Update: Amjad Samuel shows his true colors

Canon lawyer Michael Rehill recently scored a small victory in the Amjad Samuel Title IV case by getting clearance from the Title IV hearing panel to post discovery on the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (ECCT) diocesan website. But Rehill’s victory is pyrrhic, and the enormous supplemental brief posted to the website merely highlights Samuel’s true colors. And no, that is not a racist remark. 

Anglican Watch has read the entire brief. Every. Last. Word.

At the highest level, the brief evinces Samuel’s modus operandi: trying to intimidate, embarrass, oppress, and control. Without exception, the issues raised are trivial, speculative, dilatory, and oppressive. The entire brief is a shining example of bad faith.

Nor does the brief serve its intended purpose. Yes, a few of us tenacious sorts will read the details. But there is nothing in the content we didn’t know about, including indirect references to several unrelated instances of clergy and lay misconduct. 

But most will never bother with this mind-numbing morass of irrelevant content and ad hominem attacks. So Samuel’s effort to bully others — a tactic we see respondent’s counsel Rehill deploy in other cases — is a total loss.

Indeed, the other primary conclusions Anglican Watch reached from the filing are that:

1. Ian Douglas, Robin Hammel-Urban, and the rest of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (ECCT) have been remarkably patient and professional. Indeed, given the haphazard manner in which most dioceses handle Title IV — if they bother at all — ECCT can be proud of its exemplary handling of this situation.
2. Samuel should have accepted the diocese’s proposed accord, which would have had him resign and get trained in new management styles. Given what we have learned about Samuel, we doubt training would work — he fits the definition of a serial bully to a T. But it was an extraordinarily humane gesture. And on a more significant level, we see a simple truth: Samuel is not suited for the priesthood.
3. In family systems, a corrupt priest like Samuel contaminates an entire parish. For example, consider this telling exchange, in which parishioner Luis Cabral, probably egged on by Samuel, basically tells the world that he can cook the church’s books any way he wants. But any conscientious vestry would be appalled that the parish is making its own financial reporting “rules,” not to mention Cabral’s lousy attitude.

Finally, as noted before, Rehill and Samuel seemingly deserve each other. Samuel shovels out loads of cash for Rehill’s representation while Rehill grinds out the billables like crazy. 

And it’s all a goofy loop—Samuel looks worse by the minute, and diocesan staff would be entirely within their rights to applaud the day Samuel is defrocked and enjoy a glass or two of champagne. 

Meanwhile, we have posted the brief below, so that posterity may see for themselves what a knucklehead Samuel is. Additional information on Samuel and his parish, St. Paul’s Shelton CT, is here.