TEC Sidebar: Bp. Ousley and the Standing Committee of Wyoming speak
Transcripts for your convenience
Today Bp. Todd Ousley and the Standing Committee of Wyoming have released a series of videos discussing the motivation and process for Ousley’s nomination as provisional bishop of Wyoming. These videos are informative and worth watching if you have the time. I wanted to provide a transcript for convenience (no commentary) so that those who may not be able to sit down for the videos can still follow along.
1. Selecting a Provisional Bishop: The Episcopal Church in Wyoming's Journey
I'm the Rev. Camie Dewey, the rector of St Mark's Church in Casper and a member of Standing Committee. I was elected to standing committee in October 2023, just five days before the Title IV process began in this diocese. I come before you today to explain the process that started after the deposition of Paul-Gordon Chandler, that of finding an assisting bishop, a provisional bishop, and how we came to present Bishop Todd Ousley as the candidate for provisional bishop after the deposition and removal of our former bishop in late March 2024.
The work of the Standing Committee, in addition to becoming Ecclesiastical Authority, was to begin searching for bishop support. The steps for us were to first find an assisting bishop to come in and take care of the backlog of bishop-specific tasks that had piled up since our now-former bishop had been put on administrative leave. These included ordinations, confirmations, signing rector and priest-in-charge contracts, and a few other administrative things reserved for those persuaded and elected to wear purple shirts. The assisting bishop would carry on taking care of those bishop-specific tasks while the Standing Committee began and carried out a search for a provisional bishop candidate.
The Office of Pastoral Development at the Episcopal Church assisted the Standing committee with finding candidates for assisting bishop and ultimately presented a four-person pool in early May. It is the work of Standing Committee to interview and hire an assisting bishop, and this is done without a vote by Convention, as this person does not hold Ecclesiastical Authority. We interviewed all four candidates sent to us, including the Rt. Rev. Katharine Jefferts-Schori, over about a week. We then took some time to pray and discern both as a group and individually. After that time of prayer, it was quite clear that we had found the person in Bishop Katharine to see this diocese through the first stage of grief and shock and to bring a sense of unity to us as we navigated next steps. We extended the offer to Bishop Katharine in early June, and she graciously accepted.
When Bishop Katharine came on in July 2024, the Standing Committee began its next task of searching for bishop provisional candidates. A provisional bishop must be someone who is already ordained and consecrated as a bishop, who is retired or resigned from their position, who has not reached the mandatory retirement age of 72, who is in good standing with the church, and is willing to serve in a temporary position for 18 months to two years while a diocese searches for its next bishop diocesan.
The three bishops that the Standing Committee had interviewed for assisting bishop in addition to Bishop Katharine were all asked to consider continuing to discern whether they would serve as provisional bishop, as all were impressive candidates and were people we wanted to continue conversation with as we moved forward. Of those three, one person took another job; one discerned that they were not called to Wyoming for that extended period of time; and the other was interviewed but ultimately took a position in another diocese. The Standing Committee then went back to the Office of Pastoral Development for more candidates, and that officer went back to the drawing board and began calling bishops to see whether he could populate a new pool for us.
In the meantime, the new Presiding Bishop Sean Rowe was installed and announced his new staff. The Rt. Rev. Todd Ousley's position, which just so happened to be the officer in the Office of Pastoral Development, was being eliminated, and his tasks were being reassigned within Bishop Rowe’s staff, leaving Bishop Ousley available to seek other opportunities. The Standing Committee discussed the possibility of calling Bishop Ousley and unanimously voted to enter into to conversation with him and extend an offer to interview with us. Bishop Ousley took many days to pray, discern speak with his wife and family, speak with the Presiding Bishop and others in the Episcopal Church about this potential, and eventually decided that he was feeling positively about pursuing the role of provisional bishop here in the diocese of Wyoming.
The Standing Committee interviewed Bishop Ousley in early December and asked initial questions in areas we knew we would we knew would be concerning to many in the diocese after this initial conversation. The Standing Committee felt extremely positive in moving forward with him and invited Bishop Ousley to join the leadership in the diocese at their Confluence in January, which he did. At this Gathering he was able to answer direct questions and bring his calming and joyful presence to the room, which we hope alleviated many concerns among the leadership in the Committees who influenced the direction of the diocese.
The Standing Committee brings one candidate forward for affirmation by the delegations for a couple of reasons. One: bishops tend to not want to run against other bishops for positions like this. Two: the pool for provisional bishop is not particularly deep or wide, and to present a slate to the diocese is difficult and could eliminate future candidates should we need to tap into that resource. And three: the sole resolution we are allowed to present at this crucial and special convention is designed for us to really rally around one candidate and make a well-informed decision about one person who has been well vetted by the standing committee, the rest of the leadership of the diocese, and all of the delegations of the diocese, through question asking, prayer, and deep listening.
