On a Firing

Regarding my termination from Fenwick High School

Volte-face is one of those beautiful French expressions with forceful meaning and subtle connotations that are often lost in translation. “About-face” does not do it justice, as when the French utilize the term, there is a sudden and serious abruptness to it; a brisk turning away from what was once pursued, what was once held as true and dear.

Given the current pervasive hysteria and the attendant cancellation of the 2019-2020 school year, I have been delayed in providing to the interested and inquiring among the Fenwick community as well as those outside of it, a proper explanation conveyed in the proper manners, of my termination. So many questions about how and why I was fired continue to flood into me, and so many have still been left in the dark. It is necessary to inform the interested now. Furthermore, in communication with the faculty subsequent to my termination, I was made aware that Fr. Peddicord and Mr. Groom falsely insinuated that I was fired because I openly defied, attacked, and opposed the teachings of the Catholic faith.

In that last regard, nothing could be further from the truth. 

I am a devout, dedicated Catholic, knowledgeable of the Church’s teachings, convinced and convicted of her salvific doctrines.

The following is a timeline of sorts of the events leading up to and culminating in my dismissal. These are the same facts that I presented–without objection–to the Tenure Board on March 2, 2020, a hearing that was convened at my urging so that I might be reinstated.

• I was suspended from teaching following the school day, Friday, February 14.
• The causes of my suspension were that 1) I acted contrary to the Catholic faith in criticizing Pope Francis, because in the words of the acting HR director and Mr. Groom, “We believe as Catholics that the pope is infallible.” 2) I had directed students to my personal website wherein said critiques were located. Mind you, not to the pages containing criticisms of the pope per se, but to the website in general.
• After I explained to both present that neither of these actions were in any way violations of school policy, as their understanding of papal infallibility was inherently flawed and their misunderstanding of the school’s internet and social media policies so profound, I demanded that Ms. Grigg and Mr. Groom state again the cause(s) of my suspension.
• Befuddled, Mr. Groom then went on to say that I was then still suspended because now, they suspected I had done something wrong. You read that correctly. I was preemptively suspended based on pure suspicion. At that point, I demanded that Ms. Grigg call in every teacher at Fenwick and suspend them–in the interest of fairness and equity–while they too were investigated to uncover any real or imagined infractions. To my knowledge, this was not and has not been done.
• The meeting concluded. As I exited Mr. Groom’s office, I asked him if I could inform my students over the weekend as to why I would not be present come class on Monday. He said no. I departed.
• Contrary to school policy outlined in the faculty handbook, I received no indication as to when my suspension would be lifted. In fact, I received no word from anyone at Fenwick for the next week, that is seven days.
• On Thursday of that week, (February 20) I emailed Fr. Peddicord. I inquired, in the most polite manner possible, of my status. I received no reply; not even that simple courtesy was afforded to me.
• The next day, Ms. Grigg attempted to reach me via text message from her personal phone. I responded, demanding an in person meeting with her, Mr. Groom and Fr. Peddicord on Monday. I received no response.
• Monday, then, next week–I was asked to be available for a conference call with Ms. Grigg and Mr. Groom. Seeing no alternative, I accepted. I was informed on that call that my employment was to be terminated effective immediately for the following causes:

1. I had broken the school’s social media policy by directing students to my website, www.hoth2ohistory.com, without the explicit permission of the technology director.
2. Within that website, I disparaged Pope Francis and thus defied Catholic teaching in not paying proper religious assent to the pope.
3. In responding to students’ inquiries as to why I was suspended–in acknowledging my suspension–I was insubordinate to Mr. Groom.

From then on, and at the advice of my counsel, I petitioned for a Tenure Board meeting to be held. Per Fenwick’s own policies, a tenured teacher has a right to such a hearing for the purpose of reinstatement. Ms. Grigg and Mr. Groom avoided, delayed and obfuscated for the better part of a week, until after considerable insistence, I was finally granted a hearing for reinstatement.

It should be noted here that my desire for reinstatement at this point was to get back to instructing my classes. There was no way for the relationship–short of a miraculous volte-face or mea culpa from administration–to continue. I did not therefore intend to teach at Fenwick beyond my commitment to the students for the 2019-20 school year. The scores and waves of egrevied notes from students, petitions from parents and encouragement from friends among the faculty and staff motivated me to try to return to Fenwick to finish out the year and do what I’ve done for so many years; to do what I do best and that is to teach history the way it ought to be taught, with verve, passion, humor, opinion, argument and open, dynamic exchange.

That Tenure Board meeting convened at St. Vincent Ferrer on March 2. Before entering that meeting, I sat and prayed in the church for just short of an hour. Overwhelming joy, confidence, peace, and comfort flowed into my heart, my soul. Our Lord and my Guardian Angel were present with me there, and by His Grace and his intercession, I defended myself with eloquence and passion.

