[Bumped] Diocese of Georgia Continues To Swing Between Persuasion and Bullying To Salvage Finances
[This week is “Diocese of Georgia Meltdown Week” and so we’re bumping a few of the stories from the past that let us all know why the diocese is where it is today.]
Showing every sign of desperation, the leaders of the Diocese of Georgia are clearly focused on money, Money, and Money.
At the launch of their first digital issue of their diocesan newsletter, we have this line from Bishop Benhase:
Many of you have expressed grief and concern about losing CIGA in its paper form. As you know, the diocese simply did not have the funding to continue to print the paper.
Just another sign that finances are a big issue for the Diocese of Georgia.
Of course, you can also examine the proposed budget, found on pages 14 and 15. You can see the steady decline in funding for the national church [note to parishioners—it’s working!], a zeroing out of the money for the “youth activities director,” the “communications editor,” the diocesan newspaper, an elimination of the prior year reserves, and a zeroing out of the money to the faux “parish” titled “Christ Church, Savannah.” Somewhat humorously, with all of those cuts, “staff compensation” has skyrocketed.
But not to worry. There’s a nifty new canon for the Diocese of Georgia [see page 13 of the newsletter] that means that “no congregation is allowed to contribute less than a fairshare” to the diocese. Of course, we’ve seen that tried before, in diocese after diocese after diocese, as the congregations steadily recognize that the revisionist leaders in charge of the diocesan entity in no way support the mission and ministry that the parish is actually trying to implement.
And what will happen to a parish that doesn’t pay the pound of flesh to the diocesan entity?
In the event that annual contributions from any congregation fall short of the ten percent assessment or the reduced amount set by the Assessment Appeal Committee for two consecutive years, any such congregation, if it is a parish, shall, by operation of this canon, have its status changed to that of a Mission of this Diocese.
What does this mean for a conservative parish? It means that they can expect their priest to be removed and the bishop to appoint a revisionist priest that can—perhaps—force the congregation back in line, maybe through some re-education camps or something similar.
So that’s the bullying and bluster solution for the predictable financial shortfalls that the Diocese of Georgia will experience.
Then, we’ve got the persuasion tack. While diocesan leaders are bullying individual congregations into paying their assessments so that the diocese can continue to attempt to implement its unique Benhase gospel [as well as pursue its lawsuit attempting to wrest control of Christ Church, Savannah property from that parish], we have a draft report on a “Fundraising Feasibility Assessment and Campaign Readiness Report” helpfully titled “Towards a New Era For Mission.”
So as not to frighten the natives, I suppose, the fundraising feasibility assessment begins with this puzzling assertion:
The proposed Campaign for Congregational Development of the Episcopal Diocese of Georgia (EDG’15) is not about raising money, although the feasibility study determined that the potential for securing significant financial investment exists.
And then proceeds to spend much of the 29-page document discussing money.
The resources needed for the campaign will require a special fundraising initiative. Based on the information gathered through the two initial phases of the feasibility study, the Episcopal Diocese of Georgia should design and implement a major gift fundraising program to acquire the extraordinary resources needed to:
♦ Promote congregational growth and vitality
♦ Deepen individual and congregational spiritual life
♦ Provide age-related programs that attract and engage participants of all ages
♦ Foster community awareness and better serve the Diocese’s communities
♦ Improve financial health, add financial and capital resources and develop financial sustainability throughout the Diocese.Specifically, the Diocese of Georgia should:
1. Swiftly design and implement an assertive ministry of congregational growth and development that leads to a new era of mission for the Diocese and its congregations.
2. Support these congregational development ministries through initiatives selected or designed to deepen spiritual life, address the needs and opportunities of key age cohorts and promote community understanding and outreach.
3. Develop two Diocese-wide, Convocation-based organizations – one to focus on developing and implementing the Campaign for Congregational Development for the Diocese and the other to acquire the financial resources needed to support the congregational development initiative.
4. Implement an intense fundraising campaign that will acquire the extraordinary gifts needed in the Diocese and promote sustained increases in annual giving to congregational stewardship campaigns.
5. Task the Honey Creek Commission to address the facility’s role in contributing to the spiritual growth and development of the Diocese.
The key to the success of the Campaign for the Diocese of Georgia is the engagement, mobilization and commitment of both clergy and lay leaders across the Diocese.
I can’t imagine that “engagement, mobilization and commitment of both clergy and lay leaders” taking place. But I’m sure hope springs eternal!
