Support the Café

Search our Site

A lead is not a story: more on the Bede Parry case

A lead is not a story: more on the Bede Parry case

A story has been making the rounds in the last few days that purports to demonstrate that Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori knew that the Bede Parry, a former Roman Catholic monk, had sexually abused minors and was likely to do so again when she received him as a priest into the Episcopal Church while she was serving as the Bishop of Nevada.

This claim is overblown. Rather, the story is one person’s recounting of a conversation he had with a second person in which the second person allegedly recounted a conversation he had with Bishop Jefferts Schori in which he allegedly informed her of Parry’s past. In a courtroom, this sort of information is hearsay, and inadmissible. In a newsroom, it is a lead—a darn good one, but still only a lead. Those familiar with journalistic standards would know that the information is not publishable, at least by mainstream religion reporters, until confirmed by the man who allegedly had the conversation with Bishop Jefferts Schori.

I am certain that if any mainstream reporters are following the Parry case, they have already deduced that Abbot Gregory Polan, the second man whom I referred to above, is an obvious person to interview. He was a monk at Conception Abbey during Parry’s tenure, and abbot by the time Parry was received into the Episcopal Church. He may be better able to answer the question of what the presiding bishop knew and when she knew it than anyone other than the presiding bishop herself. Either he has not been contacted (which I highly doubt); he is not talking; or he is not telling reporters what Patrick Marker, who has bravely brought material about sexual abuse within the Benedictine order to light, tells us that Abbot Polan told him.

Marker’s story can’t be accepted as factual until it is confirmed. But the existence of such a story, and the fact that it has gained traction with readers who have no ideological axes to grind, suggest that the presiding bishop will not be able to avoid speaking about this matter forever. And thanks to Mr. Marker, Abbot Polan may soon find himself in a similarly untenable position.

In Crisis Communications 101 (a course that exists entirely in my head) one is taught rules for governing the release of bad news: tell it yourself, tell it all, and tell it quickly. These rules apply with special force to organizations whose moral credibility is their stock in trade. I don’t know that the presiding bishop has bad news to deliver, but either way, she would be well advised to put the facts of the Parry case before us.

It is no surprise that the Episcopal Church’s ideological adversaries have been all over this issue. We at the Café find ourselves in the unusual position of believing that however overheated their rhetoric and under-sourced their stories, they may be doing the church a greater service in this matter, than the church is doing for itself.


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dan Jarvis

Dear sisters I have no desire to go round n round with you on this. I posted my comments and they were mine to say. we disagree; i accept that.

The Lord be with you.


…this case is not the typical “bad priest coverup” that some people would like it to be…

What is it then, Daniel? Why so many questions still unanswered by the PB?

Who are the “some” with the “indication of a superficial, legalistic trend”? Plus, I don’t understand what you mean by the words in quotes.

June Butler

Ann Fontaine

“Logical approach?” Logical would be no ordination – there are plenty of ways to minister without being ordained.

Dan Jarvis

Ann There has been no deposition. Parry resigned on his own accord and asked to be released from priestly duty. And the”no contact with minors”…a logical approach of covering all the bases. The presented evidence indicates to me that this case is not the typical “bad priest coverup” that some people would like it to be, but rather an indication of a superficial, legalistic trend among some.

Ann Fontaine

For Christianity, we have a belief in the power of the Spirit and the transformation in Jesus to change lives. The evidence in this case bears that out. This doesn’t happen as oft as we would like, we should be rejoicing in it and working towards reconciliation, forgiveness, and healing for all concerned.

Yes, forgiveness, but that does not mean one can be ordained as a priest. That should never have happened. One can amend one’s life and never do something again – but there are also things one can never do because of the original offense. The fact that the bishop put the restriction of no contact with children on Parry and that now he is deposed – tells me that he should never have been ordained. And – If he had truly amended his life and there was no worry – why the deposition?

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café