discussion of the St Mary of the Angels situation at that time. If I were them, I'd be planning for the Presiding Bishop's succession, but I'm not them.

Fr Catania Rehabilitated?

Mr Murphy carries a piece lifted directly from the National Catholic Register carrying a lengthy interview with Fr Jason Catania, oddly without giving direct credit or a link. A visitor noted in an e-mail to me,

Mr Murphy posted, then took down, a comment on Fr Catania's interview in the NCR, to the effect that the story ends with his bringing Mt Calvary into the Church and being ordained, but says nothing about his removal as rector and nine month wait for another appointment.

This puzzled me as well, but the thing I really noted was that, although Fr Catania had earlier been dispatched to Siberia Canada, all of a sudden, his picture, and the good parts of his story, are appearing with an interview in a major Catholic organ. Again, imputing my experience in another field to the working of God's Kingdom, I have got to assume this appearance in major media has the thoroughly vetted approval of those in authority.

My visitor went on, "Fr Catania accompanied Bp Lopes to Mt Calvary yesterday, as his chaplain, for his visitation[.]" At least in The Episcopal Church, a bishop's chaplain is just his or her driver, but normally, a former rector of a parish is not supposed to have any contact at all with that parish after leaving. Would it be responsible for Bp Lopes to give Mt Calvary a mistaken impression that some continued contact with Fr Catania could be in the works?

We had a series of puzzling events under Steenson's stewardship, ranging from the denial of votum to David Moyer, to the abandonment of St Mary of the Angels, to the reversal at Our Lady of the Atonement, to the removal and exile of Fr Catania, a couple of which may be on the way to correction under Bp Lopes.

So What's Up With This?

With no other comment, other than it's one that he missed (well, he misses quite a lot), Mr Murphy points to a Youtube video of a mass celebrated by Msgr Keith Newton at Our Lady of the Atonement San Antonio on February 7, 2016.

In the context of what we now know, Jeffrey Steenson retired suddenly late last year. In May of 2012, Our Lady of the Atonement reversed its decision to go into the US-Canadian Ordinariate after the contents of a cell phone call by Steenson were reported to Fr Phillips. That Our Lady of the Atonement has stayed out of the OCSP presumably remains a major issue. Not long after Steenson's sudden retirement, though, and immediately after Bp Lopes's consecration, Msgr Newton, the UK Ordinary, visits San Antonio and celebrates mass.

Msgr Newton has made previous independent visits to groups in the US. Was Bp Lopes consulted on this visit? It's hard to imagine he wasn't. Who paid for this visit? Might the good offices of the Carl and Lois Davis Foundation have been involved?

Reflecting on what I've learned about the Davises -- a visitor has traced several multimillion-dollar donations to the OCSP through the Foundation's public tax filings -- I would assume that the move to put the headquarters of the OCSP at Our Lady of Walsingham and Houston came entirely from the Houston-based Davises, and I might even go farther and surmise that it was a major donation, or its prospect, that simply gave the CDF the go-ahead to make Anglicanorum coetibus a possibility. I wouldn't rule out their involvement in a renewed effort to bring Our Lady of the Atonement into the OCSP.

On the other hand, I did run the Davises' names past a key individual in the Anglicanorum Coetibus Society, but he said he'd never heard of them.

Carl and Lois Davis

A visitor sent me a nugget of information for my last post that Carl and Lois Davis, whose names were on the endowed visiting professorship Steenson held at St Mary's Seminary, are parishioners at Our Lady of Walsingham. A bit slow on the uptake, I eventually realized that if they were able to endow a professorship, they probably appear elsewhere, and a web search could be profitable. Indeed they do, and indeed it has been. They are major supporters of the St Thomas University Center for Fatih and Culture:

Married for 57 years, the Davises became members of Our Lady of Walsingham in 2001. Lois has served on Our Lady of Walsingham’s Pastoral Council and been involved in several building programs there including the recent construction of the Shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham.

The Carl A Davis and Lois E Davis Foundation appears to be well-managed and very well rated. "With $70.5M in assets, the organization is one of the largest of its kind in the United States." Its IRS Form 990-F indicates that in 2011, it gave Our Lady of Walsingham about $2.2 million, and the still-gestating US-Canadian Ordinariate $25,000. A non-profit called the Walsingham Foundation has apparently received multimillion-dollar grants from the Carl and Lois Davis Foundation in recent years.

I'm assuming that the Davises are the major donors behind the Houston Chancery, and probably many other projects surrounding Our Lady of Walsingham and the US-Canadian Ordinariate. I strongly suspect that major changes to personnel, such as the sudden retirement of Steenson and his replacement by Bishop Lopes, would not occur without their consultation and approval. The removal of their names from Steenson's professorship would also indicate the Davises' involvement in Steenson's removal.

Exactly what happened, of course, we still don't know, although I suspect there was a last-straw event leading to a sudden change.

Academic Demotion For Steenson?

A visitor notes that on the latest St Mary's Seminary website, Jeffrey Steenson has been moved down from Full-Time Academic Faculty to Adjunct Academic Faculty. In addition, since 2007, Steenson had been listed as "a visiting professor of Patristic Studies at the University of St. Thomas Center for Faith and Culture" and, since 2009, "Carl and Lois Davis Visiting Professor in Patristic Studies, University of St. Thomas/St Mary’s Seminary, Houston, TX". This designation no longer appears on his faculty profile at the St Mary's Seminary site.

A visitor tells me that Carl and Lois Davis are parishioners at Our Lady of Walsingham. The full professorship at St Thomas that became an endowed professorship appears to have been a deal-sweetener that accompanied Steenson's cautious progress to Ordinary from 2007 onward. Once he was out as Ordinary, the deal-sweetener seems to have rather quickly become less sweet.

I misspent several years of my youth in a misguided academic pursuit. In it, I did learn that an endowed professorship (e.g., "Carl and Lois Davis Visiting Professor") is very prestigious. An adjunct professorship, on the other hand, is nearly the bottom of the heap, one step above a graduate assistant, several steps below tenure track, teaching whatever courses become available from semester to semester.

