Sometime in the second half of 2010, following the arrival of Andrew Bartus in the parish as a new graduate of Nashotah House and a transitional deacon, a small group of people got together to air their dissatisfactions with St Mary's Hollywood. It's difficult to tell what they were dissatisfied with, but overall, I would guess they all were basically unhappy people, perhaps even deeply troubled. All of that group, Bartus, the Kangs, Ms Akan, and Mrs Bush, were fairly new to the parish. To the extent that Bartus's participation in this group involved extensive interaction outside parish activities, it was unethical in itself, but on top of that, it appears that the group mutually reinforced its divisive instincts, with Bartus's concurrence.
Somehow, the group objected to Fr Kelley in an unspecified way. Their publicly expressed objections involved "financial impropriety", but their main activity was simply to engage in financial impropriety themselves and then try to transfer the blame for it to Fr Kelley. I assume it took them some time to develop the scheme of not forwarding quarterly tax withholding payments to the IRS. This could have potentially catastrophic consequences for all involved, including those in the group, and it could do major damage to the parish. In other words, it was a reckless and dangerous idea, but they brought it to fruition and pursued it for over a year.
What was Bartus's issue with Fr Kelley? It does seem that he became dissatisfied almost as soon as he arrived. Mr Clark's statement cites theological objections, but my understanding is that then-Bishop Moyer discussed these with Bartus in June 2011 and decided they were unwarranted. But you wouldn't normally resolve theological issues by violating tax law.
How soon did the group apprise Bishops Strawn, Marsh, or Falk of this scheme? Certainly by early 2012, Strawn at least was aware of it. As of late 2011, Strawn was communicating with the dissidents, in violation of the agreement he'd signed in April of that year not to interfere with Patrimony parishes. By April 2012, Strawn had been informed of the likely date when the IRS would seize the parish and had prepared a letter of inhibition to Fr Kelly in anticipation of it.
It's probable that few people in this group of plotters will face accountability for what they did, at least in this life. Most probably will never be in a position to do equivalent damage to another parish, in fact. The exception is Bartus. The events he was connected with here simply call into question his suitability for the priesthood in any denomination. If he was troubled enough to do what he appears to have done at St Mary's, it's very likely that similar problems will emerge elsewhere.
