Friday, 19 February 2010
An extraordinary investment of ACNA's time and resources. Several individuals have made the trip from the US and Canada. It would be interesting to know the cost of this failed motion.
Is ACNA forthcoming with such information? Do they have to file detailed information like this?
I am not sure what the bishop of Winchester was saying - bless him - he seemed a little flustered.
"It would be interesting to know the cost of this failed motion."
It would be, but they are under no compulsion to disclose this, so far as I know. Maybe it's time for Jim Naughton to follow the money anew.
If ACNA has tax exempt status as a church, I'm not sure if they have to file information about their finances publically. I assume they have what the Internal Revenue Service calls 501c3 status? Does that require financial disclosure? I wonder what their collective carbon footprint is?
'There are remarkable ecumenical initiatives opening out precisely through the particular kind of witness that ACNA is seeking to live, to offer, to explore in North America. They have a particularly pronounced mission and church planting focus from which all of us in this church will benefit if we are in some kind of relationship with them.'
Why oh why did they leave the Church then ?
'a particularly pronounced mission' -- I like that ! Very much
Further proof that this attempt to destroy TEC is, at heart, more about power and big money than about theology or faith.
Actually hearing Ms. A is immediately striking. She seems profoundly unaware that following Packer as he follows Jesus is a dodgy business, with flat earthisms enough to go all round, then round again. Pick a dodgy topic - alleged (textual?) inerrancies in the scriptures, human embodiment and especially the simplistic collapse of sex into traditional gender roles (aka rigid complementarity, but somehow still sharply tinged with the assymetry of males only-males first), evolution in particular and science generally, ...
Anglican big tents flap wide over many different sorts of investigation, hermeneutics, and the like - but settling on this one as a gold standard is intellectually unsettled and unsettling. Then emotionally so ...
Then Ms. A going on about how much she shares gospel with ACNA - theft as gospel? False witness against gay neighbors and allies as gospel? It's way, way, way too much to digest, all at once.
"If ACNA has tax exempt status as a church, I'm not sure if they have to file information about their finances publically. I assume they have what the Internal Revenue Service calls 501c3 status? Does that require financial disclosure?"
Under U.S. federal tax law, churches/temples/etc., provided they are bona fide religious entities, are deemed to possess 501(c)(3) public charity status even when they have not filed with the IRS a Form 1023 for recognition of their tax exempt status. Only if they are shown not to be bona fide religious entities do they lose such status. (Many donors, nonetheless, insist on churches obtaining IRS recognition, in order to remove any possible doubt as to the tax-deductibility of their contributions.)
Similarly, although all 501(c)(3) public charities *except* bona fide churches/temples/etc. must file an annual (and publicly available) Form 990 with the IRS, reporting on their income, expenses, etc., these religious entities need not do so, and not filing the 990 does not result in loss of 501(c)(3) status. (The religious entity exception with respect to filing Forms 1023 and 990 is, of course, rooted in interpretations of the First Amendment.) As with filing the 1023, many donors and other stakeholders nonetheless, in the interests of certainty and transparency, do cause churches/temples/etc. to file an annual 990 even though not required.
So, it may be that ACNA will voluntarily file a 990 for this year (although not until next year, and extensions can often drag it out longer). If so, it will have to be made publicly available, but of course it is highly unlikely to disclose specific items one could trace to this jaunt to England. Accounting entries can, of course, hide a multiplicity of sins.
And it is possible ACNA will not even file a 990, especially if they feel there is detail they don't wish to disclose and their donors don't mind the lack of transparency. But if they *do* file one, a fishing expedition through its pages may yet yield some interesting data points.
I for one am so grateful what TEC (PECUSA as it once was) has given me over the years. Its message and its embodiment of the gospel means so much to me. I feel TEC is in my heart, in some sense.
I treasure the memory of the Priesting of Liz Canham at Newark Cathedral, when a sizable party of us from Southwark Diocese (UK) flew over to support Liz and increase our own joy, including Bishop Stockwood of Southwark. It was wonderful ! Women were not even ordained deacon in the C of E at that time -- let alone priest ! (I took Communion back from Elizabeth's first mass for her mother in St Albans.)
I stayed at the rectory at Kinnelon, New Jersey and still have the prayer book Al Josette, Jnr., the rector gave me as a goodbye gift.
Also we had teach-ins with their bishop Jack Spong , and many other good meetings and experiences of american life.
But most of all down the years, I have apprecaited TEC's teaching, theologising and witness in action
down the years, although far from America geographically.
It's Baptismal theology is stunning. They Really believe in holy Baptism -- how many believe in this sacrament like TEC., in the C of E ?
It's courageous and imaginative and amazing loving stand for us lesbians and gays has been stunning, ahead of its time, and the promise of good things to come throughout the holy Catholic Church.
The disclosure question is a dead end. Churches are not required to file Forms 990, as many non-profits are.
"I want Synod to have the opportunity to express its own wishes and not just to affirm other people’s wishes. So I want to vote for Bishop Mike’s amendment but in such a way as to also vote for Mr Vince’s." - Michael Scott-Joynt -
And obviously, the majority of the General Synod wanted "the opportunity to express its own wishes and not just to affirm other people's wishes" - resulting in not affirming the Bishop Winchester, and his and Lorna Ashworht's and Mr.Vince's extravagant wishes.
The stunning rejection of these significan *Other People's wishes* issued in a resounding defeat of ACNA's and Ms Ashley's P.M.Motion, which would have rendered the position of TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada in the Communion to be uncomfortable at least, if not impossible.
The fact that the C.of E. G.S. stepped back from this appalling and unacceptable snub to TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada speaks volumes about the Christian common sense and sweet REASON for which the Communion hitehrto has been celebrated. Let's have no more such nonsensical talk from the mavericks of the broad spectrum of the Communion - some of whom have to jump Provinces to voice their nasty opinions.
So Bishop Scriven is apparently putting it about, without quite saying so, that Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori attempted to defrock him. This after saying previously that he did not think that was what the Episcopal Church's action had meant. And other Church of England bishops such as David Walker believe him. I smell a rat here.
Yes, I'm glad that the Church of England stepped back from the brink also. I just don't think celebrations are in order. This isn't even the end of the beginning. It's the beginning of the beginning.