For spring semester 2016, Msgr Steenson is not teaching patristics. A visitor says he's teaching two courses, one in homiletics (with another professor) and one something called a colloquium which seems to be student reflections on their current course of study. (I suspect this is something that was called a "gut" when I was in school.)

Steenson appears to have fallen out of favor beyond his position in the Ordinariate.

Missing Items

As the vestry slowly takes inventory of the property, two items appear to be missing. First the reliquary that held the Relic of the True Cross has been located, but the Relic itself is missing. Evidence says it was still there in the summer of 2013. That eliminates a few suspects and narrows the search. My source says, "But IMAGINE! Stealing such a Relic! -- Is there a Guilty Conscience out there in ACA-land???"

The parish register is also missing, which means the parish can't answer requests for information about baptisms, confirmations, marriages, memberships, and so forth, just as such requests are being renewed. It seems to me that Marsh is abandoning any pretense of Christian ministry -- although, as the evidence mounts that the ACA-inspired pirates intended simply to sell the property, this really shouldn't be a surprise.

Still Puzzled

Regarding the question I posted the other day, a reader responds,

It now appears that the Governing Council was not established in strict accordance with the canons, including the fact that the Judicial Vicar recently appointed by Msgr Steenson, not being incardinated in the OCSP, could not sit on the Governing Council and hence could not actually do his job. . . . And it has been pointed out that the annual OCSP clergy get-together does not fulfill the canonical requirements for the retreat that priests are expected to make annually. I am sure that daily examples of Chancery sloppiness are coming to Bp Lopes' attention. As you say, there may be some dark secret that came to light and precipitated Steenson's abrupt departure. But his day-to-day management was also certainly remiss.

Like the centurion with the paralyzed servant, I've tended to impute what I've learned from experience in another field to the operation of God's Kingdom. The various lacunae that my visitor mentions here strike me as the sort of thing that's tolerated -- barely -- from some relatively unimportant corporate functionary until some other last-straw issue comes to light. ("Did you hear the CEO's son-in-law went to that presentation?")

Or consider that Ted Bundy shoplifted socks, a peccadillo that was overshadowed by the other stuff. I still don't see something big enough to justify sudden retirement when, for four years, we saw, as my visitor puts it,

Sometimes the Ordinary issued an Advent/Christmas/Lent/Easter letter; sometimes he didn't. The hopeless website we have often commented on, the erratic "quarterly" newsletter full of puff pieces.

Something had to be new. It had to be big enough to force action, when for four years of bungling, none had been taken.

Parish Work Session And Appeal For Donations

I've had the following from Fr Kelley, which for those at a distance should at least give an idea of the parish's revival:

Dear Parishioners & Friends,

This coming Saturday, March 19, is the Feast of Saint Joseph, -- a traditional "Sign of Spring" as the Swallows return to Capistrano... Come celebrate with us! And remember St Joseph also as "The Worker" - the tradesman - the Guardian of Our Lord & His Holy Mother, and the Patron of the Universal Church.

Mass will be offered at 9am, for those who are able, and wish to mark the Feast Day. At 10am, we will begin our Spring Work Party, with special efforts to prepare for Palm Sunday. Please bring a bite or two to share for lunch.

We'll have a list of projects to choose from, fitted to a spectrum of strengths and such. There are may things, large and small that everyone can have a hand in somewhere. If you can't come, you can still help! How? Send us some funds! We have lightbulbs to buy, for instance! (We don't know why "the illegals" lived in such darkness -- but we can offer some suggestions!) And there are other things that will require replacement, or renewal. The opposition did their best to deplete the Parish's assets. You may make checks out to Saint Mary of the Angels' Parish, and send them c/o Aloyce Levin, 4510 Finley Avenue, Hollywood, CA 90027-2602.

If you know someone whose name should be included above, & who would be willing to lend a hand, or give a check, please feel free to cut & paste this message and forward it. There are others who have no email account. Please feel free to call them, or relay this message personally, so all can be included! Please help in our efforts for Outreach.

And those who can do neither, please bend a knee for us! We cherish your prayers as we engage in the work of restoring the Parish to its full function for the Lord.

I'll be there for the work party. It's worth noting that the parish is fighting its way back from attacks by an ancient foe that have come from many unexpected quarters. Please pray for the parish.

It's also going to be a struggle to get the parish back on a sound financial footing. Lent is a season for almsgiving. Please keep Fr Kelley's appeal in mind.

Here's A Question

This has been at the back of my mind for several days, and I posed it in a post the other day:

The problem for Houston is that I can't avoid thinking there must have been other reasons behind Steenson's sudden and premature retirement. St Mary's and even Our Lady of the Atonement are water under the bridge, after all.

The impression I get as a new Catholic is that bishops have a lot -- a lot -- of latitude. Just the cases I've seen in recent years confirm that. Bishop of Victoria, BC Remi De Roo stayed in his post for 37 years, retiring at the canonical age of 75, despite violent disagreement with Vatican teaching and financial scandal. Archbishop of Miami John Favalora had his retirement expedited by only eight months, although he'd been at the center of allegations regarding a rampant gay culture in his archdiocese.

Cardinal Roger Mahony retired at the canonical age of 75 in 2011 despite steady releases of evidence from at least 2004 that he had actively concealed cases of child sexual abuse by priests under his authority. Following his retirement, his successor limited his ability to function publicly as a bishop, but critics called the action a mere slap on the wrist.

So what was it that led to Steenson's retirement, "with immediate canonical effect", at age 63? The performance of all three Ordinariates has been equivalent -- essentially, dismal. There's no reason to single Steenson out for mere fecklessness. So, what was it?

I Have Three Takeaways

from the accounts I had from priests who'd worked with Steenson and Hurd during the Hollywood troubles of 2012. The first is that Steenson, behind the bland and uninspiring public persona, is actually a pretty nasty guy. Hurd, though probably not Mr Congeniality himself, was probably just doing as he was told by Steenson.

