My experience at the installation of Archbishop Cordileone
A post to clarify my experience at the installation of Archbishop Cordileone at St. Mary's Cathedral, San Francisco.
I was dropped off at the cathedral at 1:30PM by my assistant. After making my way around protestors and showing my invitation to security guards, I was in the lower level area to which I was directed by 1:40.
The instructions the Archdiocese had given my assistant were that I should be at St. Mary's by 1:45. The service was scheduled to begin at 2.
I identified myself to an assistant to the archbishop, who spoke to someone through a headset, saying, "Bishop Andrus is here."
I saw the Greek Metropolitan, a good colleague of mine, who was in the same room with me, several Greek Orthodox priests, archdiocesan employees and security guards. I greeted the metropolitan and we spoke briefly.
An archdiocesan employee attempted to escort me upstairs with the Greek Orthodox group, but was stopped from doing so by the employee to whom I had first identified myself. This person, who appeared to be in a superior role, instructed another employee to stand with me.
At this point no other guests remained in the downstairs area. The employee and I chatted while waiting. I began to wonder about the time holdup. I checked my phone; it was 1:50PM. I asked the employee standing with me if the service indeed started at 2, which she affirmed.
At 2PM, when the service was to begin, I said to the employee, "I think I understand, and feel I should leave." Her response was, "Thank you for being understanding." I quietly walked out the door. No one attempted to stop me. No attempt was ever made to explain the delay or any process for seating. I arrived early, before the time given my assistant, and waited to leave until after the service had begun.
My intention for attending the installation was to honor our ecumenical and interfaith relations in the Bay Area.
Bishop Marc's blog.
H/T to John Chilton at The Lead for the link.
Speaks for itself. You have my sympathies, Bishop Marc. Kyrie eleison.
ReplyDeleteThe way the bishop was treated was beyond rude. I have no doubt that the situation is exactly as he describes it for +Marc is a person of great integrity. I'm pleased he told his story.
DeleteI also do not doubt Bishop Andrus' integrity, so I'm sure that his account accurately describes his perception of what happened. And it's certainly possible that this was an intentional slight on the part of someone in the archdiocese because of +Andrus' letter a few days beforehand (although there's been no indication that the Archbishop authorized--or even knew about--it). That leaves the question of why they would even bother to go to that much trouble. Bishop Andrus is important to Episcopalians because he's the bishop of a major TEC diocese. But from the RC archdiocese's point of view, he's probably just one of many religious leaders in the community.
DeleteBased on the various accounts given by Bishop Andrus and the archdiocese, I think a more logical explanation is a miscommunication on the time he was expected to be there. Maybe someone at the archdiocese gave the wrong time, or maybe Bishop Andrus' assistant misunderstood. It does seem that telling a guest to arrive 15 minutes before such a major service is cutting it awfully close.
Anyway, according to the archdiocese's account, by the time Bishop Andrus arrived, the other ecumenical and interfaith guests had already processed in and been seated. So from +Andrus' point of view, he was early, but from the point of view of the organizers (who may not have known about the miscommunication), he arrived later than expected. An explanation I read another blog about not letting him be seated with the Orthodox metropolitan is that the metropolitan was going to be processing to the sanctuary along with the RC bishops.
The archdiocese has acknowledged in a "tweet" that Bishop Andrus, as an invited guest, should have been given an explanation about the delay in seating him.
Anyway, when choosing between ineptness and malice, I tend to go for the former unless there's really strong evidence of the latter.
Paul, +Marc says he joined clergy from other faiths in the basement. I don't believe he arrived late, because he says he didn't. When the other clergy were escorted into the church, +Marc was barred from joining them and was left alone in the basement with the minder until the service started, whereupon he left. Someone is spinning like a top, and I don't think it's +Marc.
DeleteOf course, it's possible that one of the functionaries of Apb. Cordileone took it upon himself to snub Bishop Marc, perhaps because of the letter he wrote a few days before affirming gay marriage.
Actually, he talks about the Greek Orthodox metropolitan, several Orthodox priests, archdiocesan employees, and security guards being in the room with him. He doesn't say anything about representatives from other denominations or faiths being there. According to the archdiocese's account, they had already processed in and been seated.
