[Magdalen] PB restricts Cook

[Ann Markle]

Roger, I think the misrepresentation was as simple as saying she was in
good, solid recovery, when obviously she wasn't. Nothing more complex than
that. IMO.

Ann

The Rev. Ann Markle
ann.markle at aya.yale.edu
On Feb 10, 2015 6:28 PM, "Roger Stokes" <roger.stokes65 at btinternet.com>
wrote:

> On 10/02/2015 22:08, Grace Cangialosi wrote:
>
>> The Episcopal News Service is reporting that the PB has issued a "formal
>> Canonical restriction" against Heather Cook. Among other things, she may
>> not hold herself out as "an ordained person of this church in good
>> standing" until all matters pertaining to the case have been resolved. The
>> whole thing is on the Episcopal News Service website.
>>
>
> I notice from the website report that the inhibition notice includes a
> reference to "misrepresentations you allegedly made to persons in the
> Diocese of Easton and in connection to your candidacy for the episcopate in
> the Diocese of Maryland regarding your experience with alcohol."  I assume
> this refers to comments Bishop Cook may have made in relation to the 2010
> arrest and whether or not it was a one-off incident.
>
> This development was to be expected.  I don't know how TEC deals with
> ecclesiastical allegations linked to criminal allegations but this side of
> the pond the Church would let the civil procedures run their course before
> moving to judgement on the ecclesiastical allegations.  In this way there
> can be no argument that the ecclesiastical procedures have impeded the
> civil jurisdiction and a finding of guilt in a criminal trial can be taken
> as evidence that offewnces have been committed.
>
> My reading of Title IV is that until there has been an official
> presentment by the panel of the Disciplinary Board of Bishops there is the
> possibility of an agreement between Bishop Cook and the Diocese of Maryland
> whereby she vacates her position as suffragan bishop.  Her attorney would
> be well advised to consider this possibility alongside preparing for the
> arraignment next month.
>
> Roger
>