We look forward to seeing all of the delegations at the election on March 2nd and pray that this outline of the process answers your questions about how we came to this decision as a Standing Committee. Bishop Ousley's role in the Title IV case against Paul-Gordon Chandler is explained in another video, as is the canonical process for electing a provisional bishop and the upcoming timeline for this process, both of which should hopefully answer more of your burning questions. Thank you for your attention and God bless you, your congregation, and this incredible diocese of Wyoming.
2. Understanding the Canonical Process for Electing a Bishop Provisional
Hello, my name is Brian Knox and I've been given the honor to serve on the Standing Committee at our last convention. Let me tell you, it's been a busy and productive four months. Today I've been asked to explain the process according to canons for electing a bishop provisional and the timeline up to the convention.
First, what is a bishop provisional? A bishop provisional in the Episcopal Church is responsible for maintaining the diocese's episcopal authority while the diocesan bishop is unable to serve. Currently that authority is held by the Standing Committee. The duties of a bishop provisional include presiding over liturgies such as confirmations, receptions, visitations, and other liturgies. They will work with our governing bodies to include the Standing Committee, the Commission on Ministry, the Diocesan Council to ensure the diocese's legal and financial commitments are met, and they will also work with our Foundation. They will support the diocese by providing pastoral care and support for the clergy, leadership, and laity. They'll advise our leadership and they will represent the diocese in the House of Bishops and in the council of the Episcopal Church.
Second, what are the requirements in the canons for a bishop provisional? Well, here's a brief overview. Canon law states that the Standing Committee is tasked with selecting only one candidate who must have prior experience as a bishop, either being a retired bishop, or a bishop who has already served or is serving in another dicese. They must be under the mandatory retirement age for clergy, in good standing with the Episcopal Church, and willing to serve as a bishop provisional. Once the candidate is selected, the Standing Committee drafts a resolution putting forth that name which is then affirmed during the special convention.
Now some have asked, what is the length of service? Well, it is until the new diocesan bishop is elected and consecrated, or the provisional bishop resigns, or the Diocesan Convention revokes the provisional bishop's charge.
Our timeline started with the announcement of the nomination on January 1st. We planned it this way for several reasons, first of all, to mark a new year and a new chapter for the Diocese of Wyoming. We also planned it to have a special convention on Sunday March 2nd prior to Lent to be respectful of that religious season. There must be a minimum of 60 days from the announcement before a special convention can be held. We also knew that congregations would be holding their annual meeting during this time of year, so this would allow for congregations to select and confirm delegates for the 2025 year. The Standing Committee wanted the diocese to have a chance to get to know our candidate and also for Bishop Ousley to be aware of your topics of interest that you may have with his nomination, our current state as a diocese, and our future plans. We also took into consideration the time of year, so we planned these virtual public Forums on January 30th and February 8th so people could attend or later view the recording to allow for members to ask their questions based upon their concerns and for Bishop Ousley to answer them in his own words.
Once a nomination is announced, it is common to develop a transition committee to help discern components of the process. Our transition committee has been focused on reviewing the submitted questions to make sure that common topics can be combined and to make sure that all concerns have been addressed at our March 2nd special convention. The attendees will have an opportunity to speak, discuss, ask questions, and vote on the single resolution.
Our diocese has never experienced this type of transition, so a common question is, why is there only one candidate for a bishop provisional for this convention? This is what happens with a temporary bishop provisional convention. The delegates confirm the transfer of episcopal authority from the Standing Committee for a limited time period to the bishop provisional. With our assisting bishop Katharine, the Standing Committee hired the position, but the authority was never passed at the convention. The delegates will vote either yes or no to confirm the resolution of the Rt. Rev. Todd Ousley as our bishop provisional. If confirmed, the diocese will move forward with a ceremony to start the service of the bishop provisional, develop a search committee exploring candidates for our diocesan bishop, and a confirmation convention to elect the slate of nominees. If the resolution does not pass, then the Standing Committee will continue to serve with its authority and continue to search for a provisional candidate.
Our goal is to have a bishop provisional to guide our diocese for the search for a bishop diocesan over the next several months, and will also take on the roles and duties of the leadership and pastoral care of our diocese. I hope this has helped clarify the canonical process for electing bishops provisional, and timeline for the convention. Please check out our additional recordings on the diocesan website under Events > Special Convention, where the Standing Committee answers your questions on explaining the Standing Committee's process of searching for a temporary bishop, including assisting and provisional, from Spring of 2024 to December of 2024, and also what was the Rt. Rev. Bishop Todd Ousley's role during the Wyoming Title IV process, including our communications with the Episcopal Church and Presiding Bishop Rowe. Thank you and God bless.
3. Bishop Todd Ousley Addresses Perceptions of Conflict of Interest
Okay, welcome, Bishop Ousley. Will you an answer concerns about how there's a perceived conflict of interest with your role as bishop provisional, and how do you plan to minister to the diocese despite these perceptions?
