TEC Sidebar: Bp. Ousley's Second Public Forum
Bp. Ousley answers more questions from the Episcopal Church in Wyoming; transcripts for convenience.
On February 8, Bp. Todd Ousley participated in a second Q&A with the diocese of Wyoming over his nomination as provisional bishop. This followed the Standing Committee of the diocese publishing several videos about how they came to select Bp. Ousley as their nominee and where Bp. Ousley addressed concerns about conflicts of interest and his previous Title IV responses as Intake Officer, and a first Q&A held on January 30.
Below is a transcript (without commentary) of the Q&A for your reading convenience. According to the description of the YouTube video, this session includes questions on:
Bishop Ousley’s most challenging and blessed ministry experiences
Outreach strategies for diverse cultural communities in Wyoming
The bishop provisional’s role in the Wyoming Episcopal Church Foundation
The importance of ecumenical partnerships in today’s church landscape
Music, liturgy, and Indigenous reconciliation in the diocese
Clarifications on Title IV, transparency, and reconciliation efforts
Supporting marginalized communities in today’s political climate
The evolving role of deacons and Eucharistic practices
Bishop Ousley’s vision for a smooth diocesan transition
Good afternoon everyone, welcome. Mary Beth, we'll go ahead and start off with your introduction.
Okay, thank you all for attending our public forum today to ask your questions to our Bishop provisional candidate, the Rt. Rev. Todd Ousley. Welcome again Reverend Ousley. Before we begin, we want to remind you that our previous public forum session, along with our prior recordings, are available on the diocesan website. You can find them under the Events tab, and click on Special Convention; and the questions being asked today are different from the last session. Before we begin, let us pray. God of wisdom and love: open our spirits and hearts to your guiding voice of wisdom. Deepen our faith in you as we remember and give thanks for your unfailing love, supplying our needs. Help us to be obedient to your voice and to have faith that you provide all that is necessary for us to do your will. In the name of your Son we ask this. Amen.
Amen. Thank you, Mary Beth. We have a number of questions to ask and we may not get to all of them today. If we are not able to ask all of the questions, our plan is to then have Bishop Ousley record a session that will be posted on the diocesan website, but we'll definitely do our best, so, let's go ahead and get to those questions.
Welcome, Reverend Ousley. We appreciate you taking the time this afternoon to continue our conversation. This event is being recorded and will be posted on the diocesan web page under the Events tab > Special Convention. Mary Beth we'll let you start with the first question to say — we've lost Mary Beth — there she is. Sorry about that.
All right, let's get to my questions here. Bishop Ousley, will you share with us your most blessed ministry experience?
Gosh, there are so many. But I think I want to go back to an experience I had as a parish priest the the last parish that I served. There was a woman who joined the congregation who had recently been released from women's prison in Texas, and she became very involved in the congregation and was very interested in the congregation's healing ministry. We laid hands on and prayed for healing in every public service that we had, so it was a unique niche within in the the spiritual community. I got to know somebody that was way outside my experience. She had been convicted of a very serious crime and had been in prison for about 20 years, and so getting to know somebody who came from a very different life experience, very different kind of challenges that she had had in life, was very stretching for me and gave me an opportunity to really look inside myself and discover the depth of commitment that I had, and the congregation that I was serving and embracing all aspects of healing and reconciliation. And I will always be grateful to Eva for what she taught me about God's grace about forgiveness, and the opportunity to be in relationship with somebody who was unexpected and very different from me, and stretched me in so many ways. I think that, really, Mary Beth, that's the situation that sticks with me the most clearly over time. Thank you.
Well, Bishop, share with us, if you would, your most challenging time in ministry.
Hmm. Most challenging time. When I was a diocesan bishop in Eastern Michigan, had had a situation with a congregation that had had a series of troubled relationships with rectors, really going back almost a hundred years, and certainly within the the clear memory of the whole congregation, even the oldest parishioners there. And they were very insistent about calling a particular person to be their to be their rector. My sense was that it was not a good match for the congregation, and not a good match for the priests, but they were very insistent. So I reluctantly agreed with them that he could be in the pool of people that they would choose to call. They did so, and I had to bite off feelings fairly quickly of a notion that "I told you so," because things did not go well. So what what ended up happening, because of course I couldn't say "I told you so;" but what did happen is that we entered a period of probably a good year to two years of the leadership in the congregation being very upset that things had not worked out — wanting me to fix something that really had not been solely my doing. And we had to work on the relationship where there was a gap between our understandings of one another and our ability to work together. That was a very intense time of not only working with the priest, who ultimately had to leave the position, but working with the leadership to get to a point where our relationship was restored in such a way that we could hear each other, listen to what one another was thinking, and begin to embrace together hopes and dreams for the congregation in the future. That was a a very trying time. But it was also a time of growing to to learn how to listen in new ways, and to experience the surprises of new insights and new possibilities. I don't want to have more experiences like that, but it's to be expected that there will be gaps between self-understanding, and it means that we have to work on the relationship. Thanks, Brian, good question.
Our state is largely Euro-American in demographics, yet we're also rich in diversity with Arapaho and Shoshone indigenous peoples. We're also growing in the Hispanic population numbers, especially in our Northwestern corner of the state. Do you have some ideas for quality outreach that will welcome diverse culture into our Episcopal churches here?
