This was first published at Viderunt Omnes (blog) by James Coder and picked up by VirtueOnline. James has expanded it since it was posted at VOL. ed.
SATURDAY, MAY 28, 2011
More Katharine Jefferts-Schori cover-up: hiding evidence after Wiki-wacks
On the Wikipedia discussion page, it was pointed out that TEC Church Offices should have known about the ethics of Wikipedia editing, and that one musn't remove items without reason - since in 2007, Barbara Alton had been so persistent in removing items from Bishop Bennison's Wikipedia page, after having been warned, that her account had been deleted, and this was reported in aninternational news source (as well as various Anglican news outlets). It was pointed out that an EpiscopalLife article on the site of EpiscopalChurch.org noted that Alton "never received an order from Jefferts Schori." Though the article quotes the Church Times for this information, Episcopal Life is a branch of TEC's media department at Episcopal Church Center; so Episcopal Church Center was at the very least informed of this incident, as they themselves reported on it. So Episcopal Church center should have known better than to simply edit without providing information as to why the information was false (which it seems, it wasn't).
Now, this specific article brought up in the discussion has been removed from the site of The Episcopal Church. The original url of the article is http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_89447_ENG_HTM.htm - an archive of the article can be viewed at archive.org. Another archive of the ENS newsletter highlighting the top stories of August 25, 2007 shows that this is the only one of the four stories highlighted which has been removed; i.e., the article most definitely wasn't removed in a routine "clean-up" of old stories selected by date.
The Episcopal Church does seem to be trying to eliminate the digital "paper trail" of evidence of possible culpability. It seems also that it's getting itself somewhat entangled in the Barbara Streisland Effect: in the attempt at hiding information, unwittingly prompting others to further disseminate it.
This may seem insignificant - the removal of a single article from 2007 from the TEC website. But it does seem to fit a larger pattern of attempting to remove information which is important for the critical discernment regarding its character by its own members, other members of the Anglican Communion, and the public at large. Anyone who alleges that this information is not important must ask themselves: if it is so unimportant, then why is it being removed, instead of allowing people to judge for themselves - especially given the fact that this is a publication of TEC itself, and most certainly isn't "disinformation"?
The initial issue here was transparency: instead of an admission of impropriety, we are seeing further signs of cover-up.
When the issue was first raised - there should have been some sort of investigation with public findings. How did the false information find its way into the election materials, who was responsible for putting it there, and why? Was it an honest mistake, or an attempt to make Jefferts-Schori seem more experienced than she was? Who amongst those who read the materials, was aware that this was false, and failed to mention this to General Convention and the House of Bishops? Why did Jefferts-Schori herself fail to make clear the false description?
Perhaps TEC Church Center, or the Standing Committee, wished to "save face" and hoped that the issue would not be published beyond the single article at VirtueOnline. If so, they were wrong - it also became a news item at WorldNetDaily. And with a number of steps afterward in efforts at silencing the issue - more opportunities have arisen to alert members of TEC, the Anglican Communion, and the public at large of this ongoing cover-up regarding the likely election fraud.
A question worth asking one's self: Have any other noteworthy organizations or corporations, after such a significant election anomaly signaling likely fraud, ever continued daily business as if nothing consequential had occurred - instead of launching an investigation, to determine what had happened, to prevent its happening in the future, and to maintain organizational transparency and trust amongst its members? And if so, how did the uninvestigated election anomaly influence that organization's future? The question is particularly alarming in the case of a religious organization claiming inspiration by the Holy Spirit - since if this is not properly dealt with, it could be used as a precedent in future elections, much like how the situation with Bishop Pike became something of a precedent for Bishop Spong. "We did not find Bishop Pike's teaching in need of explicit correction by the House of Bishops; would we not be hypocritical if we now did this with Bishop Spong?" It was perhaps implicit in the decision on Bishop Pike, that TEC would begin to depart from Trinitarian Christianity, and begin advocating a new, non-Trinitarian form of Jesus-following - though no one imagined that this decision would form a precedent in dealing with someone like Bishop Spong. "We did not launch an investigation regarding Bishop Jefferts-Schori's deceptive credentials ... would it not be hypocritical to do so now for Bishop Jones?" Elections are likely to become decreasingly democratic and transparent, and increasingly guided by insiders who are "in the know," in elections whose outcomes have largely been determined beforehand by such insiders - i.e., "false elections," in place merely to convince the membership of their leaders' legitimacy. Church leadership is likely to become increasingly esoteric (and not exoteric - as is the teaching of the gospel) - affording more power to church leaders over those they control, with members needing to trust leaders since they are not privy to the knowledge and wisdom of the few. Spirituality is likely to become more a matter of credentials than it is something which can be wisely cultivated by all who wish to follow Jesus in spirit and truth. The question of who is accorded these credentials will largely be a question of maintaining respect for those who are already credentialed - i.e., those in power. Discourse is likely to become more emotive and "spiritualist" in character than rational, in discussing persons and groups more than issues - or linking discussion of issues primarily to the reputations of persons and groups. "I see Jesus in this person ..." - i.e., this person should be followed ... "How can you take that idea seriously? It sounds to me very passé, like what those ['Fundamentalists,' 'conservative Evangelicals,' 'woman-hating Catholics' etc.] are saying." We will find ourselves increasingly trying to express our adherence to the proper groups in the opinions we express, instead of actually trying to discern truth or uncover meaning, with all but a rather spectrum of thought marginalized. We are already seeing something to this effect with our discourse being reduced to the notions of love and inclusion.