Certainly, happy to respond to that Brian. As I understand it there is a perception that there's a conflict between the role that I played on behalf of the Presiding Bishop's office in the Title IV matter that unfolded in the diocese of Wyoming with your former bishop Paul-Gordon Chandler. The role that I played in the Presiding Bishop's office was one of pastoral support to the team of people who were charged with pursuing, gathering information, and investigating around Title IV, so I didn't actually have a role in the administration of the case, but rather in working for pastoral support of Bishop Chandler, his spouse, all of those affected by this: the complainant, complainant's family, as well as the diocese.
So I don't see a conflict of interest in this at all. Rather what I see is: I've had an opportunity to be engaged with the leadership in the diocese in a way that helps me to understand where people's hearts and minds are, and to have heard the kind of concerns that they had throughout the development of the Title IV process with your former bishop. So I think what that does, rather than create a conflict of interest: it actually means that I've got advanced knowledge about what's been going on. I have some experiences with the thoughts and the feelings that have been expressed in the diocese, and that enables me to enter in as bishop provisional in a way that has me more fully informed, and I don't have to go back and do a lot of gathering of information about what has transpired.
Having said that, though, a bishop provisional is one who works during an in-between time with the leadership and the people of a diocese. It's not a permanent position, but rather for a time to be determined. Normally it's anywhere from 12 to 18 months, up to 24, so it has a certain flexibility to it, and it is a moment in time when you need, as a diocese you need the partnership of a bishop, much like what you've had with Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori, but in this case more, closer to full-time, or a more robust presence, and more ongoing presence in the diocese of Wyoming. So a mark of this time is going to be a time of of deep listening, of really getting to know people, getting to know the challenges and the opportunities that are faced in the diocese. And so for us to be able to hit the ground running, as it were, without having to do a lot of catch up on what has transpired before, is going to be very important.
Having said that, though, a key part of any bishop provisional role — really of any leadership role within the church — is to listen. And so it's not like I'm going to come in and we will immediately start working on tasks and not listen to one another, but rather, there's going to be a time of getting to know each other, of understanding where we all are, the perspectives we have, and then working with what emerges during this time.
I'll loop back to the the original question about perceived conflict of interest. I'll reiterate for you that I don't think there is a conflict of interest, but rather, I come with some experiences but also with an open heart and an open mind to be present for you in the diocese of Wyoming. For me it's an honor to be invited by your Standing Committee to stand for affirmation as bishop provisional, and it will be a tremendous joy to be able to work through, work with you through a time where there's certainly some healing and some reconciliation that needs to be done. Thank you.
4. Bishop Todd Ousley’s Role in Title IV Processes Across The Episcopal Church
[Inaudible] that there are limits based upon confidentiality, please share your roles and involvement with the Title IV cases of Michigan, Virginia, Wyoming, and then your own Title IV case.
Certainly. Well, each of these has a different character to it. So I'll start with the first one you mentioned: the Dioceses of Eastern Michigan and Western Michigan, which are now known as the together as one diocese, the Diocese of the Great Lakes. I was involved with two different Title IV matters in the Dioceses of Eastern and Western Michigan.
The first was with Bishop Whayne Hougland, who was the bishop diocesan for Western Michigan and bishop provisional for Eastern Michigan, holding those roles simultaneously. At the time that I was involved with that, I was the Intake Officer for Title IV matters involving bishops. A report came to me that Bishop Hougland had been involved in an extramarital affair, and my role was to reach out to him and to assess his response and gather information, and then work as the Intake Officer to prepare a report that summarized the basic information about the case, and to work with that process with the Presiding Bishop and the President of the Disciplinary Board for Bishops. I called Bishop Hougland after consultation with the others on the team, the Reference Panel, the Presiding Bishop, the chair of the Disciplinary Board, and the Intake Officer; reached out to Bishop Hougland and, because I'd known him for a number of years and worked with him in the diocese in Michigan, he recognized that it was me calling, and his immediate response was that he had made a mistake. There was — I did not even have to say what it was that was on my mind; he knew what I was calling for. So in that matter, while it was very tragic and very complicated and many people across two dioceses as well as families affected by it, we had complete cooperation with Bishop Hougland in sharing everything that he had been involved in, in this inappropriate relationship.
And my role beyond the Intake Officer role was also to wear that pastoral hat. At the time I was wearing at least two hats on the Presiding Bishop's staff. One was pastoral support for those involved in Title IV, all those around and affected by it, as well as being a member of the Reference Panel as the Intake Officer: roles that can be in in conflict, and — I shouldn't say "can" be in conflict, but are readily and very quickly in conflict with one another, because you have a a regulatory judicial kind of role and you have a pastoral role to all of those within the system. It's a complexity that the church had struggled with for a number of years and had never fully resolved. It has since been resolved, that the roles have been separated. So in the role that I'm leaving on the Presiding Bishop staff, I've been wearing among some other non-Title IV hats the pastoral support role for for Bishops, for those who made complaints, all those around affected by it. And certainly the people within the diocese, that was a real conflict both internally and in terms of function in those two dioceses.