Certainly. One of the things that I found both in my parish ministry but also in diocesan ministries is that a first step is for us to work together, bishop and congregation, leadership, to discover what is happening in your own neighborhood — to take a real close examination about, who are the people who are there? What are the challenges that people are experiencing? And what do the statistics around demographics tell us about what kind of movement is happening economically, ethnically, and other kinds of diversity? And then to to really take a deep look inside ourselves as congregational or regional leadership to determine how God is calling us to respond to a particular shift in the context. It may be related to a growth of young people, a loss of young people, aging population, different ethnic groups, or different kinds of pinches or stressors that are occurring; but to really look at those and see where we see a match between existing congregations and what's changing — where do we see gaps? — and to explore together how we might be able to respond. The opportunities are endless, and the specifics are going to be very contextual, but deserve a close examination and a serious kind of prayerful stretching about our own boundaries and our own possibilities. Thanks, Mary Beth.
Bishop, what role do you see as a bishop provisional that you will have with the Wyoming Episcopal Church Foundation?
Certainly something that will need to be negotiated with Standing Committee, with the Foundation as well. My understanding is that, at least in the past when there was a bishop diocesan in place, the bishop diocesan had a particular role within the Foundation. I also know that the Foundation and other leadership structures are examining how those are lived out within your culture. So I want to learn more about what the specific expectations are, what the historical expectations have been, and then to fit in in a way that is not about assuming power or authority, but moving into a role of walking alongside the Foundation as it does its own continued discovery and reappropriation of its role within the life of the diocese of Wyoming. There's a tremendous opportunity, always within leadership structures and organizations like the Foundation or Standing Committee or Council, to take stock of self and what the particular role is in relationships across the different organizations. And I think my role is primarily to be a coach, a consultant to help you all discover together what your relationship needs to be today, and what it is in the future. As provisional, I clearly would have some role for you all — you may imagine something different than what's happened in the past with bishops, and I'm ready to explore that with you all. Thanks, Brian.
Bishop Ousley, do you feel it's necessary for the Episcopal denomination to move toward broader ecumenism to survive? And if so, how would would you guide our diocese in this work?
So, I would rephrase the question; or at least my response is going to respond — I'm gonna have a little bit different response than about survival and ecumenical work as a part of survival, but rather ecumenical work as an opportunity for a more expansive and more creative kind of response to God's call to us inn ministry, in our particular places and this particular time. We are certainly in a landscape, a spiritual landscape within this country, that is becoming much less connected. It's losing some of it stickiness, shall we say, with traditional Christianity and other faith expressions that we characterize as interfaith, with Islam, with Judaism, with with other faith expressions. And I think it provides us an opportunity to stretch ourselves, to maintain who we are, to be very clear about ourselves as Christians and who we are as Episcopalians — but also to learn and grow from others that are in our midst. One of the things that I found in my ministry, both in diocesan work but also in churchwide work, is that the landscape has changed, where that — the need to cooperate and the opportunities to cooperate across some of those traditional boundaries, whether that's between Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Lutherans, other Christian faith expressions; or whether it's across ecumenical boundaries, that is, or interfaith boundaries — I mean, that has only grown, because there's a recognition that there's much more that pulls us together or brings us together than divides us.
And so, the spiritual life of the communities that we occupy really don't need the the clearest divisions that we have typically had in the past, but to work together on issues of social justice, of issues around hunger, education, the quality of life in our communities; to bring what we have to the table as Episcopalians but to be open to the gifts that come to us from others in the community; and my experience too has been in small places with small populations, or some experiencing some kind of isolation, is that we can do so much more together. And even when our own particular brand of Christianity, the Episcopal Church, may have some rules, and some seemingly fairly rigid kinds of boundaries and restrictions upon how we function, that being creative and imaginative in locations and pushing those boundaries in a way that serves God's reign is really what we're called to do. And I look forward to exploring that with all of you, and being creative in your particular ministry context. Thanks, Mary Beth.
Bishop Ousley, we're doing very well with time, so feel free to to expand on any questions that you feel that you need to, because we want to make sure that the diocese does get the answers they're looking for. So for this next question: during the past few years many of us in the Wyoming diocese have worked towards a progressive update in music and liturgy, and also in reconciliation with our indigenous brothers and sisters. Bishop Ousley, how do you see these areas as possible priorities during your service ahead?
Certainly, Brian. My read of what has been happening recently, both from my observations kind of exploring around in conversation and on the website, is that you all have been very innovative in your liturgical and musical expressions, and that there certainly has been an increased emphasis in recent years around mutual understanding and influence upon the life of the diocese with indigenous culture. I'm excited about that. I think we're in a time that's very rich with possibilities within the church, that there's an invitation for us to stretch some of those boundaries, to explore in some ways, liturgically and spiritually, that can enhance who we are as as Episcopalians, as those in the long historic stream of Anglicanism. I'm excited in particular to explore two things.