DeleteThe Orthodox clergy were taken up separately because they were to process with their RC brethren. That's because the RC Church recognizes the Orthodox clergy as being validly (albeit illicitly or irregularly) ordained. It does not recognize the validity of Episcopal or Anglican orders, which is irritating, but isn't exactly something new.
I believe that as far as Bishop Andrus knew, he arrived 15 minutes early. I also believe he may have received bad information about when he was expected because of a goof by someone at the archdiocese or by his assistant. These things happen. It's regretable, but not necessarily malicious.
Paul, I suppose we'll have to wait for further developments, and who knows but that there may be conflicting stories even then?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI kind of doubt that there will be further developments. This story isn't likely to have a long shelf life. But even if there continue to be conflicting stories, it doesn't necessarily mean that anyone is lying or spinning. Both could be telling what they perceive to be the truth.
DeleteThe archdiocese has publicly apologized. It's up to Bishop Andrus whether to accept it. I hope he does, even if he doesn't completely buy their explanation.
For what it's worth, the RC version contradicts Bishop Andrus on a couple of important points.
ReplyDeletehttp://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2012/10/in-san-francisco-rebuild-my-house.html
Perhaps I'm being too cynical, but if forced to predict which side has grown a longer nose, I'd point to the Catholic archdiocese.
kishnevi, I know the RC version contradicts Bishop Marc's account. I believe +Marc. Under the circumstances, I would have left, too.
DeleteIt certainly seems to be a deliberately and fairly high level snub though there are probably enough layers to ensure innocence at the highest level. If they didn't want him there after the letter earlier this week, they should have told him directly and before the ceremony.
ReplyDeleteAdmittedly it would have been even more embarrassing to the archbishop if Andrus had stayed the whole time. But that would probably take the patience of a saint.
Yes, just say the invitation is withdrawn. Don't let the person show up and then be barred from admittance.
DeleteThe ceremonies are usually quite long. It would have taken a saint to stick it out. I think +Marc did exactly right.
Fairly high-level snub? This was *Israeli* level.
ReplyDeleteBut maybe Capo Corleone will think twice about it, and apologize if anyone was offended. And offer a free ride in his car.
(OTOH, I won't be offended if this is censored or censured. But I really am still shockable at my age, and this incident was way far out of bounds. 50 years regression in one step, back past John XXIII. I'll stop before I start making up lyrics to Los Cuatros Cardinales -- that's how deep the anti-hierarchy sensitivity goes.)
--Porlock Junior
I'm still shockable, too, Porlock, and I'm probably older than you are. I'm sure there will be further excuses about how it was all a misunderstanding, blah, blah, blah..., but it was shameful.
DeleteI wanted you to see this article in the National Catholic
ReplyDeleteReporter. Not only was Bishop Andrus treated rudely, but it seems that, subsequently, Catholic officials sought to lie about what actually happened on this occasion.
I thought you would also appreciate the protest by other Catholic Californians to the Archbishop's installation.
http://ncronline.org/node/36221
Thanks, Roberta. Excellent article which led me to the article in NCR specifically about +Marc.
DeleteThe Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence are wonderful and outré as always.
There has been little noise about the incident, so far as I've seen, in the city known so well for leftish politics, gay rights, and easily triggered outrage. And the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, of course. (All of which I support, of course, if with reservations about the outrage.)
ReplyDeleteApart from a few lines buried in the news story about installation, the only thing I've seen is an item this morning in Leah Garchiks's high-class gossip column.
http://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/garchik/article/In-Berkeley-the-pleasure-of-listening-3926821.php
It has a bit more information in the lede:
'Last Monday, in an open letter to the Diocese of California about the installation of Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, Episcopal Bishop of California Marc Andrus expressed hopes they could work together on poverty issues and dismay over the Catholic leader's support of Proposition 8. "I will not change my course with regard to the full inclusion of all people in the full life of the church," he said, and Catholics disagreeing with Cordileone's position would be welcomed "as our sisters and brothers" by the Episcopalians.'
I didn't know about that letter 4 days before the event. Makes it all the worse, no?
Porlock Junior