Further reflections on the return of adulterous Anne Turner to ministry

The old saying about the devil being in the details is often true. And it’s never as true as when we consider proposals to redeem a corrupt clergyperson like Anne Turner, whom the Diocese of Virginia suspended a year ago for adultery from her position as rector of Grace Episcopal Church in Alexandria, VA.

Indeed, Anglican Watch believes the details will undo plans to restore Turner as rector of Grace Episcopal.

Several members of our team know and respect senior warden Mary Hix, who recently emailed parishioners to announce the plans to bring Turner back. (Copy below this post.)

Further, we generally agree with all of Hix’s points, although we think that her claim in her letter that trust has been “damaged” by Turner’s conduct is a profound understatement. Indeed, words like “demolished,” “nuked,” “crushed,” and “destroyed,’ come to mind. 

We also note that Turner not only had an affair, but she repeatedly lied to church members about it. Moreover, as we discuss below, Turner’s conduct since becoming rector of Grace Church has also been damaging, including her efforts to suppress media coverage of her abusive, narcissistic behavior.

Turner will be unwilling to repair the harm she’s caused

Where we have a problem is Turner’s claim that she will attempt to repair the trust broken by her lies and adultery.

Really?

Are we going to see Turner reach out to the woman hurt by Turner’s adultery?

Will we see Turner take responsibility for her refusal to testify in the litigation between Anglican Watch editor Eric Bonetti and perjuring priest Bob Malm, the former rector of the church?

Does Turner realize that Malm’s perjury — itself a felony — and her refusal to testify are egregious violations of trust? Or that her refusal to testify is both cowardly and an implicit endorsement of Malm’s behavior that has caused lasting harm to the parish?

Does Turner have the backbone to say something when bullies in the parish abuse others? The parish has a long and sordid track record in that department, with Malm leading by example, resulting in myriad examples of bullying in the church choir, altar guild, and vestry. (Anyone who doubts this is encouraged to contact us; we are happy to provide names, dates, and details.)

Will Turner take a stand when bullies, liars, and abusers run for vestry or other leadership positions? Alison Campbell, Lisa Medley, Jeff Chiow, and Kelly Gable all quickly come to mind.

Nor should we forget that, as we mentioned in a previous post, Turner is a product of the Malm decades. Indeed, Malm claimed to be able to teach young seminary graduates how to be priests—a claim that should be evaluated in light of Malm’s regular “out of town” jaunts, not authorized by the vestry, any time he felt like a break. (The term in HR circles, by the way, is “wage theft.”)

Speaking of wage theft, Turner’s lies about being on spiritual retreats when she was actually road-tripping with her boyfriend are perilously close to Malm’s out-on-Sunday, back-on-Saturday routine. Does anyone know if she claimed expenses for these illicit outings? If she did, that’s theft by deception.

As for the answers to our previous rhetorical questions, we don’t see Turner as a leader. We don’t see her as possessing moral courage, moral integrity, or accountability. And we sure as hell don’t see her apologizing to anyone outside the church she has hurt. Nor do we see her making restitution for her conduct, which, in a Christian worldview, is a necessary part of repentance.

Instead, we believe Turner will tell people what she thinks they want to hear, only going far enough to keep her backside out of the wringer. In other words, she seems to us to be the slightly more palatable version of perjuring priest Bob Malm, a narcissist of the first order. Indeed, all we can say for Turner is that she works harder than Malm—but that’s not a high standard.

That said if Turner does actually repent of her behavior to third parties, we will be the first to report it. But it’s not a post we expect to write.

Meanwhile, we do not believe Turner’s claims that her adulterous affair ended before it came to light. Indeed, we know she was still calling, texting, and sending heart-shaped emoticons to her boyfriend in the months prior to the news breaking.

