After biding its time for years, the Episcopal Diocese of Pennsylvania has asked a civil court to remove the Rev. David Moyer as rector of the Church of the Good Shepherd in Rosemont, and to declare the diocese as owner of the renegade parish’s property.
Moyer, a vocal critic of liberal trends in the Episcopal Church, has served as the parish’s rector and lived in its rectory since 1989, even though he was deposed as a priest nearly seven years ago.
Last week, the diocese informed him and Good Shepherd’s vestry that it had petitioned Montgomery County Orphans Court to order the parish to transfer the title to its buildings, as well as all other assets, to the diocese.
It also asked the court to “restrain and enjoin” Moyer “from further use and occupancy” of the site, which fronts on Lancaster Avenue.
Fair enough.
You can’t become a bishop in another church and thumb your nose at DioPA whilst living in DioPA’s buildings and remaining on DioPA’s dental plan!
Bishop Moyer and Good Shepherd ought to ‘walk the walk’ and walk out like St James the Less were forced to and perhaps join Fr Ousley at West Laurel Hill Cemetery at St Michael’s. Bishop Hewett can keep serving Continuers in the far western suburbs.
As I think the Main Line’s Episcopalians are already abundantly served with parishes that would leave DioPA with a redundant building.
[url=http://home.comcast.net/~acbfp/]High-church libertarian curmudgeon[/url]
Friends, this is likely coming to a TEC parish near you. Picture this: Orthodox priest John Dimsdale refuses to marry Adam and Steve. The diocese deposes him under Canon 10 (abandonment of communion). The parishioners resist and keep employing Rev. Dimsdale. The diocese moves on the property.
David Moyer is bishop of the armed forces all over the world in the Traditional Anglican Communion, part of the global Anglican communion. He was made a bishop there after he was deposed under Canon 10…a canon meant to remove clergy who had switched to another faith such as Mormonism, etc. He is a former president of Forward in Faith North America.
Walking out of Good Shepherd would only make it harder on those in church battles yet to come.
Although a sitting Anglican bishop, Ross Davies of The Murray, Australia, co-consecrated Bishop Moyer, and although Bishop Moyer has a licence in The Murray, TAC is not Anglican; it is independent, part of the Continuing communion.
Orthodoxy is nothing to do with this court case: after all there’s separation of church and state. Doctrine is defined and past doctrines are changed in Episcopalianism by vote (so some day soon Adam and Steve will be able to get their Episcopal wedding everywhere in America); the court decides that the diocese owns the building and Mr or Fr Dimsdale and congregation have to move.
Sorry but stealing in the name of orthodoxy is still stealing.
[url=http://home.comcast.net/~acbfp/]High-church libertarian curmudgeon[/url]
The young fogey in his “stealing” argument presumes that a corporation (the vestry of Good Shepherd Rosemont) can have its property taken by unilateral action of a larger corporation that did so without its written consent. I believe this is at the heart of much of the Statute of Frauds discussions on blogs like this lately. The vestry of Good Shepherd has never voted to leave the Episcopal church. Bishop Moyer’s standing as an Anglican priest was validated following his deposition by Archbishop Williams and his predecessor Lord Carey.
By the way, anyone in any denominational church should consider whether it is worth making improvements to church property it doesn’t own or control. Denominations can go conservative as well as liberal.
YF: Your comment about theft presumes, of course, that the TEC Diocese of Pennsylvania is indeed the rightful owner of the property in question. If that were completely clear, even to TEC, why have they waited until now? To me, this looks like a mopping up operation, intended to shore up TEC’s position in other legal fights, such as those in Pittsburgh, Fort Worth, San Joaquin, etc.
The lesson here is to choose wisely. Had he affiliated with a Buddhist movement, Fr. Moyer might have had a chance to be the next bishop of the Dio. of PA.
😉
TEC wants to assure that no parish is in any way encourgaed but is rather discouraged from leaving the realm of innovations and Jesus as a path to the diviine instead of divine himself.
This is why they are doing this to Fr. Moyer…and their canons with which he will be charged and by which they will assert their primacy are not designed to invite into Christian life but to imprison and hold hostage.
Methinks that any parish in a TEc diocese which has to make repairs — even if it’s just replacing a faulty door hinge — should send the bills to the dio offices, since they claim they own the buildings and properties. Let’s see how far that will go.
Scars of the scourging . Wear them with humility and thank the Lord for his calling upon you Fr.Moyer.
Just what DioPA needs…ANOTHER old empty building to pay for…foolish.
Rogue Intercessor
Kendall, thanks for posting this.
What kind of witness is this, attempting to take the parish’s property?
In Pennsylvania and at the national level, TEC is showing what it believes about Jesus and his Church in ways that should trouble members, ecumenical partners, and all believers.
What is the Church, just another kind of membership organization, where all that matters is allegiance to the changing whims of those in charge? Chiesa Nostra? Kings and godfathers might respond thus to underlings’ thumbing their noses. For the Church to act preemptively and unilaterally–and with the tools of the state– is to deny the image and model of Jesus and the Church built on Peter.
If this news disturbs you, I would encourage you to keep Father Moyer and the Good Shepherd community in your prayers… perhaps adding them to the list you have of parishes, priests, and diocese in similar situations.
I have lost count of all the shenanigans like this that the PB and her 815 entourage have perpetrated on parishes, with or without the approval of the diocese in which the parish resides.
It would help if someone younger and more adept at such research would publish a list of all the parishes, plus their numbers that have left or are leaving the TEC. The totality, might encourage others to either follow this course or stay and fight it out in the courts.
@11, you’re right. Does anyone have a list like this? Anybody keeping a tally, or good notes?
Just a reminder to young fogey and others ignorant of constitutional law: In the USA there is no “separation of church and state” but there is a limit on the states power to “establish” religion. You may be thinking of the constitution of another country like France or the now defunct Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Have a nice day.
[i]What kind of witness is this, attempting to take the parish’s property?[/i]
The witness of might makes right and winning through intimidation.
The worship of that modern Moloch, ecclesiastic pride, property, and power.
Juzt got my evening Colorado Springs report and apparently “I don’t have a case here except to dump on Father Amrstrong O’Neill” was on the stand all day.
He did fine with leading questions from the Diocesan attorney, but had 25 I don’t remembers in the last fifteen minutes of the day when turned over to the plaintiff’s attorney for questioning.
Look out Bishop Moyers…TEC attorneys will be at your hearings in spades as they are in Colorado Springs…Chubb and Anderson, racking up those billable hours.
Heather Anderson apparently had a hissy fit in the lady’s room last week after the judge ruled against her motion for something or other.
Didn’t former Episcopal bishop [now RC priest] Jeffrey Steenson serve this parish as rector?
16: yes.
[blockquote]The renegades have every right to leave the church but they don’t have a right to take the church with them. Those churches were built using the money of the diocese and belong to the diocese. [/blockquote]
The above was from a commenter to the article. The boilerplate response does not consider that the Standing Committee has already stated that it would not sell the church back to the parishioners. TEC thinks if it can keep the buildings, it will keep the parishioners.
Correct: they won’t sell it back to the parishioners.
[url=http://home.comcast.net/~acbfp/]High-church libertarian curmudgeon[/url]
It’s just crazy to think that the point is whether or not the diocese will sell the parish’s buildings back to it.