By a margin of just 16 votes, delegates to the Diocese of Pennsylvania’s annual convention decided Nov. 8 to sell all the property of Camp Wapiti. The camp has been the subject of debate at previous conventions.
Camp opponents have argued that the Rt. Rev. Charles E. Bennison Jr., the diocese’s recently deposed bishop, misled diocesan leadership about the true cost of diocesan funds to support the camp. After the diocese’s standing committee filed a complaint regarding diocesan funds and Camp Wapiti, the Title IV Review Committee advised against prosecuting Bishop Bennison. By then Bishop Bennison already was in church court on other charges that ultimately led to his being deposed by the House of Bishops.
The convention received two resolutions regarding the camp. One was to sell the camp whole, and the other was to keep the property and develop it more fully. Under the special-order rules, the convention chose to debate and vote on the first resolution, and to debate the second only if first failed. The rules said that approval of either resolution rendered the other resolution moot.
Obviously, there’s a lot more to this story than Doug LeBlanc was able to report in such a brief article. Clearly the Standing Committee was extremely unhappy with Bp. Bennison’s handling (or mishandling) of diocesan funds, especially with regard to this camp. Perhaps others can enlighten us all about the basic nature of the dispute.
I’ll just observe that there is an apparent similarity with the case of the Diocese of Milwaukee likewise deciding to sell its church camp too, despite much strenuous opposition there as well. One can only imagine the ruckus that would ensue if the Bishop or Diocese of Virginia were to propose selling Shrinemont, its much loved camp.
But maintaining such places and keeping them competitive takes a lot of capital. And it’s hardly surprising that dioceses are increasingly choosing to outsource that type of ministry. But clearly there was more going on in this vote than just the issue of whether or not to keep the camp and invest yet more money in a ministry that wasn’t self-sustaining. It seems clear that this was also a referendum of sorts on Bp. Bennison.
David Handy+
Slightly edited by Elf
ECUSA will always find a reason to sell a camp. THere are far fewer kids than there used to be (See KJS on reproduction and education). Remember this: In the Diocese of Olympia many years ago, a priest bought 100 acres of recently logged land. Himself. He eventually gave it to the diocese to use *specifically* as a camp for kids. To make sure they did, he retained title to a big wedge right in the middle of it. THey couldn’t do anything to it without his approval as long as he lived. I believe to this day there’s a provision that it is lost of they stop using it as a camp. Smart man. It’s still a camp, more beautiful than when he first bought it, as second growth trees cover it. The town around it (Goldbar, WA) has expanded and you couldn’t touch that property today. ALas, it now has a “Labrynth” as part of it’s scenery, which as I understand it in ECUSA is nother word for “Christian Repellent”. But the land is there. I wish others had follwed the example of the priest back in the 30’s.