The second is how surprisingly closely Steenson and Hurd worked with Strawn, Morello, and the Bush group, in particular, as yesterday's account shows, not to allow anyone to dispute the character assassination that was being done against Fr Kelley on the blogs. Morello, recall, was claiming that as soon as he got the full story, he was going to send it all to the district attorney. This never happened, and judges repeatedly ruled that no improprieties had been shown by the Bush-ACA group. Clearly Steenson and Hurd nevertheless felt it was to their advantage to prevent the Morello story from being disputed, insofar as it was in their power.

The third, and this strikes me as the most astonishing, is that it looks like both of the priests were manipulated into thinking that if they stayed with the program, they had a realistic chance of being ordained in the OCSP. One of them was, at Steenson's and Hurd's specific instruction, saying Anglican mass for the Bush group after they'd removed themselves from the parish majority (which majority was the one that voted to enter the Ordinariate). Typical honorarium for an Anglican supply priest is $200 per mass, plus mileage. Knowing Mrs Bush, I doubt if this poor guy got even that for his trouble, and I very much doubt that Steenson or Hurd reminded her of an honorarium or anything like that.

I strongly suspect that neither Steenson nor Hurd had any intention of ordaining either one, ever.

Houston's Dilemma

I've had a couple of reactions from knowledgeable parties to my posts on Steenson's and Hurd's roles in the Hollywood troubles of 2012. One, while confirming all my theory of events insofar as he was aware of them, requested confidentiality. Another, from an ACA priest who had publicly supported Fr Kelley in the highly destructive comment sections at Virtue Online and Smuts's blog, felt that it may have affected his chances of going into the Ordinariate.

During this time period, my electronic comments were conspicuous in their support of Fr. Kelley and St. Mary’s cause, especially at VirtureOnline. Not only that, but at the last hour, I protested directly to Msgr. Steenson that he at least delay the ordination of young Master Bartus, whose candidacy for the R.C. laying-on-of-hands had been put forward under such a cloud of suspicion. I even told Bartus himself that, “The truth will out,” for which I was upbraided by Steenson himself, after the fact. He would have none of it. When I expressed on the Anglo-Catholic blog —I think it was — my frustration at the lack of responsiveness from the other end, Fr. Hurd picked it up and insisted that I post a retraction. I did so dutifully, confessing that he and Steenson had responded accordingly. But, we still had no answer from the CDF at the Vatican. "The Vatican" is the term used for the official black hole of the Roman Catholic Church, but I digress. Had Hurd or Steenson sat on our application until we went away? I will never know, but I will take to my grave the skepticism that this online verbal activity scotched my mission's and my chances of being admitted to the ordinariate.

On one hand, a potential employer, religious or not, has every right to expect a possible hire to be "with the program". On the other hand, those with knowledge of either misconduct or gross incompetence on the part of the potential employer should probably begin to recognize that hiring on would be a bad idea, and it looks like things worked out for the best in this case. God sends us messages in various ways.

The problem for Houston is that I can't avoid thinking there must have been other reasons behind Steenson's sudden and premature retirement. St Mary's and even Our Lady of the Atonement are water under the bridge, after all. But eventually, as it has in the case of Our Lady of the Atonement, this kind of stuff is going to come out. If it's bad, best to work with capable public relations people (i.e., not Sellers) to get this out in the least destructive way. Regarding favored early ordinations from the Steenson clique, one of these has been characterized to me as "not just a time bomb -- an IED!" Bp Lopes is going to have a very delicate job ahead of him, but he is going to have to get on with it, and he's going to have to be as open as he can in making sure that past errors are corrected.

I don't think Houston's problems will be solved, frankly, until St Mary of the Angels is admitted, with Fr Kelley as its priest. But God sends us messages in various ways.

Plan B

We've looked at the circumstances under which Our Lady of the Atonement San Antonio stayed out of the US-Canadian Ordinariate, and naturally, we've been talking about what happened, or didn't, with St Mary of the Angels all along. The question common to both situations was Steenson's stated intent to replace senior clergy who'd been with the most prestigious parishes with attractive and ambitious younger priests in his clique.

A visitor asked, very astutely, who might have been a candidate for pastor at Our Lady of the Atonement if Steenson's cell phone call had gone unheard by witnesses. I would have to say that the pattern of ordinations and clergy deployment in the Ordinariate under Steenson was puzzling -- desultory at best. But there are hints.

One candidate might have been Fr Scott Hurd, an Anglican Use priest who reported to Cardinal Wuerl in Washington and was serving as Steenson's vicar general at the time. OLA might have been a reward for effective service, although Hurd was deeply involved in the bungling at the Hollywood parish. When neither OLA nor St Mary's became available, he was out of the running and stayed in Washington.

Another could have been Fr Jon Chalmers, whose involvement with the Ordinariate appears to have been relatively brief and surprisingly marginal. Chalmers was ordained a Catholic priest in June 2012, only the second to be ordained in the OCSP. His wife, Margaret Chalmers, was the OCSP's chancellor, and I had e-mail exchanges with her during the 2012 troubles in Hollywood. I found her disappointing, full of excuses over the bungling, and, as a canon lawyer, she would never have been effective in the corporate litigation area demanded by the St Mary's situation. (On the other hand, bungling may have been what Steenson wanted to see.)

Fr Chalmers received his MDiv from the Berkeley School of Divinity at Yale, not quite Nashotah House, but making him part of the elite nonetheless. Yet after being ordained with enormous fanfare, he stayed with the tiny Ordinariate group in Greenville, SC until last year with a day job in hospital administration, when he left to become principal of a Catholic school in Birmingham, AL. Neither he nor his wife appears to have any remaining connection with the OCSP. A puzzle.

Another candidate could have been Fr Steve Sellers. A visitor says,

I was always intrigued by the fact that Steve Sellers left his position as Dean of the Fargo Cathedral, admittedly not a stellar post but attractive enough to lure him away from Texas in the first place, to come back to Houston as a substitute teacher with no parish responsibilities. Surely that was not Plan A. The post of Communication Director which he so mishandled was surely created after the fact, as is his current title of Director of Schools. Not that he qualifies as particularly young. But three years ago I am not sure who else would have been a possible candidate. Given the size of OLA it would not have been a job for someone at the beginning of his career.