One is the kind of liturgical innovation that you have found across the diocese that works alongside very traditional expressions of Anglican worship, but also within the influences that native spirituality, indigenous expressions of liturgy and spirit, can be incorporated into the fuller life of the diocese. I have a lot to learn about the Arapaho and Shoshone, and look forward to spending some time in other locations within the diocese, knowing more about your history, learning more about the particular expressions in adding to my own experiences with the Lakota and with the Navajo. So it's going to be a wonderful time for me in terms of my own growth, and I intend to to learn from you all as well with the experiments and the innovations that you've all put in place. Looking forward to it. Thanks, Brian.
Thank you. How will you support the work the diocese is currently doing towards racial recognition during your time as bishop provisional, and what will you do to help ensure that work will continue you after your time with us has ended?
So, one of the things that is a learning edge for me is to discover more fully exactly what you all are doing in terms of racial reconciliation, whether that is around indigenous persons within the diocese or whether it's with other groups — Hispanic communities, with black communities, with Asian-Americans, immigrants within your mix. Racial reconciliation has been an important part of my work as a diocesan bishop in a diocese that had significant racial tensions as a part of its history, and its current realities, as well as serving on the Presiding Bishop's staff, where racial reconciliation was one of the the key pillars of the ministry of the Presiding Bishop's Office. So, I want to know, sort of, where you all are — doing my own sense of an an audit about where things stand, and then discovering together where we all need to go. The challenges around racial reconciliation are only going to increase as time goes on, and as our society becomes more pluralistic, and our society becomes much more aware of the need to discover the differences, to embrace the differences among us, and to incorporate the richness of that diversity in our own particular expression. So it's a part of a common theme that we will see throughout the time that I'm serving, and that is that there is listening within the diocese and mutual discovery about how we work forward and work together. Thanks, Mary Beth.
As bishop provisional, the main primary goal for that is to help the diocese through a transition of leadership. Please describe a time where you have had left a position of leadership have had a smooth transition to your successor. How did you go about achieving this result, and what would you do different this time?
Smooth transitions, that's what we all aspire to and certainly hope is going to happen. I think some of the smoothest transitions that I've been involved in would be from my time as canon in Eastern Michigan to my time as bishop. In many ways, the most significant shift that happened most immediately is that my my office relocated just a few feet, within the same office complex, and there was a certain smoothness to that, because I knew the old job, and I knew a lot (but certainly not everything) about the new job as bishop. So I could kind of work both of those pieces at the same time. What was perhaps most difficult during that time was that I really did love the old job that I had as canon, and so, recognizing that I need to let go of pieces and pass those on to others was a part of my process of incorporating the new role into my sense of being, and my new responsibilities. That same kind of thing has happened at every shift from being a rector in one place to rector in another, moving from rector to canon or canon to bishop, and then from bishop to a staff member on the Presiding Bishop's Office. There was a smoothness to that, because — very good kind of orientation and support from my predecessor, a lot of freedom to to make the position my own, and I think that helped it to be smooth.
One of the things that I do find a challenge at this point, in terms of having left a position on the Presiding Bishop's Office, is that there is such realignment going on in the churchwide structures that it's not as clear about who to pass along that knowledge to. And so, part of what I'm in right now is navigating those changes and clarifying where the institutional and operational knowledge needs to be passed along.
One of the things that I will have in moving into Wyoming is: I'll have the movement from a churchwide position back to diocesan. That's a different kind of role, so that's going to be a shift for me in terms of the scope and the focus that we have; and also I will need to spend — and here's that listening piece again — I would need to spend significant time listening to the leadership that has been stewarding the diocese over the last year, as well as tapping into the knowledge that previous bishops and previous leaders have got to share about what it means to be among you in Wyoming. I hope that that that goes smoothly, because I do listen, because I do want to know what you think, and I want to not just hear it but experience it and learn from you. Thanks, Brian.
This is a series of questions embedded in this question, so if you need me to repeat, please ask. Okay. Please explain: why did you apply for this position? Why now? And why this position for you? Thank you.
Okay, so, apply for the position — that's, once again, I'm not sure I would use that word. I was contacted by leadership on your Standing Committee and asked if I would be open to consider. So it was an invitation to be in conversation. The timing for me was was good, because I'm 63 years old; I'm not ready to retire but, as was expected with the change in leadership with a new Presiding Bishop, there was going to be be a transition period for me as the Presiding Bishop reevaluated how he wanted to structure the team around him and how he wanted to structure — the word he uses is "realign" — the operation for the churchwide structures. So the timing was good. I was in a time of discernment, along with the Presiding Bishop. Wyoming was in discernment. And so it seemed like a worthy conversation to take the next steps.