The “findings” were interesting:
Findings
The Campaign for the Episcopal Diocese of Georgia 2015 (EDG’15) is about selecting, designing, implementing and sustaining the ministries that will enliven the people and congregations of the Diocese and foster a new era of mission. Over 350 people across the Diocese were actively involved in the study. Participants expressed:
A broad-based desire for increased vitality, spiritual and numeric growth, and engagement with the communities that the congregations serve
A desire to be part of a movement that proclaims the Good News of Jesus Christ without hesitation and complements proclamation with active ministry within the congregation and out to the community
An understanding that the health and growth of their individual congregations are the building blocks for a vibrant Diocese
Concerns about current economic conditions and about the impact of a Diocesan campaign on their own stewardship campaigns and, where pertinent, their own capital campaigns
A belief that the potential exists for conducting a major fundraising program to support the programs and services that will enliven congregations and strengthen the Diocese and its congregation.
Worries that there was little precedent for such a campaign and that there seemed to be little readiness, at this time, for donors to make gifts at the level needed to insure success.In the course of the study, participants identified a set of desired outcomes for EDG’15 and possible tactical approaches to produce those outcomes. In particular, participants wanted a Diocesan- wide initiative to:
Improve demographics and diversity with growth in membership across all ages and especially with increased participation by youth, young adults and young families, ethnic communities, lower income groups and other un-churched members of the community.
Create a healthy, vibrant and financially sustainable Honey Creek
Foster increased financial support to provide the resources for financially healthy congregations that then support a financially healthy Diocese.
Increase the number and quality of outreach programs that provide effective ministry to communities and make the Episcopal Church a better known and appreciated part of each community
Improve communication between and among congregations, individuals and the Diocese and promote collaboration between and among congregations.
My rough take on all of this is fairly simple:
—Leaders in the Diocese of Georgia are privately sounding the alarm about diocesan financial numbers.
—Diocesan leaders recognize that parishes—or individual congregants in particular—are withholding funds—hence the new canon that institutes punishments for parishes not paying their “fair share.”
—Diocesan leaders also recognize that bullying and threats only go so far—parishes are suffering and so the diocese can’t expect its interesting and unique gospel and goals to be funded entirely by diocesan pledging—hence the capital campaign.
—Parishes are distinctly worried that a diocesan capital campaign will undermine their own efforts to fundraise for their congregations. So we have a rift—noted and explicated in the feasibility report—that exists between the goals of the diocese and the goals of the parish. The very last thing that a parish needs to do is offer up names to the diocese for “fundraising” and “special gifts.”
—Honey Creek Camp is toast and will enter the now lengthy line of Episcopal Diocesan camp and conference centers that go bust, get sold, or are otherwise defunded by financially desperate dioceses.
That’s my take—what’s the analysis of our commenters?
Share this story:
Recent Related Posts
- TEC Minnesota gives local option for same sex marriage
- DioDallas: Bishop Stanton Announces Retirement
- Gay Marriage is to Govt. as is Study Hall to Academics
- Hey Anglicans, hearing the Benghazi testimony, how ‘bout that IX Commandment?
- Ruling in St. James Case Clouds the Title of Former Episcopal Parish Properties in California
- Fresno Judge Denies ECUSA’s Motion for Summary Judgment in San Joaquin
- Myth of ECUSA Declining Turns Out to be True
Comments
Facebook comments are closed.
28 comments
Great job orthodox Anglicans in Georgia! This is also a great time for dissenting parishioners in orthodox parishes in Georgia to start up a separate 501c3 with its own bank account—that has absolutely no connection to any officer or leader of the parish (for their protection)—and start to rally fellow parishioners to pledge directly to it. It is important that absolutely no money goes from the parish to the 501c3—so be sure to emphasize to your fellow parishioners that they must pledge directly to the 501c3. Your leaders can also send money there…but their own personal money…not money that has been given to the church.
This way, two years down the line when the bishop comes to turn your parish into a mission…you can simply up and leave taking your leaders with you and start up a new church.
[1] Posted by Matt Kennedy on 2-22-2011 at 09:09 AM · [top]
Thanks for another excellent analysis, Sarah. I lived in Georgia in the years preceding adoption of the 1979 Prayer Book. As a member of a historical parish, I could see even then the disturbing trends, not only in the proposed Prayer Book, but in many other actions being taken at the Diocesan and ECUSA levels, including the Dennis Cannon. The prevailing view among most of the local parishioners was that all that stuff was just politics and we should just stay out of it and worship God in our wonderful church just like we always had. I left ECUSA (for the first of three times) after the 1979 Prayer Book became official.
Fr. Matt’s suggestion for preservation of parish funds is right on target. Thanks.
