I am reminded of PJ O’Rourke’s post earlier this week about the driving hunger for power in the liberals ruling right now.

Also, what she’s proposing will lower costs significantly.

Yes, a dictatorship can be very “nimble,” very nimble indeed. Imperator Katharine Jefferts Scori has a nice ring to it.

It does seem odd; when the diocese of South Carolina is making its decisions at its convention and precisely developing more flexible, more open structures where the bishop is acting as a servant-leader and following the democratically-expressed will of the majority of the laity who are amongst the priesthood of believers slipping off the handcuffs of old-fashioned restricitve governance, she did not like it at all.

Yet now the dioceses are supposed to be all about new ways of doing things and forget the old structures? I really do wonder what is going on.

As for being an Episcopalian Pope, I thought she already considered herself that, what with “the Episcopal Church has members in the United States, as well as in Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Haiti, Honduras, Micronesia, Taiwan, Venezuela, and the Virgin Islands (both US and British).”

It does sound as if the House of Deputies is in line to be scrapped (or reorganised on a massive scale). Interesting times ahead!

I’m really thinking money is at the root of all this. Even if those in the House of Deputies don’t get paid salaries, all those expenses really add up and if you look at the list of “Committees, Commissions, Agencies, and Boards” that TEC has managed to set up, there are definitely too many slices being cut out of the financial pie.

A lot of trimming is going to go on, and I bet that clergy representation will be one part of it. After all, if you have a bishop plus clergy plus laity from each diocese, isn’t it redundant to have clergy as apart from the bishop? Doesn’t the bishop represent the clergy?

And do you really need as many as eight deputies? Surely one or at the most two would do?

Call me cynical, but I say follow the money trail.

Power is intoxicating. When people achieve it ruthlessly can they ever really have enough of it? Just as Greed makes its victims see thieves everywhere so does the love of power make one see potential rebels and traitors everywhere. They must be stopped at all costs, ALL costs.

In more poetic times Jadis would be looking forward to one day holing up in a bunker and swallowing a cyanide tablet.

In the mean time, weekly loyalty tests and armed gaurds at all the exits will be the norm. Heil Schori!

Fuinseoig beat me to it: it’s possible this is a power play by Herself, but it’s also possible that the financial waters are getting so deep that she is flailing about for any help she can find.

A question: who pays for deputies (clergy and layfolk) to go to diocesan and general conventions? Would it really save that much cash?

I doubt that the deputies pay for it, FW Ken. I get the impression that staging a General Convention is enormously expensive for the national organization.

Fuinseoig, follow the money is probably the right approach. To your earlier question, the answer is these people don’t believe in “democracy” and “democratic polity” unless the produce the correct results. South Carolina isn’t producing the results they want.

re: “Why would Mrs. Schori officially want what she already has?”

1. Because she really does not have it. The broad is not authorized to do many of the things she has done. She is acting unlawfully under the TEC Constitution.

2. She needs to codify her “unlawful” behavior.

3. She and her comrades need to abrogate the tenets of the current structure they are breaching, thereby freeing themselves from fiduciary duties and responsibilities owed to those they serve and by whom they are employed.

It is much like thieves having robbed a bank then managing to change secular law so that their unlawful acts are made lawful – black becomes white.

4. Right now she and some other folks are legally hanging out in the breeze if anyone were predisposed to file an in-house church presentment against them, individually or jointly, and/or if class action suits or perhaps even more serious charges where filed against her and her cohorts in secular courts.

5. She and her buddies are a lot of things, but they are not stupid. Perchance they are beginning to sense the legal handwriting on the wall.

On the previous thread, Curia’s R Us, the Little Myrmidon obsreved that if Kathi starts wearing red shoes, it’s all over. Actually, it’s not the Popes red shoes that she is after. She wants The Ruby Slippers! “Give me back my slippers. I’m the only one that knows how to use them. They’re no use to you. Give them back to me. Give them back.”

Delegates to diocesan convention (in the four dioceses in which I served) usually paid their own way to the convention; the parish paid for their clergy, at least to some extent. A parish might pay for meals for all of its delegates.

