This didn't happen, notwithstanding any vague assurances Strawn and Morello may have made at parish meetings. The most recent version of events was in a local paper, although somewhat garbled: "At this time the church remains under the auspices of the Anglican Church and Morello said there are no plans to enter the Roman Catholic order." So here are the first dupees, the naive but sincere parishioners who had been stirred up against the rector (possibly having been told the rector was obstructing the process), but who felt that the ACA would rescue them and put them into the Ordinariate. Someone identifying himself as "former parishioner" posted the following comment on Fr Smuts's blog:
re the Ordinariate: “[W]hy is it that Morello says that there are no plans for St. Mary’s to move in that direction?”Because he has lied to the laity and lied to the clergy from day one. No doubt, he has no plans to move in that direction because he is not able to be ordained a Catholic priest himself nor willing to submit to Catholic authority. That he at first wanted to bring in a former Catholic priest to be rector was sign enough that he was taking many of us for a ride. His lack of transparency about the “charges” against Fr. Kelley is of a piece with his duplicity regarding the Ordinariate. Now that he has chased off the pro-Catholics he has the prize all for himself; the majority who wished to become Catholic are now already Catholic or dismissed/barred from the parish by Morello and unable to vote (again) for the parish to enter the Ordinariate. . . . Count me the biggest dupe of all.
The second dupee, in my opinion, was Andrew Bartus. In my opinion as well as that of other observers, Bartus apparently felt that he could advance his career by hastening the parish's entry to the US Ordinariate, where he apparently felt deft maneuver a la Barchester Towers would favor his appointment as rector. Events by early spring 2012 suggest he had seriously miscalculated. He had aligned himself with the small group in the parish that was talking to Bishop Strawn about reasserting control over the parish following the dissolution of the Patrimony. He went as far as asking to have a private meeting with my wife and me in late March about important developments that were about to take place, but he canceled the meeting at the last minute. Within days, the events of early April 2012 listed in the timeline on the Freedom for St Mary blog, took place, Bishop Strawn inhibited Fr Kelley, and Bartus had left the parish. Some in the parish believe Bartus had been led to believe that he would be named rector until the last moment.
Those associated with Bartus have given varying accounts of what his actual intentions were. It's hard to avoid thinking, though, that if he'd played his cards only a little differently, he would have been able to stay in a well-paid position as curate at St Mary of the Angels, with few actual duties beyond the daily offices, under a 65-year-old rector. If there hadn't been so much friction and controversy -- some part of it, according to Ralph Clark's statement cited yesterday, incited by Bartus himself -- he could have gone with the parish ino the Ordinariate and then, either on the rector's retirement or sooner if the rector had impediments to ordination as a Catholic priest, quite possibly become rector himself. Instead, he's serving a mission group meeting between Roman-liturgy masses at a Catholic parish and working a day job. It's hard to avoid the impression that people with private agendas exploited his apparent poor judgment and immaturity -- he's one of the bigger dupes in the story, as I see it.
What of the ACA, Morello, Strawn, and Marsh? The transaction whereby they rode in to the rescue of eight or twelve distressed parishioners in April 2012 is undoubtedly complex. All the evidence suggests the anti-Hepworth majority in the ACA and TAC had been stewing over the Patrimony ever since Hepworth set it up, and they were eagerly waiting for the earliest possible opportunity to rid themselves of the Archbishop and dance on the Patrimony's grave. Indeed, the timeline on the Freedom for St Mary's site has this entry:
2012-01-11: Bishop Strawn stayed away from a secret meeting with some Vestry when informed by Patrimony’s Bishop Moyer that he had no Jurisdiction over, no interest in, nor business with St Mary of the Angels.The move the ACA finally took in April had clearly been in the works for some time. But who was calling the shots? Let's look at the present outcome and ask qui bono? It's hard to imagine that Marsh, Strawn, or Morello is happy with how things have turned out. A legal case they expected to have resolved in the space of a few weeks in May-June 2012 is dragging out for an extended period.
My understanding is that the parish accounts are still frozen, and unless they can find a way around that, they can't even pay a supply priest to say mass, even if they could find one who'd agree to do it. If they were expecting to get their hands on all the money, they haven't been able to, and likely won't until all possible appeals from both sides have been exhausted. As a result, they've bought themselves an enormous headache well above their meager paygrades. The scandal can't help in recruiting new clergy to a post like St Mary's, nor in retaining the parishes they have anywhere in the ACA.
What about the lawyers, who are said to make out no matter what? This is a hard one, too. It's understood -- Judge Linfield remarked on it -- that both teams have done an outstanding job. Unfortunately, my understanding is both teams have claims on the same frozen St Mary's accounts. My guess is that neither firm is likely to be paid anytime soon. Even the lawyers aren't cleaning up.
So again, qui bono? Let's look at the actual results. The parish remains locked, with no masses said since June 2012. Although Morello had told a local paper they'd be resumed sometime in November, this seems unlikely, especially given the obstacles of paying a supply priest or even finding one willing to come into the situation, given what we know about the players. The great majority of parishioners seem to have left looking for other options -- devout Christians prefer not to miss mass Sunday after Sunday, month after month. Yet those are the very people you want in a parish. They also recognize that if Strawn and Morello can remove vestry members in violation of state and canon law and appoint their own stooges in violation of same, as well as excommunicate parishioners at will, there's no point in their even trying to participate in parish life. So the rank and file Christians are pretty much gone.
Who's left? The hard core of eight to twelve dissidents, a diverse group, some members since the 1970s, some very new, some pro-Ordinariate (at least they say they are), some resolutely anti-Catholic. They'd been out-voted in a series of parish elections on the Ordinariate and on leaving the ACA, and they'd been voted off the vestry. But in the end, they're still in charge, now Vestrypeople for Life, it would seem. It doesn't seem to make much difference to them that no masses are being said, no AA meetings being held, no homeless coming to the door and getting small handouts -- they're in charge. They, I suppose, are the dupers, and everyone else is the dupee. Except, of course, as C.S.Lewis also knew, there are in-groups, but there's never an ultimate in-group: someone else is always more in than you are. Someone else is more in to this in-group as well.
