Support the Café

Search our Site

More on the Maryland timeline

More on the Maryland timeline

The Baltimore Brew has fleshed out some of the details behind the timeline first published by the Diocese of Maryland yesterday concerning the election and subsequent actions of Bishop Heather Cook. Cook has been indicted on charges including vehicular homicide and others in the death of Thomas Palermo in December. The timeline included the report that Bishop Sutton had suspected at a dinner held two days before the consecration service that then Bishop-elect Cook was inebriated. He conveyed his concerns to the Presiding Bishop the next day. The Brew quotes diocesan spokeswoman, Sharon Tillman.

“It was a private dinner at a restaurant on September 4″ in Baltimore, Sharon Tillman, the diocesan spokeswoman, told The Brew today. “It was a spouses kind of thing.”

In attendance, Tillman said, were Sutton and his wife; Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop of the national Episcopal Church, and her husband; and Heather Cook and her “steady companion,” defrocked Episcopal priest Mark Hansen.

The timeline has been updated since it originally appeared on the diocesan website yesterday to clarify the sequence of events between the dinner and the consecration service.

 September: Bishop Sutton suspects that Cook is inebriated during pre-consecration a private dinner two days before the consecration and conveys concern to Presiding Bishop before rehearsal the next morning, one day before the consecration. Presiding Bishop indicates she will discuss with Cook. Cook consecrated a bishop.

The Brew characterizes the timeline as

an opportunity to rephrase and reframe a much-criticized earlier statement about the December 27 crash that killed Palermo and left Cook facing multiple charges, including manslaughter, drunk driving and leaving the scene of a fatal accident.

But their report also alleges discrepancies between the timeline published and comments made by Bishop Sutton at a meeting at Holy Comforter Church in Lutherville on January 15.

In response to questions from the audience, Sutton said he had no indication that Cook had a drinking problem. Asked specifically if he had knowledge prior to December 27 that Cook was an alcoholic, Sutton said, “The reality is that we had zero indication.”

Pressed some more, he said, “Was she an alcoholic? In the process that was never said to us, although questions were asked.”

Asked again if he had personal knowledge of her drinking problem, Sutton said, “I had no evidence,” explaining that Cook’s 2010 DUI was handled by the Easton Diocese, where she then served as canon ordinary to Bishop James J. “Bud” Shand.

Based on a conversation Sutton said he had with Shand and others, “What we were informed was that there was no problem. . . No indication that she was alcoholic. That this [the DUI] was a one-time event.”

Sutton never brought up the September 4 dinner with Cook, or his suspicions of her inebriation, at the Lutherville church meeting.

The details of any conversation that Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori’s might have had with Cook are unknown. Jefferts Schori told the paper through a spokesperson that

it would “not be appropriate” to comment on the Maryland diocese’s timeline pending completion of the church’s Title IV disciplinary investigation of Cook.

The section of the diocesan website dedicated to news about the Cook case includes details of the fund set up to benefit Palermo’s children, and prayers for use in times of conflict, for victims of addiction, for those who mourn Tom Palermo, and for Heather Cook.

Posted by Rosalind Hughes


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
kaatherine damitz

I find it interesting that a person whose “constant companion” is a defrocked ( and why ?) Episcopal priest would be elected Bishop. This was apparently no secret as they were at the dinner with others.

Nick Porter

John, those priest were not attempting to remove their parish from the Episcopal Church, they were trying to obtain DEPO status, something that the majority of bishops have graciously given.

John Chilton

Thank you, Nicole.

John Chilton

Regarding priest who was deposed:

He is among the Connecticut clergy who were deposed for attempting to remove their churches from the Episcopal Church. Perhaps the irony is not lost on Cook’s steady companion, Mark Hansen, that he objected to the consecration of Gene Robinson because of his sexual orientation.

Kirk Kubicek

Asking her to resign is strange given the progression of things. We have been told repeatedly that the Title IV investigation needs to conclude before she can be taken off administrative leave. Not to mention there has never been a time when she has needed resources and benefits to remain in rehab than now. As no expert in Canon Law, my understanding is that the protocol remains in the House of Bishops – ie that is where she needs to resign. Bishop Sutton and the crisis management team have conceded that she is under the authority of the Presiding Bishop, not the Diocese of Maryland. So I am not sure that the action of the Standing Committee is even appropriate. I don’t know that it is defiance that hinders a resignation, but rather necessity, church law and protocol that constrains it. Others wiser in such things than I am may be able to sort that out.

Randall Stewart

FYI: Cook indicted by a Grand Jury today. Arraignment on March 6, I think.

Frankie Andreu

Randall, has Bishop Cook resigned yet? Or is she defying Bishop Sutton and the Standing Committee?

Scott Slater

Not experiencing her drinking is different from suspecting that she had already been drinking prior to her arrival at dinner. Suspecting implies lack of evidence.

Samuel Knopf

Yes he should. For the good of everyone. Trust is shattered.

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