We’ve seen the various announcements from the St. Paul’s Dayton about the postponement of the installation of Daniel McClain and we are calling BS, world without end, on the vestry. Specifically, while the vestry tells people that the Title IV complaint against McClain was anonymous, it wasn’t.
Anglican Watch filed the complaint, and we make no secret of that fact. Indeed, we filed the complaint knowing full well that McClain is a litigious so-and-so who may (stupidly) try to sue us. We’re good with it.
So, our advice to the vestry is: Don’t lie.
We get that you may not be able to share the person’s name. And in fairness, we are far from the first person or organization to complain. So arguably the Title IV complaint is someone else’s doing. But we are confident that a but-for analysis makes clear that we are the instigators.
For the record, we got the chutzpah thing going, and we’re not afraid to call bullies out. Specifically, we find the allegations of domestic abuse and sexual assault by Daniel McClain persuasive.
We do not find McClain’s purported claims that his wife is violent and had a breakdown convincing.
Nor are we the only folks to reach those conclusions.
So folks, if you want to paint a target on someone, it’s us. And no, that does not mean we giving McClain’s flying monkeys a pass. Keep it clean, keep it civil, don’t offer content-free comments.
And while you’re at it, don’t say we’re doing the work of Satan. He doesn’t return our calls either.
All: We have decided to ban further comments from McClain’s favorite flying monkey, Joseph. That is due to his continuing content-free, fact-free comments. His speculative comments are inappropriate and unhelpful and marked by disrespect for alleged victims of domestic violence.
We also have deleted several of his non-fact-based comments.
You didn’t miss much. Just someone too busy doing church to have time to actually be church.
There is no way for St. Paul’s Vestry to know who made the Title 4 complaint. As such, it really is “anonymous” to them and to Fr. McClain. I would also add the fact that the vestry unanimously stands by their Rector, Fr. McClain. Their vote to unanimously proceed with a gathering instead of the instillation demonstrates their experience with him is different from whatever is the Title 4 complaint.
Given the allegations against McClain, the vestry’s approach is all the more damning. Indeed, if the vestry really has no idea what is in the complaint, then it’s inappropriate for the vestry to wade into the matter until it knows what the issues are. Something about being a “rubber stamp.”
And while we’re on the topic a little “compassion, love and respect” towards alleged victims of domestic violence and spousal rape would not be inappropriate.
We’d also point out that the most toxic clergy often act in that manner—they charm bomb those they perceive as useful, while treating others with an utter lack of concern.
So how does that explain the current situation?
Oh, and you’ve seen the diocesan investigatory reports? If so, kindly state what they say.
There is no way for St. Paul’s Vestry to know who made the Title 4 complaint. As such, it really is “anonymous” to them and to Fr. McClain. I would also add the fact that the vestry unanimously stands by their Rector, Fr. McClain. Their vote to unanimously proceed with a gathering instead of the instillation demonstrates their experience with him is different from whatever is the Title 4 complaint.
Speaking of, who’s that woman I keep seeing with McClain? Isn’t he still married?
Bullcrud. There is a difference between saying an anonymous complaint was filed and saying that you don’t know who filed the complaint. The complaint was far from anonymous. To say otherwise is a lie.
Not to mention that the vestry is lying when it says an investigation is required whenever a Title IV complaint is filed. First, the complaint passes a two-part test: If true, would the matter complained of constitute a violation of church canons? If it would, is the violation “of weighty and material importance to the ministry of the church?”
From there, the reference panel has several referral options:
Take no action other than appropriate pastoral responses
Refer the matter to Conciliation
Refer the matter to the Investigator for further investigation and report back to the Reference Panel
Refer the matter to the Conference Panel
Referral to the Bishop for possible negotiation of an Agreement for Discipline
At each phase, if resolution is not accomplished, the matter keeps coming back to the referral panel. If the matter goes out for investigation, the results of the investigation may be considered by the reference panel, although it does not evaluate the truth or falsity of witnesses.
So no, an investigation is neither required nor guaranteed. The St. Paul’s vestry does neither itself, nor the parish, any favors when it spouts falsehoods like this. Anything the vestry sends out should be cleared by the Canon to the Ordinary or the Intake Officer to make sure it is helpful, does not impede the Title IV process, and is accurate.
That is both logically and factually untrue.
Apropos logic, arguing there is no proof doesn’t address whether abuse has occured. It is akin to arguing someone isn’t dead because you haven’t seen their dead body. The fact you haven’t seen a dead body proves nothing as to whether the individual in question is dead or alive.
As to the facts, there is an emergency protective order in place, signed by a judge after an evidentiary hearing. And yet you claim there is no proof of domestic abuse. So which is it? Are you saying the judge was wrong? Or you know better than the judge? We’d also note that the standard for issuance is an imminent threat of bodily harm. So, in light of the judge’s ruling, it logically follows that you agree that McClain cannot serve as rector.
As to the prior Title IV case, you falsely stated that McClain was exonerated. He was not, per the bishop.
It’s time for you to get your various stories straight.
Yet again, you are clueless. Are you aware that other clergy plan to testfy? And criminal charges also are allegations. Unless the defendant is found guilty, in which case they become a conviction.
Do yourself a favor—stop with the speculation. We are removing your non-fact-based comments.
Earlier, you stated that you don’t know what is in the complaint. How is it that you are able to opine as to the outcome?
The notion that you would automatically discount the experiences of alleged victims of domestic violence is profoundly at variance with the Gospels. “As you have done to the least of these, so also have you done unto me.”
Your focus should be on discerning the truth, not jumping to McClain’s defense.
Meanwhile, you are being profoundly disrespectful to others, and you’re making the situation worse for the church, McClain, and everyone else.
If you don’t know what you’re talking about, do yourself a favor and keep your mouth shut.