The Facts

A. Franklin was Diocesan Youth Coordinator. Complainant TW was a youth active in the Diocese through Sawyerville, a Diocesan ministry for children and youth in Hale County, Alabama, a highly impoverished area, through free summer programs, mentoring, and scholarships. TW also was active in Christ Episcopal Church Tuscaloosa EYC. Franklin knew TW through both but became especially close when she became Youth Director at Christ Church. TW graduated from high school in May 2020 and was living in the Tuscaloosa area and having financial difficulties as he had no family support. TW initially knew Respondent through Sawyerville where Respondent was on staff as the Chaplain (pastor for the staff and campers). TW knew Respondent was an Episcopal priest and called him “Father Tommie.”

On September 13, 2020, Franklin received a telephone call and a text message with a video from TW. The video was a recording TW made of a conversation he had with Respondent of a sexual nature. Franklin then called TW who told her he was receiving financial help from the Respondent. When TW asked for help paying a bill, Respondent asked him to come to Respondent’s home. When he arrived, Respondent invited him inside. TW said Respondent gave him a massage at his home and then made sexual comments to him. He felt uncomfortable so he made the video on his phone. Franklin reported this to the Bishop Diocesan and the Bishop Coadjutor. Franklin kept the video and screenshots of text messages between Respondent and TW.

B. Later Franklin received a phone call from another youth she knew in the Diocese, DK, from Greensboro, Alabama. DK told her that Respondent had given him a massage while at Sawyerville. DK stated he felt uncomfortable around Respondent. DK was a black male about nineteen (19) years old at the time.

Franklin prepared a written report of what happened. (See Church Ex 5 - Report of Sexual Harassment by Franklin).

2. TW (Complainant)

In 2019 TW, a black male, was a counselor at Sawyerville, a Diocesan ministry for children and youth in Hale County, Alabama, a highly impoverished area, through free summer programs, mentoring, and scholarships. There he met Respondent whom he knew to be a priest and called him “Father Tommie.” He sought guidance from him and felt he could go to him for help. TW was having financial problems and Respondent helped him. Respondent asked him to come from TW’s home in Northport to Respondent’s home in Birmingham to assist him with a bill. TW was nineteen (19) years of age at the time. Respondent was about forty-four (44) years old. TW testified that, while in the home, Respondent showed him his bedroom, massaged him, and said things that felt uncomfortable, wrong, and inappropriate. That is when he made the video with his phone. (See Church Ex 6A - Video by TW). TW testified that Respondent said he had been watching him, and Respondent offered TW money for sex.

3. DK (Complainant)

In 2018 DK, a black male, was a camper at Camp McDowell, the Diocesan overnight camp. The next year DK served as a counselor at Sawyerville, a Diocesan ministry for children and youth in Hale County, Alabama, a highly impoverished area, through free summer programs, mentoring, and scholarships. Through these two (2) experiences DK met Respondent who at the time was forty-four (44) years old. DK knew Respondent as a priest and called Respondent “Father Tommie.” Respondent was the Sawyerville chaplain when DK was there. While at Sawyerville Respondent offered DK a massage. DK testified that Respondent offered on multiple occasions to take DK to Six Flags, an amusement park near Atlanta. Respondent claimed he could make it not look suspicious. DK said this made him feel very uncomfortable. When Respondent invited him to his home, DK said he did not go. DK knew Respondent was gay (it was no secret) and felt like they had been friends. DK was about nineteen (19) years old at the time.

4. The Rev. Rob Morpeth

A Diocesan staff member for twenty-six (26) years and an Episcopal priest for forty-three (43) years, Morpeth is the Intake Officer for the Diocese. He received the reports from Kathleen Franklin and the Bishop Diocesan. He also spoke with TW and viewed TW’s video. It was his opinion that if true, the allegations rose to the level of a Title IV violation. To his knowledge all prior disciplinary complaints in the Diocese of Alabama had been resolved (including some where clergy were deposed) and none had gone to a Hearing. In his expert opinion there existed a pastoral relationship between Respondent and TW and that it was violated when Respondent asked TW to come to his home for financial assistance, creating an imbalance of power. (See Church Ex 4 - Report of Intake Officer October 27, 2020).

