But not always factual information.
As the consideration of the proposal goes forward by the Study Committee appointed by the Council, I am concerned that the church-at-large know the facts.
This proposal in no way diminishes the legacy or future of Ghost Ranch.
I am an example of its impact; for decades it has been a part of my life and ministry. My convictions have developed over my 50 years with Ghost Ranch as a seminar leader and organizer, initiator of the Ghost Ranch Service Corps, and six years as a volunteer program director after my retirement in 1988, I have not been asked to write this article by anyone on the Ghost Ranch staff or Governing Board. Neither do I have any awareness of the deliberations of the Council Study Committee that is to make its recommendation on the proposal.
First, it should be remembered that Ghost Ranch was given lock, stock, barrel, and buildings to the Board of Christian Education of the former Presbyterian Church USA. The Board of Christian Education did build several facilities, though the Ghost Ranch Foundation has raised much of the money for capital improvements over the years from Compadres of the Ranch. But, essentially, Ghost Ranch cost the denomination nothing!
The proposal to transfer title is not without precedent. There is a long history of transferring mission properties once owned by the denomination to national churches, in the case of a great many facilities overseas, or to congregations, presbyteries, or independent local non-profit entities in the case of entities owned by the former Board of National Missions. Almost all such transfers were completed without monetary payment.
If the title is transferred to a separate non-profit corporation, Ghost Ranch would then be in the same relation to the denomination as the other two national conference centers — Montreat Conference Center and Stony Point Conference Center, plus the seminaries, all of which are clearly understood to be in the service of the denomination, though not owned by it.
Given its financial realities, Ghost Ranch faces a daunting financial future if action is not taken; the (then) General Assembly Council has not been able to live up to its original commitment to the conference center.
When a Governing Board was constituted for Ghost Ranch some years ago, the General Assembly Council entered into an official covenant with that Governing Board which, among other things, provided that the GAC would elect the director of the Ranch and pay the salary and benefits for that person, and would pay the insurance premiums. When the GAC found itself no longer able to honor that covenant, it left the Ghost Ranch Board with the immediate necessity of raising hundreds of thousands of dollars without the flexibility that Montreat and the Presbyterian seminaries have. Since Ghost Ranch has, in essence, been told that it must make it completely on its own, it seems reasonable that it should be freed from the real restrictions that direct General Assembly ownership imposes, since the General Assembly is no longer able to maintain or support its property.
The transfer proposal clearly indicates that the property of Ghost Ranch would revert to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) should it cease operation. Hence, this clearly recognizes that the property is “held in trust … for the use and benefit of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).”
Dean Lewis retired to New Mexico in 1989 after 30 years service on the staff of General Assembly agencies of evangelism, Christian Education, and Church and Society.