It seems as though the US-Canadian Ordinariate staffed up without realistic ideas of where to put its new hires. Thus the old boys kept around in make-work jobs and sinecures. To tell the truth, I'd want to have a better idea of what Bp Lopes had in mind for these guys before I made more than a token donation to the Bishop's Appeal. (For now, we think it's a better bet to send our money to the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.)

Pray for Bp Lopes and the US-Canadian Ordinariate.

Here's The Frammis -- V

Steenson's dealings with Our Lady of the Atonement show him up as untrustworthy (there are Episcopalians who will say, "Join the club!"), but the events in Hollywood during the spring of 2012 make him out as only a duffer, a mere weekend Machiavellian, going up against Morello, Strawn, and Mrs Bush.

Recall that Steenson's agenda with all parishes and groups coming into the Ordinariate was apparently to knock senior priests out of the running or quickly force them into retirement, replacing them with his protégés. This would have been his intent with Fr Kelley at St Mary's as well, and his protégé Andy Bartus was on site, available, and eager to take over when the opportunity arose. Mrs Bush, while she had absolutely no intention of allowing any such thing, was happy to permit Bartus, Steenson, and Fr Scott Hurd, the then-vicar general, to think this is what would come to pass, for exactly as long as it suited her purpose.

A formal campaign of character assassination against Fr Kelley had been under way since late 2011, which also suited Steenson, and back-channel communications between Bartus and Hurd on one hand, and Morello, Strawn, Hurd, and Steenson on the other, seem to have been under way throughout the winter. My own view is that the repeated delays in admitting the parish, with postponements depending on repeated requests for new parish votes, were deliberate, aimed at allowing the seizure of the parish by Bush and the ACA, planned for Easter Monday 2012, to be the event that overtook the process.

The Easter Monday Putsch had clearly been in the works for some time. The scheme not to pay the parish's withholding taxes had been in place since January 2011, with members of the plot removing the quarterly IRS notices from incoming mail during the following year. Mrs Bush, Morello, and Strawn were fully aware that the IRS would seize the parish on Easter Monday; Strawn's letter of inhibition to Kelley had been prepared and post-dated in anticipation. Bartus contacted key parishioners, including my wife and me, saying there would be a major announcement that Tuesday, presumably of Fr Kelley's removal and Bartus's designation as ACA priest-in-charge.

It was only the early arrival of the IRS notice that thwarted this plan. While Strawn's "inhibition" of Kelley (Kelley was never under Strawn's authority, and it was never valid) stuck as far as the ACA was concerned, Bush, Morello, and the other dissidents were unable to seize the property, and Bartus was summarily sent packing. This was the first major setback for Mrs Bush, but it also gives an insight into Steenson's agenda.

Following the failure of the Putsch, Mrs Bush withdrew from the Patrimony parish with her dozen or so stooges and malcontents. She proposed holding their own mass in the common room of her luxury condo a few blocks away. Oddly, Steenson arranged for an individual to celebrate Anglican mass there for the Bush group with his permission and encouragement, a most peculiar arrangement. It appears the individual who was encouraged to do this was given some type of assurance that his own application to enter the Ordinariate as a priest would be viewed with favor. The Bush mass celebration was also tacitly approved by the ACA.

Clearly Steenson and the individual he'd asked to celebrate the Bush mass, and probably Hurd and Bartus, were under the impression that the Bush parish would succeed in seizing the property, resolve the various irregularities alleged to have taken place under Fr Kelley, and turn things over to Houston at some appropriate time. For Steenson, this had the particular advantage of keeping his fingerprints off any action against Fr Kelley, but it would bring the parish into the Ordinariate in due course anyhow. I recall during this period hearing that Morello was saying this would certainly take place, saying he was on first-name terms with Jeff Steenson.

Mrs Bush returned to the property with Strawn and Morello, armed with a court order, on May 26, 2012. This second Putsch was more effective, though never completely successful. In the May 26 meeting, though, Morello and Strawn announced that the ACA was now "neutral" on whether the parish would go into the Ordinariate. All present at that meeting took this to mean the Ordinariate was a dead letter. But at the same time, with the property now under Bush-ACA control, there was no further reason to maintain any charade, and the individual Steenson had persuaded to hold Anglican mass for the Bush group was told his services were no longer required -- in fact, with the property in hand, Bush, Strawn, and Morello saw no reason to celebrate any mass at all.

Steenson was out of the picture, utterly outmaneuvered. For that matter, Bartus was also gone, no longer of use to Mrs Bush.

Who Is Jeffrey Steenson? -- VI

As it has with Mrs Bush, new information has come to light since my last formal estimate of Jeffrey Steenson almost three years ago. I would say, though, that it has gone to flesh out what had only been surmise in developing my theory of the case. (It may also provide indirect insight into issues that may have led to his sudden and premature retirement.) Three disturbing developments marred the inception of the US-Canadian Ordinariate in the first half of 2012:

• Archbishop Chaput's denial of votum to David Moyer in January 2012
• The reversal of Our Lady of the Atonement San Antonio's intent to enter the US-Canadian Ordinariate in May 2012
• The protracted bungling of St Mary of the Angels's entry to the US-Canadian Ordinariate between January and May 2012.

All have been the subject of speculation in the blogosphere. They may have been potatoes hot enough in mid-2012 to have led to the demise of the Anglo-Catholic blog. Certainly there was speculation at the time on Steenson's possible role in Abp Chaput's denial of votum, but nothing concrete has so far come to light, and possibly nothing ever will. The reversal -- and a reversal it was -- of Our Lady of the Atonement's intent to enter the Ordinariate essentially left everyone dumbstruck, and Fr Phillips's public explanation at the time was deliberately vague. The question of St Mary of the Angels has led to extensive examination here, and if my traffic is any indication, the interest continues and is increasing.

A reliable source has provided an account of what appears to have been the real story on Our Lady of the Atonement. As it happens, during the first part of 2012 as Steenson was traveling to receive a parish into the Ordinariate, a group from that parish had picked him up at the airport and was driving him to town. Several people were in the car. Remarkably, Steenson got involved in a cell phone conversation while in the car with several witnesses in earshot and began explaining to whomever was on the other end that he intended to force the retirement of Fr. Phillips after a year and replace him with one of his younger priests, presumably a member of the Nashotah House clique with whom he surrounded himself. One of those in the car conveyed this information to Fr Phillips.

