So...a member of the Starr King cabal speaks. And while many replies are running through my head (mainly about how ratchety this situation is) , for this post I will concentrate on one portion of the cabal member's statement.
Cabal member states:
Additionally, the release of the email hobbled the first chapter of Rev. McNatt's presidency at Starr King. I would like to apologize to her. Coming into such a situation cannot have been easy for the Rev. Rosemary Bray McNatt. I humbly beg her forgiveness for my part in any harm that has come to her, for which I am truly and profoundly sorry.When the leaked information was leaked, it was done with a specific purpose; to imply that the chosen candidate, Rev. Rosemary Bray McNatt, was less qualified to become President of Starr King and was picked in spite of all available evidence. This was done with malice and forethought. This was done to make Rev. McNatt and Dr. Gabriella Lettini, who was asked for her honest opinions-as is done in every academic search process, look bad. This was done to make it seem as if the search process was fixed. This was done because members of this cabal thought that they were entitled to malign.
A little later in the statement, the cabal member points out the fact that their undergraduate education focused on social and racial justice. Yet earlier in the statement, cabal member states:
In the heat of outrage at what was perceived to be injustice, there was insufficient consideration of the implications this release might have for the new incoming president, or for the school.How is this cognitive dissonance possible? How is it that nobody saw that by mischaracterizing the results, the implication was going to be that Rev. McNatt got the job over a "more qualified" person?
I know that with the releasing of this statement (and with the report of the Ad Hoc committee), many are saying that it's time to move on. But how can things move forward as long as there is studious avoidance of the real issue?
The real issue being...the intentional leak of confidential documents was never about the process. It was about the result of the process. The cabal set out to imply that the Search Committee's choice was "less qualified" for the job. They set out to imply that those who were asked to give their honest opinions were unnecessarily mean. They set out to malign the process.
I'm sure there were "trust" issues at Starr King. Every seminary has them. Heck, every school has them. Leaking confidential documents and mischaracterizing the results in order to imply that the incoming administration should not be there because they are "less qualified" is not how one handles those issues.
There is more that I could say, but it's Scandal Thursday. So I'm going to prepare for tonight.
