(Please see the original post on this here.)
I read the Daily News article with deep distress and know its contents will trouble many parishioners. The allegations made in the article, if true, constitute a serious violation of ordination vows to be “a wholesome example” to a priest’s people. If true, they may also violate other canonical provisions and certainly portray an unacceptable idea of Christian stewardship.
The Episcopal Church provides due process when such issues arise, however, and no summary judgment can be made by me unilaterally. During the time that the Standing Committee is investigating Fr. Malia’s activities, I am removing him from his appointment as my vicar at St. James in Dundaff, and will be inhibiting him from the exercise of priestly ministry. The conservative group he has gathered around himself will be traumatized, and I will ask two priests in the locale to minister to them.
Interpretations of what a “wholesome example” is seem to vary. I suppose that if Fr. Malia had been seen visiting gay bars with his male lover, Bp Marshall of Bethlehem would be congratulating him now instead of deposing him. Bp Marshall is well known as a champion of gay rights, same-sex marriage, and other revisionist agenda items. Apparently, two men having sex with each other constitutes a wholesome example for Bp Marshall, but visiting night clubs and leaving large tips does not.
Or is it Fr. Malia’s traditionalist view of Holy Orders, the Bible and homosexual acts that are the real problem?
In the Episcopal Organization lust in its various manifestations is a lively grace not a deadly sin.
“If true, they may also violate other canonical provisions and certainly portray an unacceptable idea of Christian stewardship.”
To say this in light of the abuses carried out by KJS and Co. is beyond ridiculous. While the priest in question has certainly shown bad judgment and behavior that is certainly outside the reasonable life of parish clergy, the damage done is but a thscratch when compared to deep wounds caused by the HOB and its leadership.
[blockquote]The conservative group he has gathered around himself will be traumatized, and I will ask two priests in the locale to minister to them.[/blockquote]
This is a rather peculiar statement. Is Malia actually a “conservative”? If so, why would the bishop mention this in his response unless he is trying to make a point?
Nonetheless, at least he is taking action.
Addendum,
Sorry, the bishop actually explains the relevance of Malia’s conservatism within his responses. He justly notes that, “Part of the surprise of all this is that he has a very conservative view of the Bible…”
Surprising indeed.
[i]”The last time I looked, Episcopalians are the highest main-line givers per capita, while Roman Catholics are the lowest.”[/i]
That’s cuz we’re all barefoot and pregnant..like your PB said.
My main reaction to this whole episode was to think of how hard it is to be an Episcopal Bishop.
I agree with you, Kendall, though as I look at this story through the lens of my years of work with the National Network of Episcopal Clergy Associations, I have to say that Bishop Marshall’s reactivity here, at least as reported, is somewhat troubling. One wonders whether there was a substantive pastoral intervention prior to the notice of suspension, for example. I certainly hope so. “Suspension” and a committee inquiry related to discipline are serious canonical matters and should only be employed when pastoral guidance breaks down or is deemed insufficient.
In the other article posted above in the strand Bishop Marshall talks about issues of Christian humility and stewardship, which I agree are critical to priestly ministry and ordination vows. But they are also subject to varied interpretations. A bishop or cardinal rector who takes his family on a six-week jaunt to the beaches of Southern France or who “frequents” the walnut-panelled lounge of the Union Club may spend as much or more money than the “nightclubbing” 30-something, and may drink as much or more. But the tabloids won’t be interested. Which may be what is driving this story.
In any case, again, I just hope that we are seeing only a partial view, and that Bishop Marshall’s goals here aren’t simply to turn off the bad publicity by hanging a young priest out to dry, but would be more to act as a teacher, pastor, and mentor, with a goal to enhance the “humility” and the “good stewardship” of all of God’s people.
Bruce Robison
And my interest was ow and why anyone could defend it. Priests are to held to higher standards than the rest of us, are they not? Moreover, there is deep in scripture and the entire western ethos the standard of self restraint and self discipline. If a priest cannot exercise either of those, as clearly this priest cannot, how can he be defended? More than that, have you ever seen anyone who gave himself over to such exhibitionism and self indulgence who demonstrated these qualities of character only in his handling of money? This is an issue of one’s entire character, not some piddling divigations on personality quirks. Now, mind you, I am assuming the news reports are accurate. L
Larry, I agree with you entirely that priests (and bishops) should be held to a higher standard, and I also agree that there are elements in the tabloid stories that, if accurate, would clearly cross the line. But what I am concerned with is reactivity. My suspicion is that what bishops are usually concerned about is not so much bad behavior as bad publicity. “Just don’t frighten the horses,” etc. It doesn’t appear to me that the young man in question is obviously guilty of any crime or specifically canonical offense, other than the all-encompassing “conduct unbecoming.” The question I have is whether there was appropriate episcopal pastoral care. Is Bishop Marshall familiar with his clergy? Does he communicate to the clergy and laity of his diocese both by word and example his godly vision of Christian conduct? And are we clear that there are not some generational and cultural issues involved? Is the issue of “spending a lot of money on frivolous recreational activities” clear both to youngsters who would run off to a disco and to those of a different generation who might, if financially able, drop similar amounts at a local golf or social club? Again, the tabloids are less interested in the latter than the former, but is that the only or even primary thermometer the church should be watching?
So: I think the behavior of the young priest in question is scandalous. I think his bishop and colleagues should form a community around him to let him know this in a clear and pastoral way. And if the scandal continues–well, then formal disciplinary actions would be necessary.
But again: I’d like the question about pastoral environment and leadership, clarity and equity, to be in the mix.
Bruce Robison
But, is support of my speculation, Bruce, see the entry above on this man surrounded by club girls. These are not virgins awaiting the arrival of a prince on a white horse, are they? How often does one see a man who indulges himself thoroughly in one vice but leaves all the other vices ungamed? I have never seen this happen except when the vice leave its guest so unmanned he can do nothing else. Father Malia is displaying a fundamental defect of character.
No, I don’t doubt that the episcopacy is worried as much about bad publicity as priestly purity. You are probably right enough here.
But I continue to be astonished that seniorpriest continues to defend what is patently indefensible. He cites in an entry above that he has seen priests engaged in all sorts of patently unsavory tastes and behavior. No doubt he has seen all this. But it is worse than nonsense to argue that, if we see many using marijuana, we should not condemn anyone who uses ot her drugs. Larry
Larry, I agree with you entirely. I certainly believe the priest in question should have the opportunity to speak in his own defense. But the photos and reports are pretty awful, and “everybody else does bad stuff” doesn’t fly.
I just hope that behind the scenes Bishop Marshall has turned to the processes of canonical discipline knowing in good conscience that his expectations of his clergy have been well and clearly communicated in a pastorally consistent way, and that appropriate informal intervention has been attempted and found insufficient.
BruceR