The next one, the Diocese of Virginia, I believe what we're referring to there are the concerns that were brought to my attention by Mr. Eric Bonetti, a lay person in the Diocese of Virginia, who is also now the the author and and publisher of a website called Anglican Watch, and he has had numerous things to say about me in my role, much of which is inaccurate and serves his own particular purposes in Title IV. But basically what happened in the Virginia case is that Mr. Bonetti had a complaint about behavior of the rector of the congregation that he attended. M. Bonetti had been a member of the vestry, and he was removed by the rector as a member of the vestry. He filed Title IV charges against the rector. Those went through the Diocese of Virginia Title IV process; there was no jurisdiction on the part of the Presiding Bishop's office nor any role for the Title IV Intake Officer for Bishops. It went through that process. His complaint was dismissed, and he was not satisfied with the result — not an uncommon situation in Title IV. When we get to Title IV cases, people have been hurt, and people are rarely going to be satisfied or fully satisfied with the outcome of those. So rather than continue through the diocese and process of appeal, and/or to accept the results of those appeals, he decided to file — he wanted to place a concern about the Bishop of Virginia, and so that came to me at the time in my role as Intake Officer.
I was working in concert with Presiding Bishop Michael Curry who really wanted Title IV as much as possible to be handled in a pastoral way, rather than to be handled in purely a judicial way. Whether that was right or wrong at that time, it was what Bishop Curry wanted, and it certainly was consistent with my feelings about Title IV: that most matters can be handled in a pastoral way. So my work was to try to get Mr. Bonetti to recognize that his concerns were really with the Diocese of Virginia and their process, not something that needed to be handled through the Title IV process with bishops. He did not accept that and and thus began a series of ongoing complaints, blog posts, pieces placed on AnglicanWatch.com that called my integrity into question, along with multiple other bishops and others who were in his sights. That was a a painful situation of course for him, for people in the diocese, and it drew me and drew the Presiding Bishop into those matters as well. Those have been resolved through the Title IV process and ultimately no charges were made against me or the Presiding Bishop in that matter.
The next that's probably some have read about on Anglican Watch or other media within the Episcopal Church and beyond is a matter in Michigan, so we'll go back there, to Bishop Prince Singh. Bishop Singh was the bishop provisional for Western Michigan and Eastern Michigan following Bishop Hougland. His ministry went along quite well for a number of months. He's well known as a healer, a reconciler, one who seeks peace, who reaches across bridges or reaches gulfs to bridge those gaps between people and relationships.
Before he became the bishop provisional, he also underwent a difficult time in his own family. He and his wife divorced. They have two adult children, and my knowledge was that they had reached an amicable divorce — amicable, but, yes, always painful. There was no indication of any kind of inappropriate behaviors within the marriage, or in his time as bishop, or in his time as as a parent to his two adult sons. Later as Bishop Singh, who was divorced and had been divorced for some time — when he revealed to his sons that he was entering into a new relationship, that created a period of unsettledness within the family that came to me and to Presiding Bishop Curry as a concern about his behavior, and it — for the first time identifications of his behavior as having been physically and emotionally abusive within the home, also some accusations about alcoholism, which — behavior that can result from alcoholism can be a Title IV matter, but alcoholism itself is an illness and something to be treated medically, and to be treated pastorally.
My assessment, and Bishop Curry's assessment at the time that the complaints came in, was that this was a family matter — that what we were seeing was the unsettledness within the family, ongoing hurt that the sons were feeling because their father was moving on with a new relationship in his life, and we saw it as something that needed to be dealt with internally, pastorally, and therapeutically. And my role could be to support their work in in seeking that kind of healing within the family. Bishop Curry made a promise to Bishop Singh's former spouse Roja that I would reach out to her and to the boys to provide some pastoral care, and to follow up on what their needs might be in the midst of this. There began to be a number of accusations flying back and forth, and things escalated within the family, and I determined based on my pastoral experience and my previous experience as a therapist that to intervene in an internal family matter that needed to be dealt with within the family would actually exacerbate the problem and create some triangulation, and do nothing to really help resolve the internal family matters that they had.
As time went on, it became apparent that trying to handle this pastorally and trying to deal with it as an internal family matter was not acceptable to the Singh family, and so Title IV charges were filed against me and against Bishop Curry for failure to respond appropriately, pastorally, and to follow a very narrow reading of the Intake Officer's role: to always write a report. I would contend that, and will continue to contend, that the Intake Officer must have pastoral discretion to to deal with these matters early on in a pastoral matter, or go straight to the report and a judicial handling. We live in a time where conflict is high. The need for healing and reconciliation has increased, and tolerance for handling things in a pastoral way is much less than than they were in the past.