Respondent had received the Diocesan Policy on Sexual Conduct and signed that he understood it and agreed to abide by it. The document defines “sexual misconduct” and “pastoral relationship” and states that engaging in sexual misconduct can result in punishment including deposition. Further, by signing Respondent agreed “to fully participate” in the disciplinary process. (See Church Ex 12 - Covenant for Sexual Responsibility).

Morpeth identified the Administrative Leave documents. (See Church Exs 2 - Administrative Leave November 12, 2020; 2A - Addendum to Administrative Leave November 18, 2020; and 3 - Amended Terms of Administrative Leave January 14, 2021).

5. Crystal Jones

A. From 2016 to 2022 Jones was the Director of Sawyerville, a Diocesan ministry for children and youth in Hale County, Alabama, a highly impoverished area, through free summer programs, mentoring, and scholarships. As such she was responsible for staffing. Among the staff positions was a Chaplain. This was almost always a priest, and that staffer led two (2) Eucharist services, held chapel time for the staff, helped with disciplinary issues with campers and staff, and was there for anyone who needed someone to talk with. Respondent was Session I, Upper Camp Chaplain in 2019. (See Church Exs 9 - Emails between Respondent & Crystal Jones and 10 - Sawyerville Coordinator Form). The Sawyerville Chaplain Job Description states: “Most importantly, the chaplain is there for pastoral care of both the campers and staff.” (See Church Ex 11, par. 5. - Sawyerville Chaplain Job Description).

B. Jones knew CT, another Complainant, through Happening, a Diocesan spiritual retreat for high school students held at Camp McDowell, the Diocesan overnight camp, and through Sawyerville where CT was a small group leader and intern, for five (5) years. Respondent was the spiritual director at Happening. His position included attending to pastoral needs and listening to confessions. CT stated to Jones that Respondent asked him about staying at CT’s home, but it made CT feel uncomfortable so it did not happen. Jones told the Rev. Rob Morpeth about her conversation with CT.

6. The Rev. Corey Jones

Jones is Associate Rector at St. Luke's in Birmingham. In 2018 he was the Session Director at Camp McDowell, the Diocesan overnight camp, and Respondent was the Session Chaplain. See Church Ex 16 - Program Staff for Senior Camp 2018). Among the one hundred, sixty (160) campers at that session were TW, DK, and CT. (See Church Ex 17 - Redacted List of Campers).

7. The Rt. Rev. Glenda Curry

While Bishop Coadjutor in 2020, Bishop Curry was contacted by Kathleen Franklin about complainants from Sawyerville, a Diocesan ministry for children and youth in Hale County, Alabama, a highly impoverished area, through free summer programs, mentoring, and scholarships. Bishop Curry attended a meeting with the Bishop Diocesan, Respondent, and others to discuss with Respondent the Sawyerville complaints and his arrest for sexual misconduct of WS on November 7, 2020. Respondent admitted “that he had a romantic interaction with a person with whom he had an established pastoral relationship….” Respondent was placed on Administrative Leave with pay for three (3) months, “required to undergo evaluation, counseling and treatment in a facility selected by the Bishops,” and was “inhibited from exercising his privileges as an Episcopal priest for the duration of this Administrative Leave, and from identifying himself as such either by manner of action or mode of dress.” (See Church Ex 2 - Terms of Administrative Leave November 12, 2020).

On January 14, 2021, Bishop Curry amended the Administrative Leave Terms as Respondent had not resigned as Rector of St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church, as requested in the meeting on December 14, 2020. (See Church Ex 3 - Amended Terms of Administrative Leave January 14, 2021).