All of this seems to me to be consistent with the idea that is not un-Christian to act specifically to preserve resources which were contributed or funded by contributions intended by their donors to be used in the furtherance of Christianity so as to ensure their continued dedication to that purpose and prevent their use for un-Christian purposes, even to the extent of resort to the civil courts.
God bless.
[2] Posted by Ol' Bob on 2-22-2011 at 10:00 AM · [top]
Typical nebulous and unattainable goals for a church that cannot sell its alternate gospel disguised in traditional liturgy.
They apparantly still believe that the new gospel will take root and flourish.
They are still in the denial phase.
[3] Posted by Undergroundpewster on 2-22-2011 at 11:37 AM · [top]
Maybe getting into the anger phase…
[4] Posted by Undergroundpewster on 2-22-2011 at 11:40 AM · [top]
These diocesan strategies have kind of a “Bruce Garner Rage” odor to it. What a warm wonderful inviting place that heavily centers itself on the premise that your wallet is now mine. No thanks!
Intercessor
[5] Posted by Intercessor on 2-22-2011 at 12:26 PM · [top]
I wholeheartedly agree with Matt’s suggestion above:
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/?/sf/page/27259#456289
And here’s the thing. I know parishioners who have been pledging money to alternative non-profits for years now. There are whole funds set aside for that—for protecting money in other organizations and then to be used later on. And furthermore, it’s not even a decision to “leave TEC” at all—even down the road.
It’s just prudent to begin socking away money in another entity—which can be used for any number of delightful things, even making in-kind donations to one’s parish, if need be or of course, if you and others decide, to depart and build a new entity at a time and place of one’s own choosing.
Of course, even more fun is to think through what happens when and if bishop declares a parish—an actual parish with lots of parishioners—a “mission” because the congregants weren’t pledging enough to the parish for the parish to scrape up enough for its diocesan toll.
Here’s what happens.
—Priest gets ousted [bishops always think it’s the priests driving the conscience of the laity anyway]
—New propagandist revisionist priest gets installed to whip everybody into shape
—Revisionist priest gazes at the parish books and preaches many sermons on stewardship
—Nothing happens
—Revisionist priest institutes Sunday Schools to study Marcus Borg
—Nobody attends
What on earth—a year down the road—is the diocese going to do? Remember—the parish is a mission—so the bishop is responsible for the buildings and property.
I actually know a small rural parish in a diocese-unnamed which has done exactly that. The “mission” trundled along, doing everything on the cheap and performing in-kind maintenance—and making no donations to the diocese. Priest blundered along with his sermons. Parishioners continued happily volunteering for the things they approved of.
Finally, the “priest” left in disgust.
Parishioners were left with the parish and happily chugging along with supply clergy of their liking and instituting the education and other projects they liked.
What was the bishop to do?
Well—there were only a few options. He could declare the parish “dead”—which would have of course been a lie, but what’s new. But then . . . he’s left with the historic property out in the boonies to maintain. It *certainly* couldn’t be sold—the building was on the historic register.
Or . . . he could send another revisionist priest out there to preach sermons on stewardship and Borg.
Or . . . he could simply slip quietly away.
He chose the last option.
[6] Posted by Sarah on 2-22-2011 at 12:39 PM · [top]
Calenders. That’s the solution. I might suggest Ecclesiastical Dogs - photos blessing of the animals. Or Clowns of the Church - 12 Months of Clown Eucharists.
[7] Posted by iamaworm on 2-22-2011 at 12:40 PM · [top]
On more serious matters, to add to Matt’s post in #1, also make sure you have a civil employment contract with your rector and staff signed by the Vestry. Should your rector be removed, the Diocese is forced to take a poison pill.
[8] Posted by iamaworm on 2-22-2011 at 12:45 PM · [top]
And here is a good opportunity for ACNA parishes now on “safe” ground to step up to the plate and help laypeople with such a vision within TEC. This strategy was tried within my own diocese, but failed because there was a lot of confusion. There was not concensus on the goal of the 501c3 and those who kicked around the strategy were not able to “plug in” when assistance was halfheartedly offered.
I would say, have a few of your crackerjack people with the vision, set up a 501c3. Then remotely pull in conservatives who are interested in doing that, then eventually reproduce by fission. You’ll end up with the template 501c3 group, and a local group. The template group will go on to help out fledglings in other places.
Remember - not all priests are Fr. Kennedys. And not all parishoners are from Bing. Be prepared for a lot of babysitting.
[9] Posted by J Eppinga on 2-22-2011 at 12:49 PM · [top]
Matt+, your suggestion is the best I’ve seen yet….right on the mark!
