The first is signed by 19 former vestrymembers of Grace Church and current members of the non-CANA breakaway congregation
The second is a response to that letter by the current senior warden of Grace Church, Jon Wroblewski.
Pastor must answer important questions
Question: What is thy duty toward thy neighbor? Answer: My duty toward my Neighbor is . . . to do to all men as I would they should do unto me: . . . To be true and just in all my dealings: . . . To keep my hands from picking and stealing, and my tongue from evil speaking, lying, and slandering: . . . Not to desire other men’s goods; But to learn and labor truly to get my own living.
— The Book of Common Prayer (1928).
We are 19 former vestry members from Grace and St. Stephens Episcopal Church. Between us, we served almost every year when Father Don Armstrong was rector. Though we represent a variety of views on the moral issues facing our church, those issues are not in question here.
At issue is the commandment: Thou shalt not steal. Armstrong is exploiting theological divisions within the Episcopal Church to avoid a canonical investigation about his alleged financial wrongdoing. He has defied church and civil law by occupying and taking property from the church he and his allies left. We cannot keep silent.
Armstrong dismisses inquiries into his financial activities. He cries “religious persecution.” Consider the facts and ask: Is Armstrong trustworthy? Is he guilty of financial wrongdoing? Do he and his followers have a lawful basis for taking church property?
Is he trustworthy? Consider three examples: Armstrong claims the secessionist vestry members voted on March 26 to leave the Episcopal Church. They had already published the results of that “vote” on March 25.
In his March 30 letter, he claims he was “prevented by inhibition from responding to allegations.” The inhibition never prevented his private response to diocesan representatives. Diocesan representatives asked for his explanations or evidence eight times. He refused every time. Based on our experience, we are not surprised that he refuses to speak in settings he cannot control, nor to answer inquiries by informed questioners. Armstrong wrote on March 30, “the bishop’s own audit found no money missing” even though he is accused of “theft of $392,409.93.”
Is he guilty of financial wrongdoing? The presentment alleges that Armstrong took the nearly $400,000 for his personal expenses and for his son and daughter’s education, rent, cars, cell phones and computers. It alleges that he personally directed incorrect accounting entries for many of these checks. According to the presentment, he himself initialed many incorrect accounting entries. Such entries made it unlikely that those reviewing parish financial statements would identify payments benefiting Armstrong. The presentment alleges these sums and an additional $150,000 were never reported to the IRS. It also alleges that two checks totaling $3,433 received by Armstrong every month since 2001, suddenly began to be treated as taxable salary the month after the diocesan audit began. If so, this new practice is a tacit admission of previous wrongdoing.
In his March 30 letter, Armstrong admits the parish paid unlawful pay advances and loans and that questions have arisen regarding his use of funds set aside for the poor. Will he admit that he was the recipient? Has he repaid these sums?
In the same letter, Armstrong argues the “scholarships” for his children represent “a common practice in the church,” saying that staff financial arrangements were “handled by the wardens.” Four persons served as senior or junior warden from 2001 through 2007: Marge Goss, Craig Whitney, Jon Wroblewski and John Newsome. (Newsome resigned shortly after the diocesan attorney showed the vestry documents regarding Armstrong’s alleged misappropriations, and two days before the secession “vote”). We served as vestry members. We never gave the wardens blanket authority to negotiate “financial arrangements” for Armstrong. We know of no provision in the parish governing documents or canon law giving wardens this authority. If such payments were a lawful “common practice,” why not report them to the IRS?
Is there a lawful basis for taking the church property? Grace Church and St. Stephen’s has been a parish of the Episcopal church for more than 130 years. Those who serve as parish leaders have no authority to raid this parish or place it under a foreign leader. Dissenters can stay and work for reform. They can leave and join another church. But they cannot change church law or take church property as they leave.
Armstrong attempts to blind the Episcopal faithful to his own wrongdoing by accusing Bishop Robert O’Neill of “fantasy” and “obsession.” We reject this rhetoric. We reject it as strongly as we reaffirm our faith in our lord, Jesus Christ. We reject it as strongly as we reaffirm our affection for Grace and St. Stephen’s.
This letter is signed by Edward Brown, Garry Butcher, Bob Carlile, Timothy Fuller, Larry Gaddis, John Hermes, John E. Hill, Jr., Marianna McJimsey, Robert McJimsey, Elizabeth Lilly, Terry Lilly, Carol Nuss, George “Pat” Patterson, Beth Phillips, Jim Phillips, John Scrivner, Frear Simons, John
Response from Grace and St. Stephen's senior warden:
Saturday, April 14 2007
Dear Editor of The Gazette,
As senior warden of the vestry of Grace Church and St. Stephen’s I cannot let yesterday’s editorial by 19 current and former members of the Parish go unanswered. In their letter they have publicly questioned the trustworthiness of our priest and, by implication, the integrity of the duly elected members of the vestry, who serve as the governing fiduciary body of the Parish.