Dioceses pay for their delegates to General Convention. Depending on how far they need to travel, it comes to $20-30K for a delegation, if my memory of the diocesan budgets of my last ECUSA diocese is reasonably accurate.

Has it occurred to anyone that the true evil one is Bonnie? I could totally envision a state of affairs at 815 in which the PB is saying:

“jeez, this is getting out of hand, maybe we need to do a little more to toe the line as laid down by the instruments of communion…”

and Her Andersonness is saying: “Yup, but our polity says we gotta do it (and as an ex-Catholic, I’m darned if you’re gonna stop me…Umm..I mean ‘Us’)”

“we need a system that is more nimble, that is more able to respond to change,” calling for “a more responsive and adaptable and less rigid set of systems.”
Money and power.

Maybe SC is a consideration. It’s best to have martial law in place before you fire on Ft. Sumter.

Or, it might just be the usual load of twaddle and tergiversation.

Sheer speculation on my part but since something is obviously afoot at 815 Second Avenue and since there is no question of the Episcopal Church’s deteriorating finances, Episcopalians, particularly clergy and church employees, would best keep a watchful eye on the Church Pension Fund. The fund is well run, profitable, with almost $2.5 billion in its coffers and, as presently set up, virtually untouchable by the Episcopal Church.

As the Episcopal Church continues to hemorrhage money, it is not hard to imagine its hierarchy casting covetous and resentful glances at the Church’s fat and well-healed brother organization, the Pension Fund, and conniving ways to lay their hands on its substantial booty.

It has been over a decade since I practiced pension law actively. But as I recall the law, if the Church Pension Fund is part of a tax qualified retirement plan, then the Feds have a legal interest in how it is invested and administered. The trustees who run the Fund have fiduciary duties prescribed by federal law. They would be foolish in the extreme if they let The High Priestess lay a finger on any of it, and can fall back on federal legal prohibitions should she try.

“Why would Mrs. Schori officially want what she already has?”

1. Dr. Jefferts Schori is an egotistical megalomaniac.

2. Dr. Jefferts Schori really wants street cred.

3. Dr. Jefferts Schori cares NOT A WHIT ABOUT ANYONE AT ALL OTHER THAN HER PRECIOUS SELF.

4. Dr. Jefferts Schori cares NOT A MINUSCULE IOTA ABOUT WHAT ANY PARISHIONER ANYWHERE WANTS, UNLESS IT IS IN LINE WITH THE IMPERATOR’S SACROSANCT AGENDA.

5. Dr. Jefferts really, really, REALLY likes to break stuff.

6. Dr. Jefferts Schori really, really, REALLY fancies herself in a papal tiara and gestatorial chair.

7. …and in the meanwhile, any meaningful orthodox reply is…well…um…er…where is it?

“So I don’t get it. Why would Mrs. Schori officially want what she already has?”

Because it will make it much easier to be proclaimed “PB for life” at GC15 if she can select all the deputies herself. Any bishop voting against will, of course, just be deposed on the spot under new Title IV.

Before you scoff at the concept, remember Johnson’s law of Episco-dynamics.

“As the Episcopal Church continues to hemorrhage money, it is not hard to imagine its hierarchy casting covetous and resentful glances at the Church’s fat and well-healed brother organization, the Pension Fund, and conniving ways to lay their hands on its substantial booty.”

Just as Obama and his cronies are casting their eyes upon old folks IRAS and retirement funds.

Both Obama and Shori believe they should be grand ruling poobahs for life and would be willing to ignore laws and create crises to accomplish that.

Imperatrix, assuming she is a girl.

I never thought I would be asking this, but what is the feminine form of “Pope”?

We have:
- Emperor & Empress;
- King & Queen;
- Duke & Dutchess;
- Priest & Priestess;
- Stallion & Mare;
- Pope & ______?

