…the repeated mantra of “fiduciary responsibility” wears a little thin. One must turn to other factors to make a prudent and sensible decision. If a majority of the present active congregation is in favor of leaving, but a significant minority is in favor of staying, the latter group should certainly not be turned out into the street–or the VFW hall. IMHO, too little imagination and charity have been exhibited in such situations; the winner-take-all mentality has been destructive. (The Colorado Springs situation seems a case-in-point here.)
On the other hand, when a congregation is a relatively recent plant and the facilities have been paid for by parishioners who are more or less the present congregation, and the diocese has made no investment beyond the brand name, and there is an overwhelming vote in favor of leaving, it strikes me as beyond inane to take those folks to court. Justice is just a matter of common sense for those with open eyes.
Then there are the “bite my nose to spite my face” cases where any victory on the part of TEC is pyrrhic because they’re left with a church and a steeple but when they open the doors there are no people. Just heating and lawn care bills–and in many cases, a mortgage. Meanwhile, the people that could be worshiping and serving there are…you guessed it…celebrating the Eucharist in the VFW hall on Sunday mornings. That’s just idiotic. My former parish is in one of the four departed dioceses. Between my departure and my successor’s arrival they eradicated the word “Episcopal” anywhere it was found and replaced it with “Anglican.” Sooner or later, Mr Beers will get around to suing them. If he wins, he’ll have a very handsome set of buildings dating back to the late 19th century and which are a collective black hole for maintenance dollars. I hope he enjoys watching them fall apart, because my guess is that even the residents of the columbarium will have relocated by then.
This is a complicated mess. It requires a complicated cleanup. Nostrums about thievery are not helpful.
What Fr. Martins says makes a lot of sense.
You can read my comments to his post [url=http://deaconslant.blogspot.com/2008/12/property-disputes-common-sense-is-not.html]here at The Deacons’ Slant.[/url]
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
[i] The repeated mantra of “fiduciary responsibility” wears a little thin [/i]
Very thin indeed. When suing congregations and dioceses, ECUSA’s hierarchs typically assert that their “fiduciary duty” under secular law leaves them no alternative to suing.
That assertion is specious. All corporations have power to compromise and settle legal claims. Even profit-oriented business corporations have power to make gifts that advance their corporate purposes.
Year after year, ECUSA gives good money to the National Council of Churches and the World Council of Churches. (Four decades ago ECUSA even gave good money to the Black Panthers.) If ECUSA can do that, it can also “give” departing congregations and dioceses whatever claim it may have against their property.
ECUSA’s oft-repeated argument that “my fiduciary duty makes me sue you” is a Big Lie.
http://accurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2008/12/lawsuits-are-symptom-disease-is.html
No one is forced to sue anyone canons or not. Lets not mistake this for something else. This is not about the fiduciary responsibility of TEC for future generations of Episcopalians. This is about property which is a tangible asset that represents funding. This is not about making disciples for Jesus Christ. The odd thing is once one does the math on how much some of these properties are worth in the current real estate market, the cost to maintain empty facilities and the legal costs to fight over ownership. What is it all about?
#4: Pride is at the heart of it, I am afraid…. The secondary issue is (in my view) the misuse of the once-respected name of a denomination to endorse political aims and social causes as if they were the express will of God.
[i] The odd thing is once one does the math on how much some of these properties are worth in the current real estate market, the cost to maintain empty facilities and the legal costs to fight over ownership. What is it all about? [/i] —#4
Vindictiveness and intimidation.
Good article by Fr. Martin. I do not agree that it is as complicated as he makes it appear. Fiduciary Responsibility does not cover it either. Americans are Americans and decidedly independent. You cannot force anyone to remain in TEC if they decide to leave. The Dennis Canons is under question and did not exist at all until GC79. But trying to hold dioceses, churches, priests, and laity who know longer see that they have anything in common with TEC is simply wrong.
I left the HOB/D listserv some time ago because it was poisonous. Dioceses have left. Churches have left. Clergy and people have left and more will do so. This is no longer about a decline this is a hemorrhage especially in the light that the over all population is increasing and now there is a New Province in formation. Diocese that have not experienced any fracturing up to this point will sooner than later.
God have mercy on us all,
A very good article. Fr. Martin brought up the point, which my friends and I have discussed several times; would our ancestors approve of the direction of TEC and the way the buildings in which they put their sweat and hard earned money are being used? I believe the answer to that is a resounding NO!
I come to this conclusion knowing my late father’s understanding of Biblical truth and surmising from discussion with my mother that her parents and grandparents would be appalled at the turns TEC has taken.
Excellent article. I represent corporations – many of which are non profit. The Board members have a fiduciary duty to do what is in the best interest of the corporation. They have a broad latitude to determine such interest – they also have a directors and officers policy in place in case of a boo boo or alleged boo boo. Many of my corporations are home owners associations charged with enforcing deed restrictions. I frequently advise that they should only sue in those instances which are clear cut as they must also husband their resources (as in lets not sue over the unweeded flower bed – but we do need to sue the owner running a bar out of his home or who has allowed vagrants to inhabit it).
Settlements are often in the best interest of the corporation – in case of a departing congregation a below market purchase or long term lease, use of the facilities by those who do not wish to depart for at least a period of time (hot bunking in the navy) – say one gets the 830 service slot the other the 11 – or one gets the chaple and the other gets the main sancturary.
The options are a numerable as the human mind is capable of creativity.
Because TEC is ostensibly a Church – the utlimate fiduciary duty is to Christ. Our worthy opponents Bishops (many with law degrees) – seem to have forgotten the order of their allegiance and oaths.
There are two sides. One discredits the other by walking away and still remaining intact as a worshiping community. The other tries to discredit those walking away by doing everything they can to stop them from remaining an intact worshiping community. One says the other is wrong because they walked away from the traditional interpretation of the faith. The other says their rival is wrong because they are walking away from the control of the corporation. Now that is what is really at stake. Property issues are mainly used for leverage. A parallel issue is wanting marriage defined as a union of two “anybodies†wanting to have sex as opposed to being defined as the natural bond necessary for the continuation of the creation. It has nothing to do with justice. It has nothing to do with defining a broader interpretation of a family economic unit. It has everything to do with credibility in the culture.
A rational approach would look at the present value of the property, the cost of maintaining it, the likelihood of redeveloping a viable Episcopal congregation in that property, the resources available to do so from those who remain, the resources available from the diocese and other sources, and the cost of alternative space for those who depart. Each situation is different.
In the mid-1970’s Fr. Gatling and many of the people of Good Shepherd, Columbia, SC, left. The church has had for many years an ASA of about 150, 300 members, and the 2007 budget was about 235K. That might not have been possible had the diocese disposed of the building.
would our ancestors approve of the direction of TEC and the way the buildings in which they put their sweat and hard earned money are being used?
I can give one answer that I know is accurate; NO. My grandmother was an organist at Trinity many years back. A clown mass would have blown her mind. I can just hear the horrible sounds her organ would make over the TEc of today.