My source continues:

This came shortly after OLA's parish council had voted to enter the Ordinariate even at the price of relinquishing the title to their church and school property to the Archdiocese of San Antonio (with the Ordinariate congregation to have the indefinite use of the property), and just after they learned that this "compromise," which they thought had been a "hard bargain" originating with the San Antonio archdiocesan authorities, had actually been suggested to the archdiocese by Steenson himself. The parish council reversed itself immediately, and decided to remain within the SA archdiocese[.]

What this episode does from my standpoint is simply confirm a pattern I'd already suspected: Steenson didn't want strong, senior clerics in the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter, preferring more malleable younger priests who could be motivated by conventional ambition, however unhealthy. He was going to place them in Plumsteads Episcopi like St Mary of the Angels and Our Lady of the Atonement. Whatever may have led to Abp Chaput's decision, it did have the effect of putting David Moyer out of the picture -- and Moyer knew too much about, among others, Andrew Bartus and Stephen Strawn. By all appearances, Steenson was working closely with both.

Here's The Frammis -- IV

Another thing I learned from Ann Rule is that deceptive individuals can be keenly aware of people's weaknesses and can quickly exploit them to serve their own ends. Prison guards, I'm told, are trained to be careful about this from the start, since they're working with black belts among the deceptive, who have little to do all day but watch and calculate.

So let's say a rank newcomer to an old-line Anglican parish decides there might be boodle lying around for the taking. How to go about this? It will take cooperation -- influential laypepople among the old-line parishioners (especially vestry) need to be enlisted, clergy must be corrupted, and the more distant honchos in the diocese and elsewhere have to see benefit as well. Everyone has weaknesses. It's just a question of finding them and using them. Some people, of course, have agendas of their own that can be turned.

Mrs Bush arrived at the parish sometime in 2010, although she didn't complete her year of attendance to become a member of the parish in good standing until January 2012. Late 2010 and early 2011 would have been just as the controversy in the ACA over Anglicanorum coetibus reached its boil, and precisely when Abp Hepworth formed the Patrimony of the Primate. This was a convenient handle early in the process, but the parish's planned transition to the Ordinariate in early 2012 turned out to be a much greater opportunity -- and deceptive people of this sort are nothing if not opportunists.

For now, I don't want to discuss individual laity in detail, except to say it's remarkable how quickly Mrs Bush enlisted support. Key were several other recent arrivals in the parish, all poorly catechized, deeply troubled, and struggling with personal issues. She quickly got two of them onto the vestry and made alliances with others already on the vestry, so that they turned vestry meetings into contentious, four-hour rants, effectively stalling parish business. The upshot was the destructive, disputed vestry meeting of December 12, 2011, in which four of her stooges came very close to forcing Fr Kelley's resignation.

She was able as well to secure the close cooperation of two clergy, Andrew Bartus the then-curate, another newcomer to the parish and, at the time, less than a year out of seminary; and Anthony Morello, whose brief and marginal career as an Episcopal priest had ended in scandal and disgrace, but who, having insinuated himself into the neighboring ACA parish as curate, was in the process of undermining that parish's rector. Both Bartus and Morello had unrealistic ambitions, which Mrs Bush could exploit -- Bartus wanted to be rector of St Mary's; Morello wanted to be bishop in the ACA. Mrs Bush was happy to help, at least as long as it suited her own purposes.

The then-ACA Bishop of the West, Daren Williams, was weak, struggling with personal issues, and on his way out throughout 2011. Stephen Strawn, ACA Bishop of the Missouri Valley, clearly with his own set of ambitions, appears to have worked more actively to forestall moves by ACA parishes to enter the Ordinariate. Despite an April 2011 pledge by ACA bishops not to interfere with parishes in the Patrimony of the Primate, Strawn appears to have worked through back channels with Morello, Mrs Bush, and others in her circle to sabotage the parish's entry.

Bartus in the meantime had every reason to want the parish to go in, as he had a conflicting ambition -- he could only become rector (or Catholic equivalent) if the parish went into the Ordinariate. Nevertheless, he was clearly close to Mrs Bush and her circle; many of them gathered regularly in the Bartus apartment for cigar, whiskey, and poker get-togethers throughout 2011. If their ultimate objectives differed, their interim goal was the same: get rid of Fr Kelley. For Mrs Bush, Morello, and Strawn, this would help forestall entry to the Ordinariate. For Bartus, this would clear his path to becoming rector.

This almost certainly suited Jeffrey Steenson and the other young members of the Nashotah House clique surrounding him as well. In hindsight, the senior Anglican and Anglican Use priests who hoped to enter the Ordinariate with their parishes were apparently a threat to Steenson, and his intent appears to have been to knock as many as possible out of the running or quickly force them into retirement.

Mrs Bush, of course, was playing a longer game than any of these others.

Here's The Frammis -- III

More than a year ago, I posted on my theory of the frammis as it related to this case. In it, I said,

I was watching one of my favorite true-crime TV genres last night, a show where a detective solves an old, tough cold murder case. He gave some insights into how to do it: you develop a theory of the case, and you let new facts take you where they lead you.

As of late 2014, I was updating my theory with new facts that had become available at that time. In reviewing my post, I think I had things pretty much right then, but I now realize that in 2015, and more recently still, other facts have become available to give a better picture of what I would still describe as a "group hidden agenda so far falling short of criminal conspiracy".

We now know that in November 2014 (I didn't have that information in December of that year when I wrote my post), Mrs Bush and Mr Cothran secured a $575,000 loan against a title to the property that was the subject of pending litigation. We also now know that during the summer of 2015, the Bush-ACA group negotiated with a chain liquor store to lease the commercial space without telling BevMo! that the property was in litigation. Once BevMo! learned of this, they quickly withdrew.

This strongly suggests a pattern of deceptive behavior with Mrs Bush at the center. As I speculated the other day, the apparent fact that $575,000 loan was interest-only for a period of only three years strongly suggests that the pirates intended to hold onto the property for only a brief period before unloading it, when they could pay back the loan and walk away with some part of the remaining proceeds.

