Corrupt bishop Todd Ousley, recently released from his previous role as Bishop for Pastoral Development, has been elected bishop provisional of the faltering Diocese of Wyoming. The news comes despite Ousley’s deliberate mishandling of multiple Title IV clergy disciplinary cases involving Episcopal bishops, in which Ousley asserted that he could ignore the provisions of Title IV at his discretion.
Instead, Ousley contends that bishops can disregard Title IV at any time they wish because they can address complaints pastorally.
We and others have parsed those claims extensively so that we won’t revisit the matter at length. Instead, we note three key points:
- There is no support in the canons for Ousley’s claim.
- Under the canons, pastoral response is supposed to be one of the key priorities in any Title IV matter—which is telling, as Ousley has a history of ignoring the pastoral needs of complainants in Title IV cases, as evidenced by his abysmal handling of the Whayne Hougland debacle. That, even as Ousley gasses on about the “lofty goals” of Title IV.
- Ousley must have been really busy with all those pastoral responses since he left a multi-year backlog of unaddressed Title IV complaints waiting for his almost equally feckless successor, Barb Kempf. In other words, the reality is that most Title IV complaints involving Episcopal bishops went to die in Ousley’s inbox, never to be seen again.
New issues with Ousley: Violations of Title IV confidentiality
Meanwhile, in his efforts to bag himself a sweetheart deal and continue his six-figure pay via his Wyoming gig, Ousley made a series of videos that purported to address concerns about his suitability for the job. The reality is that these videos are an alarming illustration of what looks suspiciously like a bad case of clinical narcissism.
Ousley’s videos share some common themes, including:
- His use of narcissistic puffery about the “lofty goals” of Title IV.
- His insistence that he can ignore the Title IV canons.
- His disturbing efforts to trash or discredit the complainants in several Title IV cases that have rightly damaged his reputation.
Additionally, Ousley is now the subject of a Title IV complaint originating from these videos, which involves the unauthorized disclosure of details of a Title IV case against him, which Anglican Watch editor Eric Bonetti filed against him.
Thus, Ousley’s videos are all too typical for him, reflecting a narcissistic disconnect between his babble about lofty goals and his thoroughly not-so-lofty behavior.
What next?
All of that begs the question: What next for the Diocese of Wyoming?
As things stand, more than a third of delegates to the Wyoming special convention voted against Ousley. That should, if nothing else, be a warning to Ousley to tread carefully, work hard, and leave the games at home.
That said, Ousley will start his new gig sometime in April.
In the meantime, Anglican Watch and others will continue to fiercely resist Ousley and his corruption. Yes, people can and do change, but past performance is indeed a reliable bellwether of future results, and Ousley has repeatedly shown us who and what he is.
Or, to paraphrase Maya Angelou, “If you’re not prepared to believe someone the first time they show you who they are, maybe by the second or third time you should take them seriously.”
Relatedly, we want to call out another of Ousley’s lies, which is his claim that he has no conflicts due to his role in the Title IV case involving the previous bishop diocesan. That is horsesh*t.
All we can in that regard is that, if he indeed was following Title IV, yes, Ousley had a conflict. Indeed, as intake officer, he was one of three persons responsible for referring the matter, so he was in a decision-making role.
Moreover, as intake officer, Ousley was expressly prohibited under church canons (effective January 1, 2025) from providing any pastoral response in a Title IV case. And prior to that time, as Ousley should well have known, any such role was strongly discouraged.
So, we are left with a situation in which the Diocese of Wyoming now has approved a bishop provisional who has expressly stated that he continues to believe he has the authority to usurp the will of General Convention and the larger church. And we see the church continuing to coddle and protect a bishop with a dismal track record and an arrogant commitment to clericalism of the worst sort.
We hope that our sisters and brothers in Wyoming don’t wind up being hurt spiritually by Ousley’s presence.
Our fear, however, is that the sort of harm caused by clergy like Ousley is narcissistic in origin, meaning that it’s often difficult to detect, and even harder to address. And let’s face it: The denomination lacks the will or moral courage to address the harm already done by Ousley, including the profound damage resulting fromn the Hougland debacle.
If you see something, say something
In the meantime, we are mindful of the perils of taking seriously the safe church training, which blithely tells Episcopalians that, if they see something questionable, they should say something. Our experience is that doing so will result in the whistleblower, like John the Baptist, getting her head served up on a silver platter.
And the Title IV protections for whistleblowers aren’t worth the paper they are written on. After all, bishops can, according to Ousley, opt for a “pastoral approach,” which in his case invariably favors the miscreant.
That said, Anglican Watch remains willing to call a spade a spade, and we protect our sources.
So, if there is even an inkling that Ousley is playing games, corruptly mishandling Title IV cases via his purported “pastoral” discretion, or otherwise engaging in misconduct, please let us know. We will do everything in our power to shine a light on Ousley’s corruption, to advocate for integrity, and to oppose spiritual or other abuse.
In the meantime, let’s hope Ousley’s tenure as bishop provisional is a short one. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark, and we fear the stench is about to get worse.
Leave a Reply