The Budget and Eligibility to Vote

[Louie Crew <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>]

Thanks to the many who have commented on my draft resolution titled:  "The
Budget and Eligibility to Vote."  Clearly any such proposal will need to go
through several refinements before it is ready for a legislative committee
in Anaheim.

I agree that the Ananias passage is not helpful and should be dropped.  In
the draft I placed it at the end of the "explanation."  Explanations are
never officially a part of what GC passes or rejects, and carry no
authority.   "Ananias Resolution (draft)" was the title of my email, not the
title I gave to the draft resolution.

S***** *****, is there language on which you and I, often perceived as at
opposite poles, might agree?    Are we both agreed to deny vote to
deputations from dioceses which make no contribution to the budget?  Are we
both agreed that all deputations should have seat and voice?

In my draft I proposed that for its deputies to have a vote, a  diocese must
meet as a bare minimum its share of the canonical expenses of TEC. I chose
'canonical expenses' because our rules give them top priority:  everything
else must  be cut from a  budget before cuts can be made to canonical
expenses.

I am open to consider other ways to define a minimum.

Like you, I respect conscientious objectors.  My proposal would not deny a
vote to those who withheld, for whatever reasons, contributions to
non-canonical expenses of the budget (program expenses, for example).    As
conscientious objectors, Thoreau, Gandhi, and Dr. King were all three
willing to pay the price of their conscientious objection rather than make
others pay it for them.

******* ****,  I dropped the slang "freeloader" as inappropriate for a
resolution, but I believe that informal discussion needs to be quite candid
about what is at stake.    The Concise Oxford Dictionary  (8th Ed) defines a
"freeloader" as "n. [US] [sl.] a person who eats or drinks at others'
expense; a sponger."   A diocese which forces others to pay its share of
canonical expenses redirects money out of several programs  which feed,
clothe, and care for people.  I believe that many in those dioceses would
vote for their diocese to pay their fair share if they could hear the real
consequences of their not doing so.  I hoped 'freeloader' in informal
settings might help with the earwax.

A family can have deep and abiding conflicts and still function equitably.
Usually the family becomes dysfunctional if it refuses to talk about its
conflicts.  I welcome suggestions of effective diction.

Bishops of several dioceses now not giving a dime to TEC attended a meeting
of the American Anglican Council on October 7-9, 2003, in Dallas, three
weeks before the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire.  Participants
were asked to bring to the altar their pledge cards, one item of which was a
specific commitment to do all in their power to punish the Episcopal Church
financially.  A new colleague on Executive Council kept a close eye on me
during the  Eucharist, the only meeting of the conference open to guests,
and when I asked afterwards, my colleague confirmed for me that he had
indeed made that pledge.   He was appointed to Executive Council's
Administration and Finance Committee! and continued to serve on Executive
Council until he left to become the chancellor of a group that now considers
itself a diocese of the Southern Cone.

Indeed we must be sensitive to the special needs of dioceses...  I hope we
can refine any draft resolution in this regard. I am grateful to our
treasurer, Kurt Barnes, for reminding me that the first $100,000 of a
diocese's income is exempt from any request.

Sensitivity needs to be reciprocal.  When I saw him in the halls of the
Dallas AAC meeting, I asked the bishop of a diocese in Province 9 whether he
too had signed the pledge to punish the Episcopal Church financially.  Anger
wrinkled his face as he asked me what I was doing there and why I questioned
him.  (The conference had used the services of a rent-a-cop to try to keep
me out of even the public areas of the hotel.)  "I am trying to be better
informed as a member of Executive Council," I answered.

That bishop's diocese continues not to contribute one dime to the budget of
TEC, and to its credit (and with my vote while still on Council), TEC
continues to contribute generously, even imaginatively,  to that diocese.
I rejoice in that diocese's enormous growth and in that bishop's
extraordinary talent.  I am appalled at the diocesan vengeance when they do
not get their own way.

Every deputy has major responsibility for the health and fiscal vitality of
our common life.

Louie, L1 Newark


Louie Crew, 377 S. Harrison St., 12d, East Orange, NJ 07018.  973-395-1068
http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~lcrew