One of the learnings I've had in this is that still you need to try the pastoral approach, but if that is not getting traction or success early on, inevitably you'll need to go to the more judicial approach so that you can help keep the conflict lower and respond to what the multiple and different expectations there are around the church. That matter has been resolved against Bishop Curry and me. I have undertaken and completed, just this last week, some continuing education in Title IV and in the role of an Intake Officer, and I found it to be very helpful. There were reminders of things that I knew; there were highlights about some of the new aspects of Title IV that were passed at General Convention this past summer, so was helpful to get that kind of update and training; and it's always good to revisit something even when you've got experience with it and you feel as if you're you're competent and qualified to do that work.
The other is that I was expected, and I did this voluntarily — expected to write a letter of apology to Dr. Singh and her two sons for any hurt that I may have caused and for continuing — possibly continuing to leave them in a place of deep pain and lack of healing and reconciliation. I've done that. That apology was accepted by the Presiding Bishop and his staff, appropriate Title IV staff, and that has been forwarded to Dr. Singh and to her two sons. So that matter is is closed as well.
So in regard to the Title IV matter in Wyoming with Paul Gordon-Chandler: I was no longer the Intake Officer when a concern, allegations against Bishop Chandler came forward. Rather, I was in a role that was emerging, where I was just wearing a pastoral support hat rather than gathering information to go into an intake report. I also was no longer a member of the Reference Panel but rather acting on their behalf in pastoral support to Bishop Chandler, to his wife Lynn, to the complainant, to the person who was the recipient of the alleged inappropriate behavior, as well as to the leadership in the diocese of Wyoming. I want to point out that it was early in the church figuring out how to separate the the role of Intake Officer and the role of pastoral support, and we were still learning how to do that in this case. So what I had is, in church language, around the respondent, the bishop, respondent family, and others around the respondant; the complainant and complainant family, the individual that Bishop Chandler was alleged to been in a relationship with, and then the leadership in the diocese that that needed support and some guidance as they navigated — and that's the Standing Committee primarily — as they navigated what it was like to keep the diocese of Wyoming running in the absence of the bishop, because Bishop Chandler was placed on restriction on ministry and administrative leave. So my role was was complicated to try to minister to various people within the system and within the particular issues around the complaint, some of which wouldn't necessarily trust me or anyone providing this kind of support, or offering the support who was also providing that support to other players within the system.
We've since learned we've got to parcel out the Pastoral support to multiple people, so that there is more effective support and care for the various parties involved, but at that time, my role was to try to balance all of those. Quickly we got some pastoral support for the complainant and for the respondent for Bishop Chandler, and the person presenting the concerns. Lynn Chandler did not express a real desire for me to reach out to her. Now, when I pushed it, to be able to to speak with her, I was told that it was too little too late, and I regret that, that that was the perception. I also know that for me to have a role within the system to work with her would have been likely very painful and unlikely to be particularly helpful to her, because I was working for the people who were bringing the case of the concern around the allegations against the bishop. So most of my work was with the Standing Committee and in helping them navigate particular issues that developed, and to plan toward the future in the event that Bishop Chandler did not return to his office.
Ultimately what happened in the Title IV is an Accord was signed between the Presiding Bishop — in this case, actually, the Presiding Bishop-designate. Bishop Curry, due to some medical issues, had withdrawn from the role and Bishop Mary Gray-Reeves was in that, functioning in that role. So it was an Accord, or a settlement, agreement between Bishop Chandler and the Presiding Bishop-designate that was done after Church Attorney and Bishop Chandler's attorney received information from Investigation and Report with significant information that informed all of them, their perspective on what was transpiring, what had transpired, and what the likely outcome was in the future. And that settlement agreement, or Accord, that was reached was for Bishop Chandler to be deposed, which meant that he would no longer function as a bishop or have that status within the Episcopal Church. That effectively meant as well that the Standing Committee now held Ecclesiastical Authority, functioning in many of the roles of a bishop and needing to work with with a bishop for those that specifically required a bishop. And I assisted the Standing Committee to make contact with Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori and for a negotiated relationship for her as bishop assisting in the diocese. She's been doing that for a number of months, and now there's an anticipation of moving from a very part-time bishop assisting into something closer to a full-time, or perhaps full-time role with the bishop provisional. That's been my role. So once again, in this particular matter, it's given me some insights into the pain that has been experienced all around for everyone, the Chandlers, the complainant and family, and within the diocese, and so I bring those experiences in as a result of having had that pastoral support role. Thank you.
5. Bishop Todd Ousley’s Role in Wyoming’s Title IV Process: A Standing Committee Perspective
I'm Mary Beth Evers, a member of the Standing Committee. This is my third year on the Standing Committee. In answer to some questions regarding Bishop Ousley's role during Wyoming's Title IV experience, I'd like to share some information to provide more clarity.
