'I feel vindicated,' Rev. Lawlor says after jury finds him not guilty of assault

During a daylong trial Friday, there wasn’t much disagreement about whether a 74-year-old at St. Luke’s Episcopal Church was bumped by her pastor hard enough that she lost her balance.

But it took a Kalamazoo District Court jury less than 45 minutes to decide that the incident didn’t rise to the level of assault and battery. That cleared the Rev. Jay R. Lawlor of the misdemeanor charge.

“I’m very relieved,” Lawlor, 41, said of the not guilty verdict. “I feel vindicated.”

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Christian Life / Church Life, * Culture-Watch, Episcopal Church (TEC), Law & Legal Issues, Ministry of the Laity, Ministry of the Ordained, Parish Ministry, TEC Conflicts, TEC Parishes

9 comments on “'I feel vindicated,' Rev. Lawlor says after jury finds him not guilty of assault

  1. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    “Morrison testified that she confronted Lawlor after the service and told him that she found the changes to be “unconscionable.”

    Yet all concerned were aware that the bishop ordered the changes, so questions/comments about those should be directed to the “top”, not the middle man, even though the middle man was placed in a bad spot.

    And service/coffee hour are not the places for heated arguments.

  2. Catholic Mom says:

    See — just one more excellent reason why Catholics don’t have coffee hour after mass. Prevents fistfights and lawsuits. 🙂

  3. Teatime2 says:

    [blockquote]But Morrison also acknowledged during her testimony that she didn’t think the run-in was intentional. Rather, Lawlor was so upset “I don’t think he was thinking,” Morrison said.[/blockquote]

    So, then, why did she file the charges? To use a secular court to call attention to the parish issues, I guess. THAT is unconscionable.

  4. flaanglican says:

    This is a church in chaos. See [url=http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2011/03/post_125.html]http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2011/03/post_125.html[/url].

  5. flaanglican says:

    #3, see the article I linked above. That may glean some answers to your question.

  6. Sarah says:

    [blockquote]”During Lawlor’s 18-month tenure, more than 140 parishioners wrote to Lawlor, the bishop or the vestry about the rector. . . .

    Last fall, church leaders turned to the bishop for resolution and he called in an investigative team.

    But St. Luke’s had an ongoing dispute with the diocese over two matters — the church’s contribution toward diocese operations and the diocese’s requirement for using a certain health insurance plan for church employees — and that appeared to color the investigation.

    Last month, four members of the vestry met with diocesan officials. The group, which included Fritz, stressed what they saw as Lawlor’s ineffective leadership and pastoral care. Based on documents from the diocese, Lawlor and the diocesan officials focused more on the financial issues and the church’s battles with the diocese.[/blockquote]

    This is going on *all over TEC*. It’s an incredible meltdown and the real power struggle that’s rippling through diocese after diocese is the one between a failing and useless diocesan structure and parishes that have money.

    This same bishop swept in and did the same thing to the church in Grand Rapids.

  7. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    Who gets to define what is a “failing and useless diocesan structure”?

    I don’t attend the church in Grand Rapids, so I have no idea what happened there. If one wants to know, one could always ask both members and/or the bishop for their/his side of the story.

    It stands to reason that churches, clergy, and dioceses should be extremely careful in the search and election processes. While it is true that clergy should not be allowed to abuse churches, nor are bishops and clergy *boxer shorts* that churches can try on and toss to the floor if they don’t like them.

    It’s sad, and I realize it happens on both sides. I accidentally attended a church that had had 17 priests in 20 years. Conflict in that place(not to mention a couple of other toxic intangibles that I will not mention here) was a perverse form of member entertainment, and not the fault of the (some of them stellar) clergy that tried to pastor such a cesspool. Once all this came to light, I was THRILLED to leave.

  8. Sarah says:

    Hi Bookworm,

    RE: “Who gets to define what is a “failing and useless diocesan structure”?”

    I think it’s *what* and it’s the same as what defines any “failing and useless” organizational structure.

    In the case of an Episcopal diocese, one could start with the diocesan stats and proceed from there.

    Note that I did not use the ecclesial noun — ie, a bishop — but the *organizational structure* which is indeed failing, judging by *any* standard one might use to judge an organizational entity.

  9. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    “In the case of an Episcopal diocese, one could start with the diocesan stats and proceed from there”.

    Not a pretty picture in most dioceses, huh? Yuck…