[10] Posted by cennydd13 on 2-22-2011 at 01:15 PM · [top]
DGA has leadership that is out of touch with the folks in the pew. Sound familiar. The mission is to provide a place for people with brains to come and escape from fundametalism. I do not believe you can build a viable church on this. I attended a service last where Bp. Benhase had postphoned confirmation to the next Sunday. The gospel, as you remember, was about giving away your cloak and not suing people. I was disappointed not to hear the bishop’s sermon.
[11] Posted by Pb on 2-22-2011 at 01:55 PM · [top]
”...address the needs and opportunities of key age cohorts and promote community understanding and outreach.”
Interpretation: Pamper, pet, pander to the wealthy elderly at home and in the retirement facilities, whose children and grandchildren are busy skiing in Switzerland or big game hunting in Africa, or sunning at St. Moritz.
Name something after them. Take them to lunch. Plan elder programs. Send the youth group or choir to serenade them. Assign a Stephen minister and/or Daughter of the King to each of them. Send someone to drive them to church and supper and take them Eucharist and meals when they can’t attend. Send flowers from the altar. Listen, listen, love, love. Then when they are cheered, comforted, gratified by all the attention…get them to make or increase their bequests to the parish.
[of course, the church should be doing all this anyway.]
[12] Posted by St. Nikao on 2-22-2011 at 04:02 PM · [top]
Minus the bequest grubbing, that is. :-(
[13] Posted by St. Nikao on 2-22-2011 at 04:03 PM · [top]
To roll out an old chestnut: All your base are belong to us
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us
[14] Posted by Gator on 2-22-2011 at 04:30 PM · [top]
Another option instead of the new 501(c)(3) option is for individuals to essentially escrow their offerings in donor-advised funds, such as the Fidelity Gift Fund (and there are many others). When the dust settles, simply advise the fund to give to whatever new 501(c)(3) comes into existence. Tax deduction now, and no one can come after that money (or even find it). There can even be a sharing of information among those that do this as to what they have put in their donor-advised funds for future use in such fashion.
[15] Posted by RomeAnglican on 2-22-2011 at 06:00 PM · [top]
From: http://www.integrityga.org/
My Georgia friends know nothing about this commission, including its membership.
From the same website, a message (emphasis mine) from the recent past chair of the GA Disintegrity chapter:
Note however, the language of the existing canon: “Aspirants, postulants, and those accepted to holy orders shall accept and conform to the following standard: ‘Marriage between a man and a woman or abstinence from sexual activity are the only acceptable forms of sexual behavior for a Deacon, Priest or Bishop in the Diocese of Georgia.’”
Note it says, “when the existing restrictive canon is replaced,” not “if.”
Yep, this will bring the cash flowing in. You bet! The diocese, rolling in cash, will be building a Ritz at Honey Creek in just a few short years.
How does that song go? Something’s broke loose in Georgia…
[16] Posted by Ralph on 2-22-2011 at 07:08 PM · [top]
If a church gets dropped to mission status and a revisionist priets is appointed, who pays that priest?
If the diocese pays the priest, doesn’t that have the potential to defeat the very purpose for which the parish was downgraded (i.e. convert a lack of income to the diocese into an actual drain)?
This would make sense of something I read recently, that there are five TEC parishes on Hawaii and none of them have priests. An AMiA plant nearby has just upgraded to full employing its own priest - its not hard to see where things are headed in Hawaii.
[17] Posted by MichaelA on 2-22-2011 at 07:31 PM · [top]
The presumable rewording of the Canon, if it is done, leaves no doubt as to where this diocese is headed; straight down the sewer.
[18] Posted by cennydd13 on 2-22-2011 at 08:19 PM · [top]
That’s attractive until it’s apparent that I’m being generous with other people’s resources. Before geting the ax, the faithful priest gets to take graduated pay cuts that would make any layperson walk off their jobs (even me, who told my boss two years ago that I’d take a 10-percent pay cut if necessary to keep my job during the recession). And after, my family is sitting at the feet of a fool of a “priest,” to the neglect of my own priestly duties as their husband and father. Not to mention, sitting under such a person myself, gives me the disposition of a wet cat who is stroked the wrong way; much to the chagrin of my family.
And it starts with the neglect of the faithful priest.
That’s why I think that the local 501c3 thing needs to be put together first, before anyone stops putting money in the plate. The goal should be to maintain the faithful priest, in the event of the aforementioned baloney being handed down from the diocese.
[19] Posted by J Eppinga on 2-23-2011 at 12:28 AM · [top]
Hi Moot—I’m just trying to be clear with folks. Once a bunch of parishioners refuse to pay the Diocesan Toll, the parish will be—rather spitefully—turned into a mission and the priest will be eliminated.