I'll start with a review of the Title IV process. When a complaint is filed with the Presiding Bishop's Office, as it was in October of 2023, it's sent to the Intake Officer. In cases involving a bishop, an Intake Officer is assigned by the Presiding Bishop. The Intake Officer's responsibility is to prepare a summary report of the complaint, which is then sent to the Reference Panel. After thorough study of the intake report, the Reference Panel then determines how and where to refer the report.
Now let's look specifically at Wyoming's Title IV experience and Bishop Ousley's involvement. Bishop Ousley worked in the Presiding Bishop's Office for seven years. During his tenure in that office, he served as an Intake Officer and also as a bishop of pastoral care. So in October of 2023 when a complaint was filed against Paul-Gordon Chandler, Bishop Ousley was the bishop of pastoral care for Title IV. In this role, Bishop Ousley was responsible for providing pastoral care and support to all parties involved: the Chandlers, the complainant and family, the recipient of alleged behavior, and the leadership of the diocese in Wyoming, which in the absence of a bishop was the Standing Committee. It was in this capacity as bishop of pastoral care that Bishop Ousley served our diocese. Due to strict confidentiality to protect the dignity of all involved, I can only speak to our experience with him on the Standing Committee.
In our first Zoom meeting, two aspects became very evident. Bishop Ousley had compassion and understanding of the deep pain all parties were experiencing: this remained apparent throughout all our meetings. Secondly, his experience in Title IV procedures was extremely helpful to us and Standing Committee as our diocese lived in that uncertain and challenging time period of an information void, when no no one knew how long the administrative leave would last, what to do in the meantime, what were the best ways to move forward with future plans. Bishop Ousley had wide clergy networks and helped as we looked for possibilities to fulfill the duties requiring a bishop as we waited, and again when the search for an assistant bishop began. He was masterful, balancing support and guidance through his understanding of the Wyoming diocese and our needs. Bishop Ousley played an instrumental role in Bishop Katharine walking alongside us as assisting bishop, for which we are so grateful.
Bishop Ousley was also able to refer us to others in the Presiding Bishop's Office as resources over the course of this last year and a half. We've been able to talk with Mary Gray-Reeves, who served as the Presiding Bishop-designate during Bishop Curry's health issues, with the chancellor for the Presiding Bishop Office and others who have provided good advice and information to us as a Standing Committee member.
I've seen and heard Bishop Ousley act in pastoral manner. He's a very good listener and has been a huge help to our diocese. Thank you all for your interest in this election, your involvement in our diocese, and for your prayers for our body here in the wonderful diocese of Wyoming. I encourage you to hear Bishop Ousley himself in the public question-and-answer sessions that will take place this Thursday, January 30th at 6:30 and again Saturday, March 8th at 2 o'clock. God's peace to you all.
6. Lessons from Personal Title IV Experience: Bishop Todd Ousley Reflects
Bishop Ousley, what have you learned from your own experiences overseeing Title IV investigations, including your own experience in your investigation, and then secondly, how will that impact how you respond to Title IV complaints, should they arise while you're serving as bishop provisional in Wyoming? And the last part of this, which I can repeat if you need me to: what counsel and support would you provide to the person bringing the complaint, as well as the person the complaint is against?
Mary Beth, will you repeat that from the top?
Yes and if you want, can stop before that last one, and then after you answer that.
No, I think I've got that one, so if you'll just repeat the first part.
You bet. What have you learned from your own experience overseeing Title IV investigations, including your experience being the subject of a Title IV investigation? And then, how will you, or how will that impact how you respond to Title IV complaints, should they arise while you're serving in Wyoming as a bishop provisional?
Okay, thank you. My experience as a Title IV Intake Officer for matters involving bishops really focused my my understandings of Title IV. While I had multiple other tasks in my role as bishop for pastoral development, there a significant, significant part of the work was around Title IV, and most of my friends and colleagues in the House of Bishops will say things like: "thank you, we're so glad that you're willing to do that," which is another way of saying, we are so thankful we don't have to."
Title IV sometimes gets characterized as the the underbelly, the dark side of the church; and it's certainly true that Title IV can be a moment where you're having to deal with some really difficult matters. But what I found to be fulfilling about that work, which is somewhat odd kind of thing to say, is that the focus of Title IV is really captured in the very opening statements of Title IV in the canons of the church. And it lays out what it's intended to be. And it, basically I'm just going to paraphrase: it says that all Christians by nature, by virtue of our baptism, are called to be in right relationship, and when things are broken to strive to to heal that brokenness; and that the aim of Title IV is reconciliation, healing, amendment of life, justice — healing kinds of actions, reconciling kinds of actions. It's a beautiful statement that says, despite our lofty goals as Christians, we're human and we're going to fail. And Title IV is the church's way of saying, we're going to take these goals, these aspirational goals, so seriously that we are going to create mechanisms to help us right the ship when we're sinking — to bridge that gulf when we're separated, to really live into our vocation to be ministers of reconciliation and healing. So it's a real honor to be involved in that, in spending the better part of of seven years doing that work in a focused sort of way — really gave me an opportunity to see how important it is for the church to take seriously those roles. And I got an opportunity to do things on a regular basis in reconciliation and healing that others don't get to practice as regularly and as often, in such clear kinds of ways.
