Mary Frances Schjonberg of Episcopal News Service reports in detail about the third day of the ecclesiastical disciplinary hearing for Diocese of Los Angeles Bishop J. Jon Bruno.
Church Attorney Raymond “Jerry” Coughlan, appointed to represent the Episcopal Church, and Diocese of Los Angeles Chancellor Richard Zevnik did not make oral closing statements. They will submit written briefs for the Hearing Panel to consider before making its decision.
“I have no idea how long our decision will take but there are other canonical processes involved that could mean this could go on for a while,” Diocese of Southern Virginia Bishop Herman Hollerith IV, president of the Hearing Panel, told spectators at the end of the session. “This is not going to be something that is going to happen before Easter.”
The third day featured further testimony by Bishop Bruno and Diocese of Los Angeles staff and the Standing Committee.
March 30 began with Bruno spending nearly two hours answering questions from Coughlan and Zevnik about his March 28 testimony. The questions ranged over a number of topics aimed at understanding the bishop’s actions surrounding his attempt to sell St. James the Great, and his motivations for those actions. High on the list of motivations was providing money to fund the ongoing mission and ministry of the diocese.
And reported on the conflict between diocesan leaders:
Testimony March 30 also showed that the sale of St. James the Great caused controversy between at least two diocesan leaders. The Rev. Canon Melissa McCarthy, committee president during 2015 and 2016, told the panel that then-Bishop Suffragan Mary Glasspool called her to inquire about a possible sale of St. James. McCarthy said Glasspool told her that, as standing committee president, McCarthy had a duty to block the sale. She said Glasspool gave her the name of another Episcopal diocesan chancellor in the state who could help her develop an argument against the sale.
Read the details here.
Image: Photo by Mary Frances Schjonberg ENS