But why Wyoming, why not somewhere else? What really was the appeal to me for Wyoming? Part of it is that my diocesan ministry has been shaped by being in a context that has what I describe as a "mixed economy" of pastoral leadership, where you've got clergy and lay taking on significant roles within the economy of the diocese in different locations and in different ways; where you've got seminary-trained clergy, you've got locally formed clergy, you've got clergy who've been prepared outside our tradition, and you've got clergy coming to us who maintain their affiliation with other traditions — rich experiences with Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists; with Reformed Church of America and American Baptist pastors, serving in isolated rural areas as well as metropolitan areas, within the diocese of Eastern Michigan. So, some similarity to Wyoming in that way, where that's that kind of "mixed economy." Also, a great deal of independence among the people. There's a politically — we could describe Michigan, in particular the part of the state where I served, as being more libertarian, rather than Democrat or Republican; and I think that libertarian character is something that is is true within the water and the air of Wyoming — a fierce sense of independence, of the importance of the local rather than the the central office. Living within those tensions, that can be both creative and challenging. And I think, also, because Wyoming is a part of that tradition of local formation and of honoring the ministry of all the baptized, that's really where I have centered my life over the last quarter-century. So Wyoming is a culture that is both attractive and familiar and exciting to me. So the timing seems to work, be working out well for everyone, and I'm looking forward to being able to join you all on the ground later this spring. Thanks, Mary Beth.
Well Bishop, this next question was kind of tied to this one, and I think maybe you might want to expand a little bit and maybe not. What is your knowledge of the culture of Wyoming within the church context?
Okay, well, so — I'll look forward to there being any follow-up questions on this, for those of you who think that I have gotten it all wrong — but here's my understanding. Wyoming is a place that can be characterized, I think as I said, with certain libertarian quality, as a place with a fierce independence, a place on the frontier and that frontier mentality. And what I see that is so exciting about that in this particular moment in history is that we are on the move, and on a frontier in the life of the Spirit within the North American context. That means that what was once settled is no longer settled, so, it's a new frontier that we're finding. And I think the people who who do well on the frontier are the ones who are both experienced with the frontier and who are wired for frontier kind of behavior, which means bringing with you into a new land, a new place, whether that's literally new or it's a shifting kind of landscape — bring into that your previous experiences and knowledge, with the recognition that you're going to encounter things that don't look quite like they did before, and that means you've got to innovate — that you've got to make do, at least initially it feels like you got to make do with what you have, and then recognize that not making do, but it's actually a creative opportunity to do things in a new and innovative way that meet the context that we're in now. So I think Wyoming is a perfectly situated with your past culture and your current realities to embrace and meet the challenges that are present within the current context.
The other issue that I think is exciting and speaks of who Wyoming is, is, for me, looking from the outside, having had experiences with people and concepts from your diocese, and now beginning to have some experiences more directly with you and preparing to have experiences in your physical location — that you have a lot to share with the rest of the church in places that don't necessarily have the kind of depth and breadth of experience with the frontier, and the depth and breadth and permission over the long haul to to innovate, to be creative, to try things on for size and see what might fit, in this particular context that can carry us into the future. So it'll be fun to be a part of that with you all, and to know that together we've got something to share with the wider church. Thanks, Brian.
Bishop, what is your position on deacons celebrating communion from the reserved sacrament?
That is a complicated question, Mary Beth, and one that doesn't have an easy answer. But let me take a stab at it. I'm a strong proponent of the orders of ministry: of deacons, priests, and bishops, and the distinctive character that each bring to the the life of the whole of all of us gathered together as the whole people of God. So those who are not ordained, and those who are. And I think deacons — and this is somewhat reductionist — but the the schema that I really adhere to is that, when you look at the the whole people of God, that the deacons have a particular role in ministries of justice and mercy, that priests have a particular role in gathering the community and in being the teachers of kerygma, being the Greek word that we would use. So we've got diakonia and kerygma, and then koinonia is the bishop's role — it's a stewardship function about the whole community. Now, those don't exclusively belong to each one of those, but the deacon, the priest, and the bishop are icons, as it were, pointing the whole to those particular aspects of what it means to live out and be organized for the Christian faith. So, because I believe in the full and equal importance of deacons, priests, and bishops, I do think that the distinctive character needs to be lived out. Deacons are called into ministries of justice and mercy, not ministries presiding at Table, and of being the ones who convene the sacraments — that belongs to the priests and and to the bishops.
So it puts us in a bit of a quandary when we've got kind of clear theoretical, theological, principled views of what deacons, priests, and bishops are called to do, and how that meets the realities that we have. So for instance I know in many places, perhaps in places within Wyoming, where there's not a priest available that deacons have presided in a liturgy on a Sunday morning that has them distributing communion from the reserved sacrament. What I would want to do is not to say that that is right or that is wrong, but rather to explore together among the lay, the priests, and the deacons of the diocese what it is that we are trying to accomplish with deacons distributing communion from the reserved sacrament, or presiding in some form of liturgy on that day. And I'm open to innovations, and certainly I had an experience as bishop in Eastern Michigan where we empowered lay people to distribute from the reserved sacrament on Sundays in places in a way that was responsible, that was connected to community, and had some clear guidelines for it — so some innovations that pushed the boundaries of the church, so that there could be a sacramental provision in all places on a regular basis. So I'm going to want to talk to the community of deacons first, and see what the practices are, what their hopes and dreams and understandings are; and together I think that we can influence one another. Thank you. Good question.
Bishop, I'm gonna read this question twice, because I think there could be two different ways this question can be read to you. Okay. Will you be able to reverse the decisions made by the Standing Committee? Will you be able to reverse the decisions made by the Standing Committee? Hopefully I read it the way they intended.
