Folks, let’s cut to the chase: If you are a member of St. Paul’s Dayton and you are in any way still supporting rector-elect Dan McClain, you are on the wrong side of history.
Specifically, his conduct towards his wife, Kate, is abusive and unethical on multiple fronts. We condemn abuse of every sort, and we hope and pray that members of St. Paul’s reject this behavior as well.
Before we go further, we want to reiterate: Dan’s going around telling people that his wife is mentally ill is spectacularly inappropriate. Not only is the statement false and defamatory, it’s a boundary violation with parishioners and a bad example.
Dan also would be wise to keep his big mouth shut. The Episcopal Church is a damned small place, and his comments travel far and wide—to the point we are sick and tired of his endless childish antics. As in, would someone please throw this dolt in jail for a while and be done with it?
Speaking of court records, they indicate there’s a motion to show cause for civil contempt filed against Dan in the ongoing divorce litigation for violating the court’s prior order to pay support and basically leave his wife Kate alone. Should be an easy thing to do in light of Dan’s spending time with “Plant Lady,” despite still being married, right?
But no, as we previously covered, Dan decided to show up at the Boonshoft, park right next to Kate’s vehicle, and otherwise violate the court’s protective order. He did so knowingly, as the Boonshoft has confirmed for us that he called repeatedly to ascertain that his son—and by extension, Kate—were on the property.
As for any possible claim he didn’t realize he was parking next to Kate, spare us. The vehicle Kate drove at the time was only slightly smaller than the Queen Mary II, and utterly unmistakeable. Dan knew damned well what he was doing.
Moreover, when the transit van was sold per court order, Dan allegedly decided to cancel all insurance, not just on the vehicle. Doing so was spectacularly childish and manipulative, especially when it involves a wife that Dan claims is mentally ill.
Then we turn to the issue of support. What kind of jackass doesn’t pay support? It is a pretty sorry day for the Episcopal Church when the court has to order money withheld from a priest’s paycheck to make this happen.
Also at issue is Dan’s bringing his son to court for divorce proceedings, per court documents. That is per se abusive and far transcends even being a jackass. That right there should warrant the court body-slamming Dan McClain.
We’re also going to issue a warning to Dan: We see a constant pattern of manipulation and bullying coming from him, both towards parishioners and his family. We continue to document as this information comes in, and if it continues, we are prepared to publish details, or drive to Ohio and offer testimony.
In other words, we’re watching, and we strongly suggest that Dan stop with the sordid behavior. And if he thinks we’re bluffing, he’s in for a rude awakening. We have very little patience for bullies, and even less patience for abusers—and Dan falls in both categories.
As for the court, Anglican Watch believes that a week in jail for civil contempt would do Dan McClain and all involved a world of good. Maybe there he can learn the meaning of the word “respect,” both for the court and the people in his life.
Below is a combined PDF of the documents related to the motion to show cause.
I believe in the case of Daniel McClain you are involving yourself in a private matter between two adults that is only enflamed by your sensationalist rhetoric. Daniel is a good, competent priest who is trying his best to be a good faith leader for St. Paul’s. His family’s unfortunate dynamic needs to be left alone to resolve itself. You are not helping and honestly, I find the vilification of an essentially good man to be the opposite of Christian.
First, Daniel McClain’s conduct is bringing scandal to the entire church.
Second, it is attitudes like yours that allow so much bad behavior among TEC clergy.
Third, in case you hadn’t noticed, St. Paul’s is emptying out. If Dan is such a competent priest and good person, why the rush to the exit?
Fourth, you have no idea what you’re talking about. “Good” people don’t lie to others. They don’t violate court orders. And it doesn’t require a court order to get a “good person” to fulfill their legal obligation to pay support. Good people don’t go around telling parishioners their spouse is mentally ill.
Fifth, you conveniently sidestep the Title IV case against Dan, which does not primarily center on his dismal conduct towards his family. While I don’t intend to rehash the details, you probably should learn the details from someone other than Dan. Without that information, you’re spouting empty rhetoric with no knowledge of the underlying issues.
If that’s your description of goodness in the context of the Christian faith, no thanks. You can keep both.