I agree about taking care of the priest.
But let’s face it. If a crew decides not to pay money to the diocese [and by extension then to the parish through pledges] then the priest needs to be aware that he needs to start looking for a new position.
As to whether you enjoy sitting under a revisionist priest—meh—most conservative Episcopalians can do it quite well. I grant that you cannot. But most can—I talk to them every day! ; > )
You wouldn’t believe what they do to while away the toilsome time.
But they have a certain “sang froid” about them that is quite intriguing.
And eventually . . . the revisionist priest goes away.
[20] Posted by Sarah on 2-23-2011 at 07:12 AM · [top]
One solution, if you would like to stay in TEC, is to have the 501c3 hire the former rector to be the leader/CEO of the non-profit and ask him to give weekly teachings and services at another point and time and place. That way you can maintain your membership and influence in the parish, maintain the former rector, get some good spiritual nourishment, and starve the actual parish of funds all at the same time. I imagine this would drive the bishop into an apoplectic fit of rage and, funnily, powerlessness…which would be fun to watch too.
[21] Posted by Matt Kennedy on 2-23-2011 at 07:22 AM · [top]
DGA did a survey before electing a bishop. I believe 71% were oppposed to the present agenda. The diocese had previously voted to become a Windsor diocese. This is a big problem.
[22] Posted by Pb on 2-23-2011 at 08:52 AM · [top]
I’m familiar with that word and the various qualifications for why the priest can get thrown under the buss, that can follow. They’re not good enough for me anymore, not on the inside of TEC and not moving to the outside. Not on a train, not on a plane…
That’s kind of what I had in mind. There is this one scene in an ‘80’s teen-angst movie (“Three O’Clock High” ??, I think) where a hapless teenager has to come up with hundreds of dollars to cover up his embezzlment of school canteen funds, and the students show up in droves to purchase sheets of paper for a buck a piece. This sort of thing could be done with house blessings and honorariums, etc. Or, someone could surrupticiously place a thousand dollar bill into the priest’s BCP every so often..
I’m not hopping up and down at the moment, but I do feel strongly that we can do better by our conservative priests. If we can’t fix that problem, then there is no point in talking about “third way” efforts, imho.
[23] Posted by J Eppinga on 2-23-2011 at 12:10 PM · [top]
Is it possible that the Bishop intends to rewrite the canon
so that the pro-gay foundations such as Arcus and the Haas Foundation will pour money into the diocese? Heretofore, they have not been a factor in DGA.
[24] Posted by MFO on 2-23-2011 at 10:48 PM · [top]
Has the bishop of Georgia been taking lessons from Muammar Gaddafi about keeping the loyalty of subordinates?
[25] Posted by MichaelA on 2-23-2011 at 11:19 PM · [top]
How to handle a revisionist priest: Ignore him. He’ll soon get the message.
[26] Posted by cennydd13 on 2-23-2011 at 11:59 PM · [top]
A friend in the diocese doesn’t think there’s anything left of the St. John’s Moultrie congregation, certainly not enough of a remnant to take care of the building and grounds.
She predicts that the diocese will have to sell off either the St John’s or the St. Margaret’s property, and soon, since the diocese doesn’t have the cash to maintain the St. John’s property.
Calvary Americus describes itself as a parish at its website, but currently has a priest-in-charge, not an interim rector. She doesn’t think they would be particularly well-to-do, financially.
And, it’s possible that others are thinking about walking away from their property.
What other religious group in Moultrie would want to buy either of the properties? It seems unlikely that Moultrie’s ready for a nightclub or shopping mall, as happened to Muhlenberg’s Church of the Holy Communion in New York City.
Perhaps a group of Muslim investors would be gracious enough to buy the St. John’s property at a discount, and then sell it back to the St. Mark’s Anglican congregation.
[27] Posted by Ralph on 8-3-2012 at 06:22 PM · [top]
Interesting turn events with Dio of GA financial reports. Bishop Benhase promised transparency when he came to the diocese, however, financial reporting is now quarterly, but the reports have not been updated since March. The capital campaign was given one million dollars in seed money, but rather than retiring the $1 million in debt from Honey Creek bonds, committees are being formed in the convocations to discuss how money from the capital campaign can be applied. Bishop Benhase has said publically that the capital campaign is to be his legacy to the diocese.
St. John’s Moultrie and St. Margarets are currently being operated as yoked parishes with Rev. Hobgood as the vicar.
[28] Posted by frhutch on 8-3-2012 at 07:57 PM · [top]
Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.
Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.