Based on FCI paperwork, that company values the whole property in the mid-seven figures. However, if the property were sold with the object of demolishing the existing buildings and putting up luxury condos, its value could potentially be greater. (This is the goal of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles in the similar case of the property at St James Newport Beach. The difference is that Bishop Bruno has acquired that property lawfully, but similar property values are at stake.)

I have a hard time not thinking that somebody wanted money here -- big money. For Bishop Bruno, that money will go to reimburse his diocese for its major legal expenses recovering the property of ruined parishes in the "Episcopal Church Cases". For those in the frammis, I suspect the purposes will be murkier -- at minimum, as I've said before, a puppet vestry or restricted membership meeting would vote to dissolve the corporation, sell its assets, and pass them on to the ACA, less assorted payoffs, commissions, consulting fees, and lagniappes.

There is no question that, as more facts have become available, we've seen a continued pattern of deceptive behavior. This reinforces the question I raised in my second post on the frammis: Mrs Bush, the clear leader of the group,

joined the parish only in early 2011 after, by her account, 40 years of not going to church. In other words, she would be something of an Anglican Rip Van Winkle, waking up to find she'd missed the controversies over prayer books, women's ordination, lady bishops, John Spong, Gene Robinson, Anglicanorum coetibus, the whole history. What would bring her to St Mary of the Angels, and why would she care? And why would she suddenly care enough to pledge money to lawyers over this stuff?

I've learned enough from reading Ann Rule to know that you shouldn't trust the stories deceptive people tell about themselves. I'm not sure what's up with the never-went-to-church-for-40-years number, but frankly, something's hinky.

St Mary Of The Angels No Longer Listed On ACA Diocese Of The West

Every now and then, I check the ACA home page and the Diocese of the West list of parishes. As of a March 2 update, the ACA Diocese of the West no longer lists St Mary of the Angels as a parish. However, "Bishop" Williams is still listed as episcopal visitor at 4510 Finley "Street", Los Angeles. California 90027u [sic]. Well, yes, if you go looking for him on Finley "Street", you could possibly find him there, but not on Finley Avenue.

I doubt if the pirate group would have changed anything if they hadn't felt some pressure from somewhere. These folks redefine passive-aggressive. As I say, I strongly suspect we'll have announcements from Belchertown in due course.

Speculation On The Legal Outlook

As I often say here, legal strategies and discussions with counsel are confidential. I'm a good friend of the St Mary of the Angels parish, but I'm neither a communicant nor a member of the vestry, and I'm not privy to the vestry's discussions with counsel. Nor am I an attorney. I am aware, though, that the vestry is actively working with counsel on future legal developments, and the vestry does sometimes release limited information to me that may be in its interest to make public. So, caveats over and done with.

It was only when the vestry got its first bill for $3,828.54 from FCI Lender Services following its reoccupation of the property on February 17 that it had concrete information that Mrs Bush had offered the commercial space as security for a half-million dollar loan. It appears that the vestry, or counsel, moved quickly to secure the paperwork on this loan from FCI, since I was able to see it in a meeting with the treasurer this past week. There appear to have been several meetings among vestry members, a commercial real estate broker, and counsel regarding this loan and how it affects the parish's title to the property.

I've been told that counsel has filed, or is in the process of filing, a lis pendens notice. This simply notifies anyone attempting to purchase or lease the property that it is the subject of pending litigation, and title to the property is subject to the outcome of the lawsuit.

I suspect that the first development from the vestry's non-payment of the bills from FCI will be an attempt by FCI to foreclose on the property, since FCI advertises itself as a foreclosure service for private lenders. The lis pendens notice would be, I would assume, a first step by counsel to forestall this action. Even if FCI can seize the property (a very big if), they could not easily dispose of it.

I'm told that the commercial broker working with the vestry has told the vestry that it will need to quiet title to the commercial property in order to lease it. This would probably be an action taken against FCI, the Xs (the private couple who made the loan), and presumably the squatter group and the ACA, who claimed that they had title to the property in order to secure the loan. I'm told that counsel is the process of filing this action, but I don't know the precise details. UPDATE: I learn on further research that a lis pendens must be filed at the beginning of an action to quiet title.

I assume this is something the Xs didn't bargain for when Mrs Bush approached them for the half million dollars. They have my sympathy, and I earnestly hope they can secure cost-effective legal representation to get themselves out of this situation.

An additional question that the vestry hasn't brought up, but which occurs to me in the process of researching this and other issues, is Slander of Title. This can involve any recording of a false claim against property, including in a legal action. Whether this would be covered in a quiet title action or could be pursued separately is a question I can't answer. However, it seems to me that damages in any such situation would involve the total value of the parish property (listed in FCI documents in the mid-seven figures) and the value of potential rent from the commercial space during the time the matter was not settled.

The bottom line, as far as I can see, is this: FCI discovers that it must try to foreclose on property to which the lender does not have valid title. It must tell the lenders that they don't have valid title to the property on which they advanced half a million dollars. The lenders will almost certainly need to retain counsel to pursue their legal claims against Mrs Bush, FCI, and the title insurer.

Meanwhile, the vestry files one or more legal actions against FCI, the lenders, Mrs Bush, the ACA, and various et als in a quiet title claim and potentially an action for slander of title. This action, or these actions, will be for amounts in the high seven figures at minimum. FCI, Mrs Bush, the lenders, the ACA, and various et als will need to retain counsel to defend against these actions.

At this point, I count four counsel working on behalf of the St Mary's vestry. Frankly, I would not want to be on the bad side of anyone who hired any of the four. I would be most frightened, though, of Mr Lengyel-Leahu, based on what I observed in last year's trial. (Never go against a lawyer who wears cowboy boots, among other things.)

If nothing else, I strongly suspect that Brian Marsh will be taking a leave of absence as Presiding Bishop of the ACA in the near future. The other parties will need to act to secure their financial interests.

Most Controversial Post Ever?