Just saw this over on the Anglican Curmudgeon’s blog (link courtesy of Stand Firm):

“We find out that in approving a reduced budget for 2011, the Council approved the Church taking out a new loan of up to $60,000,000, and securing its note by mortgaging its headquarters at 815 Second Avenue, as well as by pledging unrestricted endowment funds.”

My immediate reaction is are they nuts???!!!! Taking out a loan of that size in this current economic downturn? Putting up property as a security, with no possibility of getting anything like the market value? Pledging the church’s funds?

I can’t believe they’re getting in debt to the tune of sixty million smackers. Even six million would be going it some, considering how the banks are all dodgy nowadays, but sixty???? That can’t be right, surely!

Guys, I’m sorry, but I’m thinking a financial crash is on the horizon. From the “Episcopal Life Online” coverage:

“By way of a related resolution proposed by FFM, the council approved borrowing of up to $60 million to refinance $46.1 million in debt that comes due at the end of this year. The $37 million renovation loan makes up the bulk of that amount. In addition, close to $10 million was spent on property in Austin, Texas, as a potential site for relocating the Archives of the Episcopal Church. The resolution said that the borrowing authority is also meant “to provide continuing working capital and liquidity.”

In other words, they’re borrowing money to pay off loans. You can’t do that. You cannot rob Peter to pay Paul, then rob Paul to pay back Peter. This is unfeasible. It cannot last. How are they going to pay back the loans when they come due, since the margin for servicing the interest is so tiny?

“Total revenue is projected to be $37,147,458, while total expenses are budgeted at $36,963,127.” That means a balance of $184,331 in credit. No way you can survive on that kind of margin.

Even if all the lawsuits are wound up quickly and they get their mitts on the property (and, more importantly it’s beginnning to look now, all the endowments and spare cash), they still have already spent the money and have nothing in reserve.

Unless they’re sitting on a magic gold and diamond mine, can somebody tell me how on earth they expect to survive for another five years?

Yeah, I’m thinking a drastic reduction in the House of Deputies – even doing away with it altogether and some kind of sop thrown to Bonnie Anderson, making her Vice-President or Second-in-Command to Katie or something. But the facts seem to be pointing in the direction of the cupboard is bare and all the committees are going on the scrapheap.

Just by comparison, us Papists are running at a deficit:

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002858.htm

“The 2009 fiscal period marked the third year in a row that Vatican expenses outpaced revenues.

The budget of Vatican City State, which includes the Vatican Museums and post office, ended 2009 with a deficit of $9.8 million, the Vatican said in notes on the budgets released July 10.

The separate budget of the Holy See, which includes the offices of the Roman Curia, finished 2009 with a registered deficit of more than $5.15 million.

The budget of the Holy See saw $319.6 million in outlays and $314.4 million in revenues including $62.8 million from the Institute for the Works of Religion, otherwise known as the Vatican bank.

…The budget of the Holy See includes the Vatican Secretariat of State and its diplomatic missions around the world, Vatican congregations and pontifical councils, the Holy See’s investment portfolio and properties as well as the Vatican’s newspaper, radio, publishing house and television production center.

…The Vatican statement included a report on two special sources of income: the Peter’s Pence collection, which is used by the pope for charity and emergency assistance; and the contributions of dioceses around the world made to support Vatican operations.

In 2009, Peter’s Pence collected $82.5 million, nearly $7 million more than 2008.

Catholics in the United States were the top contributors to Peter’s Pence, followed by Catholics in Italy and Germany, it said. But the Vatican added that in relation to their small Catholic populations, the Catholic communities of South Korea and Japan sent significant donations.

The contributions of dioceses amounted to just over $31.5 million, an increase of $2.3 million from the 2008 figure, the Vatican said. Dioceses in the United States gave the most, followed by dioceses in Germany, the Vatican said.”

She just winding her way up to a heirarchical church so she can point to her power and say “see!!”

R. Scott Purdy queried:

“I never thought I would be asking this, but what is the feminine form of “Pope”?”

There is no feminine form of Pope. The best you could do would be to use the phrase “female Pope,” but that would be an oxymoron, like “military intelligence,” “jumbo shrimp,” or “female bishop.”