Perhaps it is this very situation - a church claiming to be Trinitarian, but moving gradually into a non-Trinitarian form of Jesus-following - which requires a culture resistant to transparency, and characterized by vagueness and emotional responses. Unitarians are known for being much more clear than Episcopalians about what they do and do not believe. Perhaps once TEC becomes more clear in differentiating itself from Trinitarian Christianity, it will once more be able to encourage a culture of openness and transparency.
Was the false information provided about her ministry experience merely a bit of "CV puffery" or exaggeration, or was it pivotal in swaying the outcome of the election?: It is difficult to tell to what extent the false information might have swayed the election without some form of inquiry. However, it was no trivial "CV puffery." It has often been noted that Presiding Bishop Jefferts-Schori is remarkable in her relative lack of experience in practical ministry for a Presiding Bishop. She has never been a rector. Next to the position "Bishop of Nevada" in the "Parish and Related Ministry" list, "Pastoral Associate & Dean" far outranks the other positions in seniority. The most senior position attested to other than these two is the position of Assistant Rector for a period of one year. Her lack of experience was a major factor here; few diocesan bishops have been elected with as little experience as she had when elected diocesan bishop of Nevada, and (as far as I know) few if any Presiding Bishops have had this little experience in the history of TEC. So it is highly likely that some voted for her, who would not have had they realized how little experience she actually had in practical ministry. The original document (also linked above) is available from the site of The Episcopal Church here. Whether or not this item actually swayed the outcome of the election, an inquiry is still warranted; the deception here (though it may have initially been an "honest mistake," it became dishonest when Jefferts-Schori and others knew it to be false, refrained from pointing out this discrepancy) is most certainly a deception which should not be tolerated in elections in general - and least of all, in elections for the highest level of leadership within the Anglican Communion.
It is also not merely a case of "exaggeration." It contains multiple fabrications. Jefferts-Schori explained the first fabrication in the telephone interview with Terry Ward - her use of the word "Good Samaritan School of Theology" - as a kind of term of endearment or inside joke or between her rector and the congregation - meaning the smallish parish's adult education program. Her explanation does not cover the second fabrication - use of the term "Dean" - for her being in charge of the parish education program, which of course leaves any normal Episcopalian reader with the impression that she indeed had been the dean of an academic institution of higher learning. Jefferts-Schori has indeed been dean of a diocesan school for lay ministry, in 1990-1991, which met at a parish in Wilsonville, OR. But this was a full three years before the completion of her Master of Divinity and ordination as a deacon. Rhetorical fabrication of the "Good Samaritan School of Theology," moving her tenure there by three years in order to coincide with the attaining of her diploma and ordination, and stretching it from one year to six is not a simple exaggeration or stretching of one reality. It calls into being a set of affairs which is qualitatively different (ordained ministry with Masters of Divinity, vs. lay ministry without qualifying education) in addition to the three other modified factors. See Terry Ward's2006 article for the details of this paragraph. The combined effect is so deceptive that the word "exaggeration" does not do this fabrication justice.
A note to "liberal" bloggers: I would highly recommend you cover this topic. It speaks to the very credibility of TEC and of the Anglican Communion, as a very good case can be made that there was likely electoral fraud in the election of one of our Primates who is now seated in multiple Instruments of Communion - or at the very least, there is a most serious anomaly which has never been adequately clarified, and which further more has been subject to Church Center's manipulation of the media. It is understandable that some "liberal" bloggers have shied away from this difficult topic; but I'd argue that the ongoing cover-up of Church Center brings greater urgency to pointing out to members of The Episcopal Church the problematic character of this election anomaly, and its possible implications for our life together. The longer TEC itself does not organize an investigation with public findings, the greater urgency there is for the Communion to organize a third-party investigation of this electoral anomaly, given +KJS's prominence in the Instruments of Communion.
A note to "conservative" bloggers: I am puzzled that this election anomaly was not more widely covered to begin with; and now that we have seen multiple steps of deliberate obfuscation, the topic is most certainly becoming more urgent, more evidence of possible culpability is coming to the fore, and we are more broadly implicating ourselves with every year that passes that we do not request an investigation of the original incident (while our church officials seem to be attempting to obfuscate it). I do think that we are showing critical disrespect if our attitude is that Episcopalians and "liberals" simply will not care. In my experience, many Episcopalians do care a great deal about democracy and transparency in electoral process; and very, very few have been informed of the original election anomaly. If we can raise awareness and help them raise a voice to request an investigation into this anomaly, we are most certainly doing a good thing.
If you aren't aware, some bishops are gay. But we don't talk about it.
A few months ago, the online biography of Katharine Jefferts-Schori was edited by an Episcopal Church Center staff worker at her behest - noted here and here.