Bishop Curry further testified that Respondent had posted a video on youtube.com after the Amended Terms of Administrative Leave was issued January 14, 2021. In that video Respondent stated “I’m the Rev. Dr. Tommie Lee Watkins, Jr, and I thank you for taking the time to listen to my story.” (emphasis added) (See Church Exs 14Respondent’s youtube.com video and 15 - Transcript of video).

In 2019 Bishop Curry and Respondent both served as Chaplains at Sawyerville. Curry worked with the middle group while Respondent was Chaplain of the Upper Level (older) campers. Bishop Curry described the Chaplain’s duties as being totally about pastoral care.

(See Church Exs 21A - Photo of Respondent on staff; 21B, C, DPhotos of Respondent anointing; 21E - Photo of Sawyerville campers and staff). In her opinion Respondent’s behavior with TW, DK, CT, and WS as well as his video comments violated the Canons.

8. CT (Complainant)

In 2017 while at Happening, a Diocesan spiritual retreat for high school students held at Camp McDowell, the Diocesan overnight camp, CT, a white male, met Respondent who was the Chaplain. Respondent took his confession there. CT was also a camper at Camp McDowell and a staff member at Sawyerville, a Diocesan ministry for children and youth in Hale County, Alabama, a highly impoverished area, through free summer programs, mentoring, and scholarships. CT further spent time with him at the Christmas Youth Retreat at Camp McDowell where Respondent became a mentor, encouraging him to consider social work as his career. Thereafter they saw each other some and texted a few times a month.

CT became a student at Auburn University in August 2020. CT was about nineteen (19) years old and Respondent was about forty-five (45) years old. Respondent texted and called CT at Auburn about how he was doing. Respondent decided they should see each other. CT was not able to go to Birmingham but suggested Respondent come to Auburn. Respondent asked where he would sleep and told CT he was his special project. Respondent also texted CT: “So when I see you I will have to hug and kiss ya.” (See Church Ex 8 - Texts between Respondent and CT). CT contacted Crystal Jones to tell her he felt uncomfortable about the texts as he thought they were just going to lunch, not having an overnight visit. CT knew Respondent was gay early on and thought he was a good man who made bad choices.

9. The Rev. Marc Burnette

Burnette is the priest at Canterbury Chapel Tuscaloosa and has been there over thirteen (13) years. He knew Respondent first as a parishioner at St. Andrew’s in Birmingham and then as a Curate at Canterbury. While Respondent was serving at Canterbury, Burnette received a letter from KC accusing Respondent of misconduct with her husband and threatening to sue. Burnette addressed the situation by meeting with Respondent and telling him this was unacceptable behavior and to inform the Bishop immediately. Respondent did not deny the accusation and agreed to inform the Bishop. Burnette attempted to meet with KC but she failed to show both times a meeting was scheduled. (See Church Ex 20 - Emails between KC and Burnette). Burnette notified the Rev. Rob Morpeth of the matter. (See Church Ex 19 - Email from Burnette to Morpeth).

10. WS (Complainant)

WS did not testify in person but by affidavit. (See Church Ex 13Affidavit of WS). In addition the court records were submitted. (See Church Ex 7 - Court Records re WS complaint). WS, a white male who was twenty-four (24) years of age at the time, attended a food drive at St. Andrews Episcopal Church Birmingham and received a sack lunch. WS met Respondent, who was forty-five (45) years of age at the time, at the food drive and told him about his financial problems. Respondent invited WS to his home to do yard work for $100 on or about November 7, 2020. WS followed Respondent home from church. On the way Respondent paid to fill up WS’ gas tank. When they arrived, Respondent asked WS how he was, claiming he looked tense. Respondent rubbed WS’ shoulder and then took WS to the back bedroom where WS removed his shirt for the back rub. After five (5) minutes Respondent asked him to remove his pants and underwear to rub his buttocks. WS further swore that “when his finger penetrated a bit and he asked for a taste so I got up a[nd] left.” WS viewed Respondent as a pastor and his acts were unwelcome. WS went to the police and filed a report stating the facts in his own writing. A warrant for the crime of Sexual Misconduct was issued by a judge against Respondent on November 9, 2020. WS decided he did not want to put himself through a process in which he would have to confront Respondent. On February 18, 2021 the case was dismissed on request of the victim on payment of court costs. (See Church Ex 7Court Records re WS complaint).