Let me first of all invite them and any and all persons of good will who are concerned about the financial matters of Grace Church and St. Stephen’s to a public forum this morning at 9:00 in the nave of the church at 631 N. Tejon Street. At this meeting the vestry will preside over Fr. Donald Armstrong’s formal response to the Episcopal Diocese of Colorado’s presentment. As the principal officer of the Colorado corporation of Grace Church and St. Stephen’s, I can assure all that the vestry eagerly awaits this forum for the truth to lay bare the reality behind all accusations, allegations, and charges for the matters in question.
As to the substantial points made in the letter of the 19 persons:
1. The vestry voted to leave the Episcopal Church on Monday morning, March 26, 2007 in a meeting at 8:00 am. Ironically, this can be confirmed by the Rev. Dr. Michael O’Donnell, the priest in charge of the dissenting congregation now meeting at Shove Chapel. Fr. O’Donnell sat in supportive attendance of our meeting and immediately thereafter celebrated our decision to leave the Episcopal Church with us over coffee and donuts.
2. The Diocese of Colorado has recently released the presentment against Fr. Armstrong after a year of formulating these allegations. During the course of the year, the Bishop has prevented Fr. Armstrong from making any public response. Fr. Armstrong has never been accorded the opportunity to respond to allegations before any ecclesiastical review committee or court. The sad reality is that for any justice to prevail in the face of such a contorted ecclesiastical system, Fr. Armstrong has had to leave the Episcopal Church of his ancestors in order to be free to defend himself against the allegations in question. This defense formally begins today in a public forum that will be presided over by the vestry with a congregation assembled to pass their own private judgment on the matter.
3. Regarding the question of scholarships, it was in fact, John Simmons, one of the letter’s 19 signatories and Sr. Warden at the time, who approved the scholarships – based in part on the fact that he had similar arrangements at Colorado College. His wife, Frear, was retained by the parish (at her husband’s suggestion) as an attorney to ensure that the vestry’s actions were legal and that the Parish was in compliance with the specified stipulations of the related trusts.
4. The church has not been “taken” or “raided” by the vestry, nor has anyone been forced to leave the parish. The vestry’s action to leave the Episcopal Church on March 26 was a pre-emptive defensive measure to protect the parish from an expected hostile take-over by the Diocese of Colorado. Our current provisional membership status in the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) allows the congregation to make a real choice in self-determination. In the Parish plebiscite scheduled for Sunday, May 20th the congregation will ratify or veto the vestry’s decision to leave the Episcopal Church. In the meantime, all members in good standing have been invited to fully participate in a 40 day period of discernment and to cast their vote on May 20th. At this time Grace Church and St. Stephen’s will either formally separate from the Episcopal Church or remain in it. Frankly, the Bishop’s effort to establish an alternative dissenting church is premature, divisive, schismatic, and unhelpful to the process we have set up for full participation of our body in this crucial decision making process about the future of the Parish.
5. We disagree with opinion of the 19 and believe that Grace Church and St. Stephen’s as a Colorado non-profit corporation has the lawful right of selfdetermination. As is publicly known, the Parish has recently entered El Paso County District Court to protect its rights to self-determination and property, both real and personal.
6. Regarding the letter’s reference to a “foreign leader,” I pray that I am not hearing anti-catholic or even racist connotations in its tone. If this is a reference to the Most Reverend Peter Akinola, Primate of the Church of Nigeria, it deeply saddens me. His missionary diocese in America has been recognized as legitimate by the Primates of the worldwide Anglican Communion. Furthermore, a holy man of God who was nominated to be World Magazine’s “Daniel of the Year” (2006) is undeserving of such contempt.
7. In the letter of the 19’s reaffirmation of their Christian faith and affection for Grace Church and St. Stephen’s, I cordially invite them to return to the parish and worship, pray, and study with us, to be reconciled to their priest of twenty-years, and to fully participate in the 40 days of discernment process concerning the future life of the Parish.
Respectfully,
Jon Wroblewski, Sr. Warden
Grace Church and St. Stephen’s
24 Comments •
Comments:
I am so glad Grace Church and its rector, Fr. Don Armstrong, are now, for the first time, able to defend themselves against the slanderous and illicit attacks of the Stalking Bishop of Colorado (as well as his minions who post on this blog with the purpose of tarnishing the reputations of so many people at Grace Church).
As details such as the retention of an attorney, Frear Simmons, to ensure compliance with the scholarship trust requirements, emerge, the public will be able to more fully realize just how outrageously the church and its rector have been treated. I wonder if the fact that Ms. Simmons’ husband, John Simmons, is publicly disparaging leaders of Grace Church for actions his wife was legally responsible for might threaten her ability to practice law if charges of malpractice are brought against her.