It wasn't that long ago that Bishop Skip Adams talked about finding a positive way forward with dissident parishes in the DCNY that would be a model for pecusa. Instead, he and the other leadership of the DCNY settled for the conventional hostile approach of pecusa. In three cases, St. Andrew's, Syracuse, St. Andrew's, Vestal, and Good Shepherd, Binghamton, the Diocese has sued two parishes and is saddled with the expenses of two church buildings in Vestal (the one of the three not sued).
What does the diocese have to show for their efforts? They have the legal expenses from two lawsuits, one settled and one ongoing and the proceeds from the sale of the rectory in Vestal. Considering that the rectory sold for $145,000, the diocese is operating at a loss thus far from its hostile approach. The diocesan loss is both financial and in reputation. Of course, the diocese has been steadily losing reputation since at least the failed persecution of Fr. David Bollinger.
Legal expenses will mount up as the diocese prepares to wage legal war against Good Shepherd. In addition to these expenses, the DCNY has the mortgage payment for 400 Mirador Road in Vestal and the property expenses for 400 and 401 Mirador.
So much for finding a positive way forward. As the DCNY is finding out, the pecusa hostile approach is costly, but as the DCNY should know by now, there is not sufficient leadership in the diocese to chart a better way.
4 comments:
It is sad to say that so much money is going to lawyers who seek to burnish their reputations as fighters against the evil Diocese. One lawyer in particular quit a case in Syracuse because he wanted to keep fighting when the Church decided against it. He has since found another deep set of pockets to further his ambition and oversized ego. This lawyer has also convinced a church to sign over assets to an organization called the St Matthias Society to "protect them" from confiscation by Bishop Adams, but has since refused to release those same assets back to the original paish when litigation was settled. So, the warning is, beware of wolves in sheep's clothing brothers and sisters.
No need to veil your comments. This is the site that removes the veils of secrecy in the DCNY. The lawyer that you are attempting to discredit is Raymond Dague. It is true that St. Andrew's, Syracuse decided against continuing their lawsuit. It is fairly typical for a lawyer to stop representing a client who wants to go in a different direction.
As for any dispute with the St. Matthias Society, it sounds like you know more that I do. If you wish to make your accusation more specific, feel free to do so in this place. If you are referring to a disagreement with St. Andrew's, Syracuse, I'm not sure you or I know all the relevant facts involved.
It is well known that lawyer Dague who invented St Matthias has used this organization as his own personal piggy bank on occasion. He of course would deny this.St Matthias has refused to release assets of St Andrew's Syracuse, in writing, despite being asked many times in many ways. This is easily confirmed from many members of the Church. This certainly is a moral breach, shocking to people who thought St Matthias was the last thing that they had to distrust. Mr Dague and the St Matthias Board are really not making a difficult situation of losing a church and rectory easier by not releasing the assets held only in trust. So much for trust!
"Personal piggy bank" is a charge concerning illegal behavior. Can you prove this?
My understanding is that St. Matthias holds no financial assets of St. Andrew's, Syracuse. It continues to hold title (I guess that's what it is) to some material assets which St. Andrew's continues to use.
It sounds like we have a conflict here and one that has not adequately been dealt with.
Post a Comment