All of the charges listed as charges and causes against me were, indeed, as spurious as they sound above. My candid arguments against them proceeded as follows:

1. Referring to or directing students to a website–whether authored by me or not–is not a violation of any school (especially “social media”) policy. How could it be? Asking students to access a website happens hundreds if not thousands of times per diem at Fenwick. Certainly, none of those websites gained the official approval of the tech department or director.
2. On the Pope. As a faithful Catholic, as a tenured teacher, as a discerning intellectual and historian, I have every right to criticize the pope as his leadership of the Church can be at various points rightly described as convoluted, confused, questionable in its orthodoxy, as well as divisive and malevolent, especially toward his perceived political and ecclesial opponents. The list of vocal opponents to Francis’s pontificate is as long as it is distinguished, ranging from theologians like Aidan Nichols, O.P. and Cardinal Joseph Zen to public intellectuals such as Henry Sire and Ross Douthat. In rightly following my conscience, Fr. Peddicord declared that I was in defiance of Church teaching because any dissent constituted a lack of due deference and religious ascent to the see of Peter, per Canon 725 (sic) in the Code of Canon Law.(1) I never recall Fr. Peddicord acting with such zeal and fervor when scores of Fenwick teachers and before that Aquinas Institute professors openly ridiculed the instructions and teachings of the two previous popes. Regardless, this was not his most egregious position. He went on to argue that dissent was okay if I just would have kept it quiet. It was like being before a bizarro-Inquisition court wherein the judges declared the Nuremberg defense to be valid. How much destruction has worked its way through the Church in our lifetimes; how many lives through clerical pedophilia, ephebophilia, abuse, neglect, and clericalism have been wrecked with such a disposition in play? Not me. I will never be complicit with that. I never was. I will never stay quiet about that.
3. The charge of insubordination was completely fabricated and inaccurate. According to Mr. Groom, when students reached out to me to inquire about the nature of my suspension, and I replied that I could not communicate with them about it but that I hoped to be back in the classroom as soon as possible, this constituted not only informing them that I was indeed suspended but blatant insubordination. By definition, I informed them of nothing. They already knew by the beginning of that week that I had been suspended. It was utterly obvious that I was not present nor ill.

The Tenure Board, consisting of three teachers, President Fr. Peddicord, and Principal Peter Groom then voted to uphold my termination. I had two votes already against me so perhaps this constituted an exercise in futility, but I felt obligated to try for my students, their parents, the benefactors and alumni of the school to get back into the classroom. As a very wise, prudent, successful and handsome President of the United States once said: “A cause worth fighting for is worth fighting for to the end.”(2)

Buy the t-shirt that caused so much trouble...

But, let’s face it–the Fenwick Administration under Fr. Peddicord and Mr. Groom had for years dubbed me persona non grata because I long challenged and stood athwart the milquetoast Catholicism, progressive politics, and declining academic standards endemic within the school. This strain between myself and administration only intensified after, by student popular acclaim, I was named moderator of the Fenwick Pro-Life Club. I do not tread lightly in any of my passionate pursuits, but my dedication to this holiest of causes–protection of our most vulnerable brothers and sisters in the womb–seems to know no bounds. During my tenure as Pro-Life moderator, the club was constantly met with, at various intervals, lukewarm, token support and at other times outright opposition from the administration, as Pro-Life Club students and their parents can easily attest.

Statist progressivism is the dominant ethos of the school. It is, by its nature, impositional, so as a defender of human freedom, civil liberties, freedom of conscience, free markets and voluntary cooperation, I am proudly a heretic from that leftist ideology and what author Michael Malice calls the cultural Marxist “cathedral”.

I hold that an equally virulent strain of accommodation and diminishing standards–for conduct and in academics alike–has infected the school for years. Grade inflation is rampant, and so when I maintained the standards of Fenwick past and agencies like the College Board and AP program, this continually ran afoul of Mr. Groom. I would further assert that the overall quality of the faculty has declined at such a rapid rate–several outstanding exceptions exist of course–that students often comment that many in the student body exceed the intelligence and even mastery of the respective subject matters of many of their instructors. This was eminently true from what was then my vantage point. And, none of these observations or realizations made me popular among Fenwick administrators nor the teachers who they favor.

 All of this is to say that while my firing was unjust and sudden, totally lacking in discussion or remediation, unfounded and immoral, I am glad God delivered me away from Fenwick. As my beautiful and wise wife, Sarah, expressed to me: “Gary, the only way you would have left that place, because of your dedication and love of your students, is if they forced you out. So this is a blessing!”

That is an amazing thing about Our Lord that St. Thomas Aquinas often commented upon; namely, that only God has the power to create the good and the beautiful out of the nothingness of evil.

I am blessed with the realization that I was dismissed by the same people who dismissed and disregarded two other great men with whom I had the utmost pleasure in working, Fr. Joseph Ekpo and Dr. James Quaid. Great company to keep. I am blessed with a new job, with great leaders, in a new field which rewards success and does not censor or malign alternative thought. But most of all, I am blessed with innumerable memories of joy and laughter, achievement and excellence, happiness and grace from Room 26.

As for Fenwick… An alum, a student teacher, a former Dominican seminarian, a teacher, coach and moderator for almost 14 years cannot help but still have a fondness for the place. I would describe mine as nothing short of love mixed with hope. Hope for the best of the old Fenwick to return and the new Fenwick to truly innovate and educate.

My eternal prayer then will be for a quick, transformative, enduring volte-face.

In gratitude,

Gary Richied

Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.

(1) The actual canon is 752 which reads as follows: “Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.”
To be sure, the operative words here are “religious submission… concerning faith and morals” not the pontiff’s erroneous, destructive, and all too often whimsical positions on environmentalism, economics or political science. For example, when asked what is the greatest challenge for humankind today, Francis declared that it was “youth unemployment”. Furthermore, he has routinely spoken of socialism and the creation of a “one world political order” in favorable terms.
Thus, any requirement of thoughtless, militant obedience to every pronouncement and opinion of Pope Francis is not only shocking in its blind obsequiousness but its heterodoxy as well.

(2) Stephen Grover Cleveland.

(3) It should be noted, however, that given the superior work performed in many classes over time, but particularly in the second semesters of academic years, student grade distribution was very high, toward the A-B range. The notion that I was an unfair grader was more rumor and poor optics than reality.