Now did it all go perfectly? Certainly not. Were there situations where parties could just not be brought together? Certainly. Did I make some mistakes along the way? Absolutely, we all have human failings. But what I learned is the power of taking every situation, with unique individuals and in unique communities, affected by misguided or inappropriate behavior — to take all of that and to treat each situation as its own unique possibility for reconciliation and healing. There is no one formula to make this happen. You got different people coming together, different expectations, different circumstances, different effects, deep effects, sometimes painful but fairly surface effects. It's a whole big complicated human mix and mess, and that's just how life is, so it's been an honor to do that. And what it's done is not only reinforced for me the importance of actively pursuing reconciliation and healing, but also that we've got to do it in a way that's meaningful to the people that you're sitting down at table with. You can't do things in Wyoming exactly the way you do things in Michigan. You can't do things in New York the same way you do them in California or Texas or Mississippi or Florida or Montana or Wyoming, or anywhere, because we're all beautiful children of God who occasionally get sideways with one another and sideways with ourselves. So it it's been a gift to do that.
So I've learned a lot about myself, and I've learned a lot about what's really important within the church. I've also learned that as a human institution trying to do God's work, the church — it wasn't a new revelation, but it's been reinforced — the church is not perfect either. We give it our best shot and sometimes our best shot just isn't enough, and sometimes in spite of our failings God works with that, and really wonderful healing things happen.
Some practical pieces that I've learned: it's very easy to get wrapped up in a Title IV matter, a matter where there's a separation between people and/or communities — to get so wrapped up in that, that we go to the canons in the black and white, and we focus on doing step one and step two and if two doesn't work what is three, A or B, what are the options, and if that doesn't work — and just following deadlines and guidelines about how to do this. Those are all really important and very critical, but there's also a human and pastoral dimension. So as as a bishop working in Wyoming where it's possible that we will have some Title IV matters that come to us, my goal is to engage the community that is the diocese more fully, so that it's not just the bishop and the Intake Officer and the president of the disciplinary board with a little bit of help from the chancellor or others who might get involved, but to know that we need to have a robust program of intake, and to be intentional to look at what the needs are. And I want to discuss this with the leadership in Wyoming, but for now what I can say I would bring to that conversation is: who do we have as Intake Officers today? Do we have a man, do we have a woman, do we have lay persons, do we have ordained, do we have the possibility of a deacon who can work with deacons or priest with priests? Do we have the fullness? What about our indigenous communities? Are they represented? Is their voice present in the disciplinary structures of the diocese? And then alongside that kind of attention to a more holistic approach, also to begin to develop a pastoral care and pastoral support team, so that when something develops we're prepared to respond immediately, and not have to scramble and spend an inordinate amount of time trying to get the resources in place.
My experience in Wyoming has been that people are eager to help, that people are very good listeners, that you've got your ear to the ground about what's going on, and I think we're going to find we've got lots of folks who will be willing and and anxious to be a part of this kind of healing and reconciling ministry within the diocese. Thank you.
7. Reconciliation and Healing: Bishop Todd Ousley's Vision for Wyoming
Bishop, could you share your meaning of reconciliation? How do you see yourself being able to bring that healing and reconciliation for the diocese of Wyoming, particularly, how you will bring your spiritual approach?
Thank you Brian. The word reconciliation, and the concept of reconciliation, is at the very heart of Christian ministry. It's, if you go to the outline of the faith in the Book of Common Prayer, the Catechism, you'll see words about reconciliation. You see it peppered throughout the liturgies; we even have a liturgy, a sacrament, the Reconciliation of a Penitent, more colloquially known as confession.
Reconciliation is a mashup, really, of multiple concepts and multiple words. "Re" means again, and "conciliation" means together, so it's to bring things together again. It's about those things which were separated, having the separation, the gap between them being close, so that they're once again in relationship with one another. So reconciliation is about healing. It's about relationships. It's about finding something again that has been lost. It's about coming together as people and as community and listening to one another, and openly wrestling with what it is that has separated you, so that you can close those gaps. It's what we're called to with God: to be reconciled to ourselves, to one another, and to God. Another way of looking at it is to say that we're all beset by sin: sin as separation, and reconciliation is that process and those acts of bringing things back together again.
The reconciliation and healing have been an active part of my ministry for many, many years. When I was called to be the rector of St. Francis Episcopal Church in Temple, Texas, I entered a community that had been founded by medical professionals, and even at that time the bulk of the congregation was doctor, nurse, therapist, somehow related to the medical profession and to the healing arts. And so coming into that parish, one of the things that I did is, I looked at worship bulletins that they'd utilized over the previous year or so to get a a feel for the flavor of their worship — not to impose my own notion but to see how they did things at St Francis. And the selection of bulletins I was given for Sunday mornings all contained healing prayers and laying on of hands for healing. So I got there, asked a few questions, and I thought, this is perfect, this is a place with medical and healing types; of course we should be doing healing prayers. So I was very excited about that.