Okay, so, let me test this out, Brian. I think two ways to interpret that is: will I reverse decisions? And, do I think the bishop has the capacity to reverse the decision? Is that a fair way of seeing two ways of interpreting the question?
That's how I interpret it; there may be two different ways to look at it.
Okay, well, first of all I think my way of coming in is not going to be to come in with the idea that there are decisions that need to be reversed, but rather to to listen to Standing Committee and to listen to others about what your experience has been of decisions by bishops, decisions by Standing Committee, perhaps decisions by Foundation, Commission on Ministry, by Diocesan Council — to listen to that, to get a feel for what the state of the diocese is on particular issues. So I really can't answer clearly about any particular decision, unless we get a decision on the table. But my first response is going to be to listen and try to understand, and then, reversing decisions — it's not my style to come in and reverse a decision of any group, but rather to explore together how that decision got made and what the rationale was for the decision. If I've got a strong sense that a decision needs to be reconsidered, then I think putting that on the table for reconsideration is something that I could imagine happening; but notice I said "putting it on the table for consideration," not "coming in and reversing it unilaterally." I don't think bishops — it's a very rare circumstance where a bishop really has the legitimate responsibility, much less authority, to reverse a decision like that. It's always about engagement and understanding one another. Thanks, Brian.
All right, on this next question, Bishop, we know you've addressed this topic previously. However, it's going to be asked again in a little bit different way. Why do you believe that you are a good fit as Wyoming's provisional bishop, given the nature and resolution of the Title IV complaint against you, which required an apology and further Title IV training?
Thank you. I think anytime you have a leader who faces significant challenges to his or her leadership, questions about that — and then engages the church's procedures, the church's discipline, and did that fully and willingly — I think that says a lot about who the person is.
You know, I don't want to speak too much about the particular aspects of the Title IV charges against me, which were allegations that I did not follow the canons, that I did not carry out responsibilities, particularly on how to process a Title IV matter as the Intake Officer. There are — Title IV is complicated, and there's lots of room for interpretation. I made an interpretation about what was my responsibility and what the circumstances were in a particular matter. Bishop Curry really should speak for himself, but essentially, he made the same decisions and interpretation I did, and the church has spoken that they believe we could have and should have handled that differently. It's my job to accept that decision, to accept the the consequences of that, which was for me to write a letter of apology to those who experienced hurt as a result of my pastoral and canonical decision-making that some would disagree with. And I accept that, and I've written that apology. I was also required to take an updated course — I refer to it as "remedial," but other folks in your diocese have said it was really "continuing education" — but however you want to describe it, I had to take some Title IV training, some reminders about Title IV and what responsibilities there are for the Intake Officer. And there may not be anybody any more steeped in what the church's multiple expectations are around Title IV intake than me, because of what I've been through.
So I think I bring that experience, and I also bring to it a renewed knowledge and a deepened level of appreciation of all the possibilities of how we can implement Title IV ecclesiastical discipline in a way that lives into the ideals of Title IV, which are about healing and reconciliation — which means that we've got to apply what the canons say, but we have to do that with a pastoral, sensitive heart, and with each context having its own nuances and needs and how it's responded — the contexts, the complainants, the respondent, they're all people and individuals in different situations. So I've had some helpful reminders about that, and I bring that into my offering to be your bishop provisional. Thanks, Mary Beth.
Bishop, we're doing very well with time, and this question probably is going to need a very lengthy answer to it given the current political environment. How would you empower churches to offer assistance to the marginalized?
Well, it's at our heart, the heart of our call as Christians to proclaim release to the captives, recovery of sight to the blind, to feed the hungry, to visit those in prison, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor. It's who we are as Christians. So regardless of the political climate, that is central to our call. It's in our Baptismal Covenant to respect the dignity of every human being, every human being — to seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving our neighbor as ourselves. You can go all through scripture and see that working with the marginalized is who we are and what our call is, regardless of what may be the interpretation of our politicians, of our leadership, and of other expressions of faith within our community. We've got to be true to ourselves.
Now, I don't think that necessarily means that everybody's called to the same kinds of behaviors in each situation. People have got different comfort levels. People have got different ways that they are most comfortable responding to the marginalized, and we've got different contexts in our local settings and different particular calls by congregations and individuals, and we need to honor those. But I'm going to be supportive as bishop of our seizing the opportunities, and even in the face of difficult circumstances and consequences, to be true to our faith and to our call, and when we have people in our midst and outside of our boundaries who challenge those behaviors, our task is to meet them in love, with a sense of clarity about who we are, and to engage the conversation and to not separate ourselves from one another, but to strive to continue in relationship and mutual understanding.
