A Question That Won't Go Away

I was thinking about recent news analysis concerning a major non-profit foundation, and one issue struck me that might be applicable to the St Mary's situation. As best anyone can determine, the Bush group drained all the bank accounts belonging to St Mary of the Angels (including the funds derived from the apparently fraudulent 2014 mortgage) before being evicted from the property. We don't know what happened to those funds -- the best we can surmise is that members of the group were advised to make checks for future donations payable to something called the Perseverance Mission.

There are numerous implications of what may have happened here, but the one that sticks is that the Bush group appears to have taken funds from a tax-deductible entity -- the bank accounts belonging to the St Mary of the Angels parish -- and put them into some sort of entity that, as far as I can see, is not tax deductible. I'm not sure what the effect would be of reporting this to the IRS -- it could result in problems for the continuing corporation and its vestry, after all. However, there are certainly issues with what happened to funds amounting close to $1 million which have disappeared with no accounting.

I do see in the December 2016 Northeast Anglican of the ACA Diocese of the Northeast, in its report of the diocesan synod,

Chancellor Jones reported that he submitted his recommendations to the Diocese of the West for changes in their diocesan canons.

So clearly the DONE, and presumably by extension Bp Marsh, continue to concern themselves with legal issues in the Diocese of the West. (Interestingly, the moribund DOW has its own Chancellor, but he seems to be subordinate to Mr Jones. For that matter, it's been pointed out to me that Owen Williams, canonically just the episcopal visitor, is subject to removal by Marsh. Doesn't seem like Marsh trusts anyone in the DOW.) I would guess that the unspecified changes in the diocesan canons of the DOW relate in some way to closing the St Mary of the Angels barn door after the horse has left.

But if Belchertown is concerning itself with DOW legalities, wouldn't it be a better idea to work out a strategy for disengaging from the legal liabilities inherent in the St Mary of the Angels case? Just for starters, what about payments made to Owen Williams by the Bush group, which could at minimum include living and automobile expenses for what amounts to a non-deductible purpose? Shouldn't the ACA and the DONE be looking to protect itself from contingencies here? Doesn't sound to me like any glib assurances from Mr Lancaster should suffice, either.