It didn't take long to find out that people — there were two things: one is, people loved it, and that there were people within the community who would come to St. Francis because we were the only church of any kind in town that had healing prayers. Every time we gathered for worship, Sunday mornings or weekday gatherings, always had healing prayers. I also found out that they had done the healing prayers on a seasonal basis, and I'd been given the bulletins from that one season. It wasn't a part of their every day, every time they worshipped character, but it became that while I was there. And what I learned in that, and had it more deeply embedded within me, is that reconciliation and healing are part and parcel of everything that we do as Christians, and whether that's in a formal rite or formal prayers, or whether it's just in the language we use with one another, that it's critical that we're attentive to that.
In the case of Wyoming, this is a diocese who's gone through some trauma, some deep trauma, some broken relationships, some misunderstandings, and a lack of transparency from the wider church on what has happened. And so I think that brings us together in a moment where the experiences that I've had and the values that I hold around healing and reconciliation can be utilized in every interaction that we have.
Let me just simplify that a bit, because healing and reconciliation in the church can really be lifted up to a place of high theological notions and abstract kinds of ideas. They can be also be reduced to regular sacramental acts or to certain words and formula. I'd like to step back from that and say that all of that is good, and those are tools that we can utilize within the church, but at the heart of it, healing and reconciliation is people and groups getting together, getting to to know one another, listening to each other, and discovering for the first time and discovering again who we all are. I get to know who who you are, you get to know who I am, we can scratch our heads and wonder why we're the way we are, why why we feel the way we do, or speak in the way that we do; and with an atmosphere of healing and reconciliation, we're continually driven to to be curious and to express our curiosity by listening, by asking gentle questions of clarification, and, in the the words attributed to St. Francis, to not so much seek to be understood as to understand. If I try to be understood, I'm trying to force myself on you. If I try to understand ,I'm listening to you and checking things out, and it's through that dance of understanding, of consoling, of healing, that we can be more fully the people that God has called us to be.
At the heart of my spirituality, really, is a confluence of of three things. One is the the Psalter. For all of my adult life, I have regularly gone to the Psalms, sometimes in a very disciplined way — you know, starting with the first Psalm and sing two or three or four and then moving on, and the next day picking up some more; and sometimes just opening the Book of Common Prayer to the Psalter and starting to read randomly, selecting, because what I find in that is: the Psalter captures the cry of people who yearn for closeness with one another and a closeness to to their God. Whether that is in an understanding of the Old Testament God or a New Testament God — because they're both the same — whether it's who we access through the One that we attribute as Jesus in the Psalms, or if it's just those people who are saying, "why O God, why is this happening to me?" It's a place that that feeds me and calms me and and helps me to be in that position of listening and understanding what God has to say and what my the folks in my community have to say. So there's the Psalter.
Another bit of my spirituality comes in is, it's Benedict — following the, not rigidly following the Rule of St Benedict, but seeing it as aspirational. But in particular looking at what Benedict has to say about three values, and that is: stability, obedience, and fidelity. Stability, obedience, and fidelity. Stability in the purest sense from Benedict is about rooting yourself in a place. Now I'm being invited to root myself in Wyoming, which means I uproot part of myself from Michigan, where I currently live and have for about the last quarter of a century, so a strict Benedict would probably scratch his or her head and wonder, how can you uproot and be rooted? For me, it's about coming in and occupying the land with you, becoming one with you and Wyoming, to understand who you are and and how we can be together. So I've got to learn about how the winds blow, and how the winds seemingly don't cease! I've got to learn about mountains that are between point A and point B, rather than just some hills or flatlands like I experienced in Michigan. But to root myself with you, that's that stability that's needed.
The fidelity is to be faithful, to be faithful to who I am to be faithful to, who you are, and together for us to be faithful to God. And I — those practices are in the the common everyday conversations, and also in our shared common prayer, through the Book of Common Prayer and and like resources.
And then finally, obedience. Obedience is about a a disciplined life. It's about recognizing that we make vows of obedience, whether those are our baptismal vows, or their vows as a deacon, a priest, a bishop; vows as a a Christian educator, vows as a school administrator, vows as a good neighbor. It's about being obedient to those core values of who we are and holding one another in discipline to that continued obedience. So how does that work out on a practical everyday kind of way? Well, obedience for me means that if you think I'm doing something something that I ought not be doing, hold me accountable. Talk to me about it. Let's work together through it, and I'll do the same with you, not in a spirit of judgment or a spirit of retribution, but rather in the spirit of understanding, of being faithful to the vows that we have taken, and to root ourselves in stability and the community that we treasure: the diocese and the people of Wyoming. Thank you.