I vote for “Pope-ette”. Although Dr. Tighe’s terminology has merit — is there a superlative form of “Flamenca”?

I never thought I would be asking this, but what is the feminine form of “Pope”?

Wikipedia via Bing — now I have to wash my brain out with soap — says Papess, but I vote for Popess in English. In Spanish, “la Papa,” the Potato.

is there a superlative form of “Flamenca”?

I think that the phrase that you are looking for is flamínica máxima.

Liberals expected so much more from the presiding bishop when she was elected. It’s now clear Jefferts Schori has no use for laypeople (other than some 815 staff) and wants to cut them out of any meaningful roles in the governance of the church. Many laypeople feel betrayed.

Fuinseoig, refinancing debt at current low rates wouldn’t be a bad idea, except that it sounds like they are both reducing the rate and increasing the amount borrowed, which doesn’t help.

There is an eerie parallel between this US administration’s rape, murder and pillage of the economy and Shori’s ravaging of Episcopal church finances.

Same with both their unauthorized power grabbing, their disrespect and disregard for constitutional, fiscal, Biblical and natural law.

Wonder if they will also try to override the laws of physics and time or if they already practice levitation and channeling their predecessors like Herod, a fellow killer of infants?

I think it is quite telling, and sadly ironic, that Ms. Schori wants to “choose life” when it concerns polity, but adamantly opposes any notion of “choose life” when it comes to, y’know, people.

Welcome to the “less is more” church is becoming a reality. Where’s all that Anaheim bravado when you need it?
http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/general_convention_2009_live/eyes_on_the_floor_less_is_more.html

The Bovina Bloviator
October 26, 2010

As the Episcopal Church continues to hemorrhage money, it is not hard to imagine its hierarchy casting covetous and resentful glances at the Church’s fat and well-healed brother organization, the Pension Fund, and conniving ways to lay their hands on its substantial booty.

I think this hits the nail on the head as to what’s afoot here. This is not a power grab per se, but a money grab.

With a couple billion large at their command, Kate and Friends can keep up the charade for some years that all is well, and that their “doing a new thing” approach is a success.

Plus, unfunded pension obligations are all the rage now in Lefty circles. The more unfunded you are, the more of a “I’m-not-a-capitalist” badge it is, and the more of a bailout Team Hopenchange will throw at you. If the Pension Fund is sound and fully funded, TEC won’t get a bailout – and her fellow Lefties might ask Kate awkward questions at parties about why not.

Katherine, they’re borrowing extra to (1) pay off the loan due when they must have known (and planned) for when it was coming due, so that means they’ve not been able to keep up the projected revenue (2) that leaves them with something like $14 million left over for “continuing working capital and liquidity” which again is alarming – they haven’t enough cash flow to keep going without borrowing (3) they’ve got a further repayment of 60 million to make some way down the line and where is the money going to come from for that?

I said it before, I’m saying it now once again: the hubris involved in them saying “We’re so rich, we can beat global poverty!” is coming back to bite them in the backside in a big way.

Oops. I wrote something was obviously afoot at 815 Second Avenue, so you think I might have spelled well-heeled correctly!

My neighbor just refinanced her mortgage — same principal amount, interest rate 2.5 points or so lower, and she’s in much better shape. She didn’t increase the amount she borrowed, of course, because she’s sensible and not profligate and desperate like TEC management. With their finances in tatters, their investments down, there’s no way they should be increasing debt load.

Taking money from that pension fund would be criminal. Corporate boards which try that stunt end up in serious trouble. They will, probably, raid all the endowments they can, and possibly invent reasons to raid some they shouldn’t.

Yeah, I can’t see them being allowed to touch the pension fund. That’s why the line about “unrestricted endowent funds” makes me go “Uh-oh!”

In other words, they’re not only selling off the family silver, they’re breaking open the kids’ piggybanks as well.

RE: “committing suicide by governance.”

Does this mean she’s against the panels the Health Care Plan (TM) uses?