Every now and then I get an indication that this blog is read (and anathematized) in both Houston and (urp!) Belchertown -- but yesterday's post on the Los Feliz Ledger seems to have excited more comments from visitors than any other I can remember. One visitor e-mailed me, "I want to let you know that I was absolutely disgusted with today's post. What are you accomplishing by tearing down a small community newspaper?" Even Ms Cohen placed a call to my house, which I'll discuss in due course.

But let me start out by reviewing what happened when Ms Cohen visited the parish on Wednesday, February 24. I gave the broad outlines in this post. Based on remarks Ms Cohen made on that day and at other times, she is clearly aware that, at minimum, the parish, the vestry, and Fr Kelley feel that they've had a consistently bad deal from the Ledger. On February 17, soon after the squatters were evicted, she showed up at the parish and tried to interview Fr Kelley but was effectively screened by Mrs Kelley. In the course of that attempt, she said, "I guess Fr Kelley hates me and doesn't want to talk to me."

I would say that I'm certain Fr Kelley prays for those who wish him ill, but all things considered, Ms Cohen is probably not at the top of that particular prayer list. On the other hand, Fr Kelley and those around him would prefer that unserious individuals not waste his time, and along with other friends of the parish and the vestry, I would guess that our collective estimate of Ms Cohen is that she is not a serious individual. Our encounter with her last week hasn't changed that judgment.

Her version of events is that, on February 24, she showed up at the parish wanting to take a photo of Fr Kelley. When our group of friends and volunteers met her in the courtyard, she asked if she could take his picture. Fr Kelley, still vested from noon mass, said, "Sure" and held still. Ms Cohen said she didn't like posed photos and instead said she wanted to take a photo of Fr Kelley in his office, being Fr Kelley naturally or something. The parish treasurer, already having determined that the idea of Ms Cohen going anyplace with Fr Kelley without witnesses was a non-starter, began diverting things to a meeting room where others could be present.

So we eventually repaired to the parish hall, with Ms Cohen beginning to ask questions, some of which were along the line of why people like Mr Bruce didn't like her. (Ms Cohen, for the record, I neither like you nor dislike you; I would simply prefer not to occupy my time dealing with you.)

I would also point out that Ms Cohen's arrival superseded a previous meeting the parish treasurer and I had scheduled to discuss finances. We all had better things to do, in fact -- but we thought it might be beneficial to meet with her. She continued with more detailed questions -- Fr Kelley, the parish treasurer, and several other knowledgeable friends of the parish were present, and we began to give her comprehensive answers. She announced that a piece on the St Mary's restoration would be the lead article in the March issue. She was immensely proud of herself when she announced, "I'm going to call it 'The Bells of St Mary's'!" (One great part of being retired is I no longer have to tell my bosses what a great idea something like that is.)

Apparently realizing she was getting a story, though, she said she hadn't brought her notebook and left to get it. A friend of the parish shook his head that a "reporter" wouldn't have her notebook along. When she returned with the notebook, it seemed plain that her intent was to gather information for an in-depth article on what had happened to the parish. And it certainly reinforced the idea that her purpose was more than just getting a candid shot of Fr Kelley, which she already had. And, as I noted last week, the meeting went on for more than 90 minutes. She asked, among other things, for the names of all the key dissidents, how much money had actually been spent on legal fees, and our estimates of Mrs Bush's character and motives.

The problem was that on February 17, Ms Cohen already ran a story in the Ledger's on-line edition covering the simple fact of the eviction. The great bulk of that story, though, covered Mrs Bush's version of events, notwithstanding the courts had been giving that version short shrift for several years and, by Ms Cohen's own remarks, Mrs Bush had destroyed her reputation in the community. Fr Kelley certainly e-mailed at the time that this story was unacceptable from the vestry's viewpoint.

So those of us who met with Ms Cohen on February 24 felt that, in giving her 90 minutes of our time and fully answering her detailed questions, we'd get a better shake. Not a chance. Yesterday's story, despite the parish's gracious willingness to meet with her and answer her extensive questions, was practically a verbatim copy of the February 17 story containing Mrs Bush's version of events, with absolutely no additional information that might have come from our February 24 meeting, despite the detailed notes Ms Cohen appeared to take -- and despite Ms Cohen's apparent representation that the picture had become much clearer.

The parish treasurer's response was, " Since I was there with [John Bruce], Fr. Kelley, Pierre and Ms. Cohen I have to agree that the article doesn't reflect much of what was discussed. Puzzling indeed. My question to Ms. Cohen would be, 'Why bother to ask questions of those involved in a dispute if you have no intention of reflecting their responses?'" Ms Cohen's earlier reply to me was,

I never planned on writing a full story about Father Kelley for our March 2016 edition. Remember, I came to the church only with a camera and then the conversation evolved and I went back to retrieve a notebook. We have online readers only, but by far, most read the paper in its printed format. Therefore, the news that Father Kelley has prevailed is new to a great majority of our readership and that is why I focused our print story to that.

I do plan on a story about Father Kelley for our April edition, which I detailed to my staff in a reporter’s meeting this morning. Likely, this piece will be a Q and A with Father Kelley and I am also considering producing a video story on the issue. I have not decided.

Whew, maybe Q and A with Fr Kelley, and maybe a video! She hasn't decided! If we're real, real credulous, we'll forgive her and even do everything she wants all this month in hopes that maybe we'll be on video! Er, Ms Cohen, how stupid and gullible do you think we are?

Later in the day, she called my home and got my wife on the phone. I told her I'd rather not deal with Ms Cohen -- but apparently Ms Cohen nevertheless went on at great length with my wife. She's sorry for any misunderstanding. It was just that she found Fr Kelley so impressive she just had to go on meeting with him and stayed out of deference. She greatly admires Fr Kelley. In fact, now she's thinking of joining the St Mary of the Angels parish.

Here's the problem: Ms Cohen is a communicant at St James Episcopal on Wilshire Boulevard, which has a school. Her child is in the school. She gets a discount on tuition there by pledging at that parish. Coming over to St Mary's? Ain't gonna happen. Er, Ms Cohen, how stupid and gullible do you think we are?

UPDATE: Ms Cohen notes, "I have two sons. One is a junior at Georgetown University. The other is a freshman at Boston College. I no longer attend St. James Church."