Context matters

Of course, all of this is information we have to evaluate in light of Grace Church’s sordid history, including:

• Malm’s refusal to do anything about it when two married parishioners were openly having an adulterous relationship outside their marriages.
• Malm’s lies, bullying, and weird swings between friendly and intimidating, all part of his narcissistic construct.
• Bullying of fellow church members by Lesley Malm, Linda Waskowicz, Kelly Gable, Jeff Chiow, Lisa Medley, and Alison Campbell.
• The outrageous decision by the 2014 vestry to vote Bob Malm a $100K bonus, almost simultaneously with its decision to cut health care benefits to church employees, ostensibly to “balance the budget.”
• The myriad courtroom lies — including in his written pleadings — by church attorney Jeff Chiow in his litigation, which was an effort to prevent online criticism of the church. These lies include 1) claims that former member Eric Bonetti is a “domestic terrorist.; 2) a fictional church shooting in the equally imaginary town of “Sugarland, Texas;” 3) Chiow’s claims that Bonetti was “harassing” the church via blogpost, which any competent first-year law student knows is not possible due to the First Amendment; 4) Chiow’s lies to the court, including that Bonetti never served as a police officer and was never a licensed attorney.
• The efforts by Chiow and Malm to drag Bonetti’s mother, Sigrid Yahner, into court, despite the fact she was in palliative care and terminally ill.
• The lies spread by the Grace Church vestry, then led by Rich Kelly, that there was no truth to Bonetti’s claims.

Of course, a vestry that lies to church members represents a new low. But it’s safe to say that neither the vestry, nor clergy, nor the Diocese will ever hold Chiow, Malm, or the other fake Christians in the parish accountable for their lies.

While the DIocese would likely respond by saying it has no authority over the laity, we’ve seen multiple dioceses act when laity behaves badly, including the recent decision by two Pennsylvania dioceses to bar a registered sex offender from their parishes. So, taking action to address misconduct is possible, and we are not convinced that ignoring it and hoping it will go away is a solution.

Speaking of misconduct, we have yet to see any meaningful action to address the funds that went missing during Malm’s tenure. That, at a time when Malm was falsely claiming that the parish had enjoyed a clean audit. However, the reality is that the parish is not audited, but instead does an agreed-upon procedures (AUP) review of financials.

In other words, Malm lied.

Even worse, the AUP couldn’t be completed in a timely manner, as church financial records were in a shambles. Further, it is indisputable that funds went missing; thousands of dollars of stale checks and cash were found in church offices during a change of church office staff. Yet Lisa Medley says in writing that there is “complete transparency” involving church financials—which, by definition, means she knew of the missing money.

That also raised the question of the multiple stale estate checks found in the church offices toward the end of Malm’s tenure. Simply put, it is ludicrous to believe that representatives of these estates never called the church to ask why these checks were not being deposited.

Relatedly, we remain deeply disconcerted by the salary overpayments to former music director Dr. Richard Newman. When these amounts, which differed from the terms of Newman’s letter of agreement, were discovered by an incoming parish administrator, Malm made Newman repay the difference. But we think it highly unlikely that the amounts in question were not approved by Malm; our suspicion is that Malm approved a higher amount, and thought that no one on the vestry would learn of the discrepancy.

Then there is the matter of church deposits arriving at the bank in amounts different than what was reflected on the deposit tickets. Are we really supposed to believe that church counters, working in twos, cannot count? We find that notion improbable and believe this suggests that someone, most likely Malm, was embezzling from loose plate collections. After all, Malm knew where the key to the drop safe was kept and told his family in writing that he thought he was underpaid — despite his ludicrously overblown salary.

Speaking of church staff, we also note that Malm averted his gaze repeatedly when church staff — notably Beth Wiggers, but also Charlotte Payne Wright — bullied parishioners. No surprise, given Malm’s spineless approach to most issues, but still wrong.

And we doubt that Turner will ever have the backbone to apologize to Bonetti’s husband Mike Smith, whose request to attend the funeral of a parishioner with whom he was friends she ignored. Now, with Smith facing major health issues and nearing the end of life, Turner needs to grow a spine and make an effort, even if the effort is rejected.

The intersection of context and repentance

Of course, church officials, including Turner, like to say that the issues described above happened before their arrival. That’s spiffy, but it raises the question, “What are you going to do to fix these problems?”

In many cases, the church will need to deploy outside resources, as repairing the dysfunctional mess that is Grace Church (sometimes referred to as DisGrace) far exceeds the ability of any one person.

Yet, at the same time, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. As we stated earlier, we do not see Turner as having the courage, integrity, or mental health needed to lead healthy change. And if the head is unhealthy, the body follows.

So yes, we believe in repentance. But at the same time, we are reminded of Maya Angelou’s famous comment about believing people the first time they show you who they are.

Anne Turner has repeatedly shown us that she is a liar, an adulterer, and a spineless wonder. So, at this point, we believe her, and it is incumbent upon Turner to prove us wrong.