[The Rev. Clancy] Nixon of the Church of the Holy Spirit in Ashburn echoed Oakes. “It’s a little bit like saying, ‘You can’t quit; I’m firing you.’ I quit a year and a half ago,” Nixon said. “The only thing this does is that it says I can’t have the same benefits that other priests do or other health care and pension benefits.
“He has the power to do that and that bothers me, yeah. I wish he hadn’t felt it necessary to do that. We were partners in ministry for many, many years, and I don’t see the need for him to deprive me of assets. What’s up with that?”
Nixon said Ashey of South Riding was not on the list because he was the first priest to leave.
“Lee dealt with him under a different canon. That one deprived him of his orders in one step. Lee received such poor press for that, he decided to go another route with the rest of us,” Nixon said.
“I wish they would stop suing my friends,” he added. “It’s ridiculous. We had a long process worked out over years and at the last minute the bishop pulled the plug.”
Does anyone else see the problem here:
“I quit a year and a half ago,” Nixon said. “The only thing this does is that it says I can’t have the same benefits that other priests do or other health care and pension benefits.”
Anybody else ever quit a job and expected benifits to continue? I mean if you quit, well, then you lose that. (BTW- no clergy who has left/ quit/ been deposed loses their pension credit earned- they will get a pension on those years. They just can’t continue to earn more credited service in the pension.
These are Martyrs for the faith?
#1 I don’t think that is how Nixon+ meant it. I believe he was down playing the effect of the DioVA’s actions.
This story has several inaccuracies in its construction. The third to the last paragraph is in complete error. The fact that the civil action will be presided over by Judge Bellows is true as is that this will be deciding property and not canon law associated with defrocking as the subjects of preceding paragraphs. It is probably apt to say no matter what the verdict it will be appealed and appealed with the courts growing weary before DioVA or CANA. An error is that the Judge Bellows is an appellate judge, this it this first time the case is heard and it is on the property issue and not the defrocking.
I think this is a very complex issue and the journalist and editors are understandably confused. I’d not take these quotes too seriously or make such a charge against Clancy. I believe this is more a situation of poorly constructed story saying many thing those interviewed did not intent (I’m sure Rev. Elijah White knows who and what Judge Bellows is presiding over and the quote is placed very poorly in the story).
Plainsparson,
You missed his point. He’s not complaining. He’s just pointing out the only practical difference the diocesan action makes. His parish will be paying other benefit insurers instead.
Actually, if the brilliant minds that run denominational affairs nationally and regionally were really astute, they’d try find a way to keep ALL clergy on the eligibility list to retain health and pension benefits. The larger the pool, the stronger the resources for everybody in it, the better the chance of keeping premiums down and pensions payable long-term. All denominations, not just TEC. Call it fiduciary ecumenism or something. It might take a LITTLE nudge from Congress to allow it to happen, but hey, insurers would love to have a bigger money pool as well, including steady infusion from younger clergy with larger, growing churches.
w.w.
It may be “canonical” but it’s evil, too. When, at last, a lawsuit against the Pension Fund takes place, we’ll see how much money is needed to defend. Stealing from the faithful priesthood of the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church will not be blessed in the end. Promoting a false Gospel and defending it by deposition will not be blessed. Bishop Lee and others doing the same will not be blessed by God for this behavior.
Plainsparson, most people are entitled to COBRA their benefits upon leaving a job. If I recall, didn’t Bishop Lee prevent these folks from being able to COBRA their health insurance, even though one of them had a pregnant wife? Someone correct me if that’s wrong.
#5 You on the right track, but his son was born at this time. Any other detail is up to Clancy Nixon to reveal.
Miss Sippi,
True. People are entitled to COBRA benefites upon leaving a job. The diffrence here is that the corporation (congregation) for which these preist worked left the umbrella organization (diocese) that provided the pooled insurance. It’s akin to a Burger Franchise leaving for McDonalds. The employer (congregations) didn’t think ahead to the consequences voting and then leaving the diocese in terms of thier employees benefits. Bishop Lee didn’t cause this. The vestries and people of the congregations who voted to leave created a situation in which they would need to find alternative insurance as they would no longer be part of the group (diocese) that provided that resource. Not the same as someone leaving a job at all. Methodist congregations aren’t part of the Pension and Benefits of the Episcopal Church, nor would Church of Nigeria (Anglican) congregations.
BTW,
No one can take a preist/ deacon/ Bishops credited service in the Pension fund away from them. If, say Bishop Minns earned 28 years credited service in the Episcopal CHurches Pension fund, come time for retirment he will recieve benefits accordingly. The only thing that happens is that the clergy person becomes ineliegible to earn further credited service. If you worked for IBM for 26 years and leave to work for Microsoft, you would not be able to continue in IBM’s retirment program.
It’s not evil. It’s the way these things work.
No one had to vote to leave. They could have stayed and this would not be an issue.
#7 – However +Lee took the religious organization exemption and did not offer COBRA. In your hypothetical example of Burger Franchise leaving for McDonald, the law sates that McDonald’s is obligated to offer COBRA to all it’s former employees (remember COBRA would cost McD’s nothing).
KAR,
So, the people who orchestrated the leaving: Took months to prepare a study and leaflet program called “40-days of discernment.” They researched law, church canon, etc. Got a preist ordained Bishop. Organized a multi-congregation almost simaltaneous vote to leave. But, BUT, didn’t bother to make sure thier employees would have health care? And then you blame Bishop Lee and some call him Evil?
I don’t get our sides ethics or modus operandi.
He who has the gold…makes the rules…and has the power to destroy.
Plainsparson –
Are you saying that the health benefits for the clergy were through ie Falls Church and not the Diocese of Virginia? I wonder if their is an Erisa claim here somewhere. Also, could the Bishop merely have ended their employment or status as serving Episcopal Priests without attempting to end their Holy Orders – that seems overkill if he was merely trying to end their eligibility for retirement benefits. This would seem particulary true as their seems to be tranfers made fairly frequently between various Anglican entities.
Plainsparson, come on! There are better ways to work this out than what Bishop Lee has done. This is punitive. The wind is sowed and the whirlwind will be reaped. The only end of this behavior by TEC is death. There is everything to be gained by charity, nothing by harsh behavior. “Throw your weight around TEC but don’t expect anyone to be there watching.”