Credibility, Reliability and Weight of the Testimony and Other Evidence

The Hearing Panel is mindful of its canonical duty to “determine the credibility, reliability and weight to be given to all testimony and other evidence.” Canon IV.13.10. In doing so, the Hearing Panel has taken into account the demeanor of the witnesses on the witness stand; their apparent candor and fairness; their bias, if any; their intelligence; their interest, or lack of it, in the outcome of the case; their opportunity, or lack of it, for knowing the truth and for having observed the facts to which they testified; and any prior inconsistent statements by the witnesses contrary to the evidence at the hearing. Based on these considerations the Hearing Panel makes the following observations.

Three (3) of the complainants (TW, DK, and CT) testified in open court identifying themselves by name and address. Their full names were used at the Hearing, unlike in this Order where the Hearing Panel sees no need to use more than initials to identify them. They each stated in some detail their relationship with the Respondent as pastoral; how Respondent groomed them; and finally how Respondent tried to take advantage of them. Each reacted negatively and came forward to the Church with their complaints. Their testimony, while different in some aspects, revealed a clear pattern of behavior by the Respondent, as he tried to take advantage of the situation by virtue of his pastoral relationship, his financial inducements, and the age difference. [See Church Ex 7 - Court Records re WS ComplaintRespondent’s date of birth is January 18, 1975 making him forty-two (42) years old in 2017]. Each of these complainants appeared to take the matter seriously, was thoughtful in their responses, and did not deviate from what they had told others. It would have been easier for each to have refused to testify after such a long wait and having to again face the perpetrator, Respondent. No one knew Respondent would not be present at the Hearing before 9:05 am the day of their testimony. It took considerable courage for these complainants to come forward publicly and testify about highly personal and sensitive matters.

The evidence presented as to Complainant WS was in the form of an affidavit (See Church Ex 13 - Affidavit of WS) and court records (See Church Ex 7 -Court records re WS). The President of the Hearing Panel recognized the affidavit could be considered as hearsay but admitted it as evidence under Canon IV. 13.10(b)(5) as it was sworn and supported by the court records. The court records (Church Ex 7) were admissible under Canon IV. 13.10(b)(4) - records of another proceeding. While the criminal case was dismissed on request of WS on February 18, 2021 (See Church Ex 7 - Court Records re WS), WS stated in his affidavit he did so “because [he] decided [he] did not want to put [himself] through a process in which [he] would have to confront [Respondent] again.” We note that by the time of the dismissal Respondent was already under Administrative Leave (See Church Ex 2 - Terms of Administrative Leave November 12, 2020, 2AAddendum November 18, 2020, and 3 - Amended Terms of Administrative Leave January 14, 2021). In addition, the facts of WS’ complaint shared a number of similarities with those of the first three (3) complainants, including the pastoral relationship, financial inducements, and age difference.

As to the testimony of Kathleen Franklin, the Rev. Rob Morpeth, Crystal Jones, the Rev. Corey Jones, the Rt. Rev. Glenda Curry, and the Rev, Marc Burnette - we find their testimony to be credible and reliable and to be given great weight as well.

The Hearing Panel was keenly aware that neither Respondent nor Respondent’s Attorney was present at any time during the Hearing. As a result, members of the Hearing Panel asked questions of the witnesses and the Church Attorneys. We also considered all the prior pleadings and arguments made by Respondent as if Respondent were present to reiterate them.