I want to highlight just one thing that I experienced in my my brief visit to Wyoming last month and that was — I was with Deacon Dena, and we drove north through a bit of snow, some whiteout conditions, to Buffalo and had an opportunity to spend some time with the leadership there in the church — a lunch together, and to see the ministries that were happening there in the church. I was really struck by the commitment — a long-term commitment that that congregation has to feeding the hungry in the community and doing that in a way that is perhaps not entirely unique, but does have a certain uniqueness and openness that you don't see in all feeding programs, in food pantries within the church. What I saw was a place that is beautifully appointed. It's spacious; it is organized; and most importantly organized in a way that preserves the dignity of every person who comes into the building and seeks assistance. How do they do that? That one, it's clean; it's bright; it's inviting; and the information that is gathered is primarily just to develop relationships and know names of people and to be able to provide data in order to be eligible for grants and other kind of funding to enhance the services there. It's not set up as a way to keep people out of the program, but rather to include as many people as possible. So what's the criteria? The criteria is, you have a self-determined need for food. If you've got that need, you get to show up. You don't have to meet an income level; there's not a threshold; there's not a bottom level or a top level; you just need to say, "I'm hungry and my family's hungry," and then you get to go shopping and you get to shop from the different categories and have multiple amounts — some restrictions, but you get to shop like you're going into a grocery store to shop. There's fresh fruit and vegetables; there are meats available; canned and box items, and some personal hygiene items available. It's a very dignified way of being able to to provide assistance to people in need within the community, and to do it without judgment. I think that's a kind of ministry to the marginalized that Jesus has called us to, and that we have a responsibility to do, whether it's clothing, it's housing, it's feeding, it's immigration status, it is the color of one's skin, the expression of who you are that you give to the world. Whatever it is, God is calling us to respond to the people who have been marginalized and live on the margins, and to be Christ to them, and to see Christ within them. Thanks. Great question.
Thank you. This is a follow-up question from last session, and this person would like to know if you could please explain what you meant by the "pastoral way" or the "judicial path" in relation to Title IV guidelines.
Yeah, thanks.
Does the Intake Officer and the bishop have discretion to decide which path to take? And can this process be better defined in Title IV?
Good questions. First of all, let me say that — and I may have said this last time, so pardon me if I'm repeating, but — if you were to get five Episcopalians with experience and and responsibilities in Title IV, get them in the room, you would get at least five, maybe seven to ten different perspectives on what they can have to say about the particular ways of applying it. And some of that comes because every situation is different. Now, we have certain kind of similarities between disciplinary situations that come to us, but they all have their own nuances and particularities, and that requires that we take some time when receiving information to assess what is the the first and best approach.
What I found in Title IV is that most situations that come in are of a nature that, just listening to people and getting some folks into conversation with one another can can affect the healing and the reconciliation, or at least get it along that pathway. So I — that's the "pastoral approach." The "judicial approach" is taking it, not thinking anything about it beyond "these are just the facts that have been presented, or the assertions that have been presented;" write up an intake report, and send it to the Reference Panel. That kind of approach does need to happen with some kinds of situations because the facts are so clear and, in particular in situations that are highly volatile and highly inflammatory, or where people and groups may be in danger, you've got to go that kind of route in the beginning while also keeping a pastoral mind on it. But most things are situations that — where people have just gotten crossways; there's been a misunderstanding, and if they're given an opportunity to bring those misunderstandings together, and some assistance to work through it, most of the time they can be resolved without having to resort to the judicial processes.
One of the things that's in development right now is the exploration of developing a pilot program where, utilizing the current canons and interpreting in a more expansive way like I am talking about — that the Presiding Bishop and others are looking at what is called an "alternative dispute resolution process," which essentially would experiment with the idea that some things, very few, but some need to go into the judicial process where it's formalized and looks more like what you would report to the police, the DA, and go into the court system. And we're talking about situations, clear situations of abuse — physical, sexual, emotional, spiritual, financial, those kind of things — going that way. And then others, there being an opportunity to go into something that's more like mediation or conciliation, where parties can get assistance to work out their disagreements together, rather than having to go into a judicial process. It's always a little bit of both that are involved, and the church is learning from our experiences and saying that we really do need to look at some kind of a two-tier or two-track program, and that's what this "alternative dispute resolution" is — that it has some judicial decision-making components, but it's primarily about getting people to work together to sort through what reconciliation and healing look like for them in their own words and their own context. So that's really — I think the best I can do at this point. If you've got a follow up, Mary Beth, feel free.
I think you added to that and and gave further explanation, so thank you.
Okay, thank you.
Another follow-up question from the last session that came to us: we, as Christians, know that prayer is powerful and it works. If a "pastoral way" is chosen, at what point do you involve all members of the diocese or an Episcopal Church congregation to join in prayer, at a level of understanding which is appropriate for each individual case?
Good question, and I think that, if I'm interpreting that question correctly, it gets at the heart of a frustration that most of us involved in Title IV are experiencing, whether it's the community, the congregation or a diocese, or an Intake Officer, or a bishop. There's kind of equal opportunity frustration involved in Title IV. The way Title IV is structured right now is that there is a great deal of emphasis put on protecting the complainant or complainants: those who bring concerns and allegations of misconduct forward. Protecting their privacy, protecting them from retribution, protecting them from further harm, further trauma occurring within Title IV. There's also a great deal placed on the respondent: the person who has received an accusation, whether that's a deacon, a priest, or a bishop; and, you know, protecting their privacy, some confidentiality, because some things just aren't helpful for everyone to know. What has quite often been unaddressed, or inadequately addressed, is the community — the parish or the diocese. What I've experienced is that quite often, the canonical expectations around confidentiality can become a place where players in administration of Title IV hide, behind confidentiality; or they overinterpret the confidentiality into something that really begins to look like secrecy, and I think that's where we have created problems within the system.