That's fine that her family is doing so well. However, I see no reason to give any greater credence to her suggestion that she's suddenly so drawn to Fr Kelley that she'll maybe now join St Mary's. If she chooses to do so, let her simply do it and not make promises of something she might do, especially if such promises might be interpreted as manipulation.

My own take on all this is basically that, indeed, Ms Cohen is an unserious person. Not malicious, just not very smart, a bit lazy, and eager to go with the flow. She probably thought, however briefly, that maybe she could run a comprehensive story on St Mary's, giving the actual perspectives of both sides, with the vestry's version supported with detailed reference to dates, places, people, and events. Except (as she more or less implied to my wife), that would involve work. And beyond that, she's still terrified of Mrs Bush, as some in the community apparently still are. So best to go with the same old story that just gives Mrs Bush's version of events.

Even a fourth rate journalist is still, it would seem, a journalist.

Disappointing New Los Feliz Ledger Article

Fr Kelley, several parishioners, and friends of the parish wasted an hour and a half with Ms Cohen, the Editor of the Ledger, last week. In that meeting, she was proud of herself for deciding the article was going to be titled "The Bells of St Mary's". When I was younger, I sometimes wrote for fourth-rate papers like the Ledger. The editors of fourth-rate papers were always proud of themselves for coming up with some cliche like that. Looks like nothing's changed.

Nothing's changed with the story, either. It mainly repeats verbatim Mrs Bush's version of events from an article Ms Cohen ran two weeks ago. I have a feeling Fr Kelley and the vestry will never again feel Ms Cohen is worth their time.

The $575,000 Mortgage

With the vestry regaining control of the parish and some financial records, a picture of the squatter group's stewardship of the property is beginning to become clear. There is, however, a great deal the vestry still doesn't know. In particular, the squatters closed most of the bank accounts they had been using and withdrew all remaining funds, and so far, the banks have refused to give the vestry access to the records of these accounts. That is likely not the end of the story, but subpoenas may eventually be necessary.

However, the vestry had been aware for some time that Mrs Bush took out a $575,000 mortgage on the commercial building on the parish property. As paperwork has become available, we know more. This transaction closed on November 26, 2014. Mrs Bush and John Cothran signed the paperwork on behalf of "Rector Wardens Vestrymen of St Mary of the Angels Angelican [sic] Parish". There are numerous misspellings of the parish name throughout the paperwork; it is not clear whether these are deliberate.

The chronology is significant: on November 12, 2014, he California Supreme Court declined to review the appeal of the Appeals Court's decision by the dissidents and the ACA. This sent the case back to the trial court for another year and more of legal proceedings. Within two weeks of the Supreme Court's decision, Mrs Bush had seen fit to raise over half a million dollars. What this money was intended for, and what has happened to it, we still don't know.

On reviewing the available information, the vestry's counsel believes this was an interest-only loan for a period of three years. The Bush group was to pay $3,828.54 per month in interest and return the $575,000 to the lender three years later. This strongly suggests that the Bush group expected to have the funds available to do this within a relatively short period of time -- they weren't expecting to hold on to the property, in other words. This in turn suggests their agenda was to sell the property, and the legal setbacks, while raising the cost, were in their view simply obstacles to their continued intent to sell the property.

The lenders were a private couple whom I'll refer to as the Xs. The Xs chose to work through FCI Lender Services, Inc , which specializes in providing billing and foreclosure services to private lenders. However, a simple web search on the company name brings up four hits on sites listing complaints against FCI before the company's own web site appears. Typical is this one:

Grade Summary

Overall, FCI Lender Services Inc. received a grade of "F" based on how quickly the company responded to complaints, how often customers disputed their final resolution, and how many complaints were recieved per customer.

Grades are also broken down by the financial products offered be each institution. FCI Lender Services Inc. is rated "D" in Mortgages. Click on any of the financial products to see how FCI Lender Services Inc. compares.

Overview

FCI Lender Services Inc. has received 43 consumer complaints since June, 2012 – more than 85% of other banks.

Of those complaints, 81.4% of complaints were resolved in a timely manner. The CFPB allows 60 days to resolve complaints before considering them 'untimely.' FCI Lender Services Inc. meets the 60-day response deadline less frequently than 89.1% of other banks.

After companies respond to complaints, customers may dispute the response indicating that the issue was not resolved adequately. 25.6% of customers dispute FCI Lender Services Inc.'s response to complaints — worse than 81.2% of other companies.

The problem here is that nobody seems to have done any basic investigation into whether Mrs Bush and the squatter group held actual title to the property -- which the courts eventually ruled that they did not. The adverse ruling by the appeals court, sustained by the state supreme court, should have been a warning to any potential lender. Given these uncertainties, it appears that the Bush group was careful to find a business partner that would not ask too many questions.

The title was insured by the Old Republic Title company, which does not appear to have the same level of complaints as FCI. However, it's plain that Old Republic did only a minimal job of researching title and did not catch the litigation.

As of the March 1, 2016 payment due to FCI, this matter has been referred to the vestry's counsel and will not be paid, since the squatter group did not hold title to the property, and neither Mrs Bush nor Mr Cothran was authorized to sign for the parish.

Given FCI's record, it's likely they won't do anything until someone, presumably attorneys retained by the Xs, forces them to. My wife feels that unfortunately, it will be up to the Xs and their attorneys to pursue this matter, although clearly Mrs Bush is on the hook for more than half a million dollars. Mrs Bush, again, is 86 years old.

Coasting

A visitor reports that, as expected, the US-Canadian Ordinariate began its Bishop's Appeal to raise funds for Bp Lopes's travel and chancery expenses. But it appears that those in charge neglected to check if Canadian donations would be receiptable (in the US, "tax deductible"). in Canada, they aren't, because the money is going out of the country. It would be possible to set up a Canadian fund-raising arm with charitable status, but this would require lead time and legal help.

In addition, "suggested donations" were assessed for individual Canadian groups in American dollars based on 2015 Canadian-dollar givings, without considering that currently, a Canadian dollar is worth about US$0.75. Thus the solicitation seems unnecessarily burdensome.

It's hard to avoid the impression that the Houston staff is coasting. Bp Lopes is going to have to clean house.