The truth is that the canons give almost complete discretion — not entirely complete, but almost complete — discretionary responsibility to the bishop in the diocese when it's an internal matter with a priest or a deacon, and to the Presiding Bishop when it's a matter involving a bishop. Almost complete discretion on how much they reveal, and to what community. There is no one answer for what to decide, because each situation is different, but I believe that the church must, through the bishop and through the Presiding Bishop in their respective areas of responsibility, they must begin to be more transparent in sharing information — not necessarily everything, but sufficient information for affected communities to have a sense of what's going on and have confidence and trust that the church is handling the situation in the best possible way. Will that satisfy everyone? No. Will there be disagreements about what's appropriate and what's inappropriate, and what more needs to be shared? Absolutely. There will be. That, I think, the bottom line is — not everybody needs to know everything, but keeping people in the dark invites people to fill in the blanks. It's what we do if we don't know. We imagine what's going on, and quite frankly, our imaginations are much more creative and go well beyond, in most cases well beyond, the actual circumstances of what has occurred.
So it's a challenge that we have, and what I can tell you is that if we have any Title IV matters while I'm serving as your bishop provisional, that I'm committed to sharing the kind of information that communities, parishes, the diocese need to know in order to be a part of the overall healing and reconciliation. At the same time, I have to be mindful that complainants, complainants' families, their loved ones, and the respondent, respondent's family, and their loved ones can be negatively and permanently affected in ways that we cannot redeem if we're not careful about what information is shared. It's going to be a delicate dance, and will continue to be; but I'm making the commitment to you for there to be a great deal of transparency. Thank you, Brian.
Well, you segue into the next question, and probably answered much of it, but I'll read it and you can expand on anything you see fit. Many have felt a lack of transparency and clarity throughout the Title IV process in the Wyoming diocese. Do you believe clarifying roles and duties within Title IV regarding the options available to the Intake Officer and the Bishops to choose a "pastoral way" or a "judicial path" could be one way to build a bridge for healing and reconciliation between leadership and the numerous congregations?
Yes, absolutely. Clarification of roles, continued education within the diocese about what the options are — so not just for the players in administering, but for everybody to have additional information — and in particular, I think it's important to point out that for me, I was not the Intake Officer in the matter in Wyoming; I had just relinquished that role to the Rev. Barb Kemp and my role was an ongoing pastoral support role, which was for complainants, respondents, but also for the affected community, which was the diocese — primarily with the Standing Committee and the leadership thereof. I was not the one who was empowered to make the calls about what could be shared and what could not be shared; that was the Presiding Bishop's role, and I operated under the constraints of what the Presiding Bishop was was willing to give to me to share. I'm still under those constraints, having been in that role or those roles on the Presiding Bishop's staff. And so as we move into this, I'm still going to need to consult with the Presiding Bishop if there are questions that are asked and I'm unclear about what the limits are that I — of what I can share, and even within clarity on those limits, I have a responsibility that comes with my ordination vows to care for all of the people affected, and one of the complexities is, you can't always care for the respondent and respondent's family, the complainant and complainant's family, and the affected community — the diocese in this case — cannot always give everybody what they want in the midst of it. Because what, say, some people in the diocese want to know may do great harm to the respondent or great harm to the complainant, and every other variation on that formula. So it's a balancing act, where all of us have to recognize that there may not be a perfect solution in terms of information that is shared, and we may individually — we may not be fully satisfied with the responses that we give, but I hope what we can do is to build trust in one another, that we're doing the best we can because the goal for everyone is to move beyond this, and to be healthier and whole in the future. Thanks, Mary Beth.
And continuing on with this, obviously this was a follow-up from last time as well: Bishop Ousley, how will you — oops, make sure I read the right one here — what are your ideas on how to bring healing and reconciliation, then, to our diocese?
Well, first, anytime you're you're dealing with questions about healing and reconciliation, you need to know what needs to be healed and what needs to be reconciled. I've got a a rough idea, and I think probably a pretty good idea about many of the factors that need to be involved in healing and reconciliation. But if I come in with a formula about how to do that without asking you first, where are you feeling the hurt? Where are you feeling unreconciled? Then I may be approaching the wrong thing, may not be giving you what you want, and in fact may cause more harm than good. So there's got to be some real discussion, some conversation about what are the realities of the brokenness that you feel, or the lack of brokenness. Maybe it's not as bad as some people think. So, you know, we've got to work through that, discover together. Then I think we can begin to address.
But having said that, let me give you some overarching principles. The first is: I think for us to share as much of the truth as we know it, that can be shared without doing further damage, is the place to begin. And that's not just my sharing truth that I'm authorized to share, and that I know could be healing or I believe could be healing and reconciling; but it's also for you. Don't make me guess what's on your mind. Don't make me wonder what's on your heart. Share it with me, so we can have an open, honest, transparent conversation and begin the process of moving forward, because it's the future that's before us. Doesn't mean that we need to ignore the past, but the past we can do very little about except to heal the hurts that have been left behind, so that we can move forward into the future. Thanks, Brian.
Thank you. You touched on — excuse me — you touched on this in a previous answer as well, and again, you may want to expand further. Will you have Title IV oversight in the diocese in your role as bishop provisional?
As bishop provisional I will occupy the roles that a bishop has in Title IV within the diocese. And what that means is that there will be — once again, I don't know who's in these positions now — but a bishop is called to appoint one or more Intake Officers to to work within the system and to be the person who receives complaints and presents those to the Reference Panel. I'll be a member of the Reference Panel along with the president of your disciplinary board, and so the three of us will serve together, or the team of us will serve together as the Reference Panel in any cases that come forward. I will also have responsibility to work on Accords — a settlement agreement on matters that come forward, as part of the pastoral team on that. But I won't control Title IV. I will have my canonical roles and be a part of a group of people who have that responsibility within the diocese. My hope is that we won't have Title IV matters that come before us, but that we be prepared in the event that something comes forward, and we handle it with an appropriate canonical and pastoral measure. Thanks, Mary Beth.
Well, Bishop, they've asked their questions. Now it's time for you. Was there anything else that you wanted to share with the diocese about your nomination as the bishop provisional that we have not yet asked you?
Well, one thing I think that ought to be explored, and that is — I still have some work to do and conversation with the Standing Committee to clarify what the time frame is for my work with you all — but let me share with you my understandings about where we stand at this point. First is: typically a provisional is in place for around 18 to 24 months. Now that's just — I want you to hold that lightly, because it could be that it's less than 18 months; it could be that it's something more than 24; those are just some markers for us to look at. But given circumstances and where you are in your life as a diocese and what you have before you, 18 to 24 is a pretty good estimate for the work in healing and reconciliation that needs to occur as well as the preparation for and implementing of a search and nominating process, as well as election and ordination of your next bishop. So there's that piece.
How often will I be in Wyoming? That's a good question. Once again we've had kind of open-ended discussions between me and Standing Committee, but what is on the table is something between halftime and full-time. I believe that given where you are the challenges that you have faced and what you have as task before you that closer to full-time is what we need to be looking at, at least certainly in this first period of time that we have together. My idea is that we'll determine mutually what that time looks like. I'm going to put on the table — I'll do it publicly here today — full-time to begin, but then for there to be a regular evaluation period, say, every three to four months where we take a look at where we've been and where we need to go and to reassess, so that we're constantly able to stay on top of what the needs are for the diocese. My wife is employed full-time in development work for Saginaw Valley State University, so she is clearly rooted in our community in Saginaw, Michigan, and has a a full-time — very full-time — position here at the University; so she will not be moving to Wyoming with me, but rather we will be developing some sort of pattern where I am resident full-time most of the time in Wyoming and then periodically I will be traveling back to Michigan and working from home. That work will mean, obviously, I'm on the phone, on email, on Zoom, which I can do in Casper or anywhere within the state, within the diocese, but I can also do from here. But mostly I'll be resident with you in Wyoming and my wife will also be coming out on occasion, and her boss has indicated that he's very open to the idea that she would come to Wyoming on occasion so that the two of us can be in the same space and she can work remotely from Wyoming for the work that she does for the University. So we're going to live into that and see what works for us and works for the diocese, and once again have those periodic times of evaluation so we can say "how's this working? What adjustments do we need to make?"
I think the other thing which we may have talked about some but I would like to reemphasize is that I'm very excited about working with you all in some of your innovations in ministry preparation, in a couple of those. One is your affiliation with the Iona Collaborative. I'm fully on board with that and look forward to learning more about how you all live into the collaborative, and contributing in ways that will be useful out of my own experience as a member of the faculty or occasional visiting person with that, and working with those who are preparing for both lay and ordained ministry. Alongside that I'm very interested in the desires of the the Iona program in Wyoming to expand beyond its work on preparation for ordained ministry and also to equip lay leaders, both licensed ministries and other lay ministries that you're involved with within the diocese. And then also, connected to that, there's exploration of the Episcopal Service Corps and relationships with those, and you've got some experience with this with Service Corps members who have discerned a call to ministry and support for them in their preparation for ordained ministry in and coming back to the diocese of Wyoming, and serving for a period of time, as well as sort of seeding across the church the Wyoming experience and perspective in ministry. All those are really exciting to me.
And then the final piece that I haven't had much chance to talk about but I do want to highlight today is: I want one of my very first stops to be on the reservation to be at Wind River, to learn more about what is happening there, to see the exciting activities the the repatriation or rematriation of artifacts at Ethete, the development of the cultural center and the museum, and to learn much more about the Arapaho and the Shoshone tribes and their particular contributions to the spirituality of the people and the Episcopal Church. That seems to be a critical piece at this time in your history, and certainly is something that I'm going to make a priority when I arrive to be with you all. Thank you, Brian.
Thank you. It was a great opportunity, and we appreciate getting to know you.
Thank you, likewise.
Yes, a big thank you, Bishop Ousley, for answering our additional questions and giving us, filling out a lot of questions we had. We're going to turn it over now to Jessica who's going to do a test run of the virtual voting process...
[The transcript ends with a demonstration of vote counting.]