Received via email:
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. – – Three California Anglican churches today announced the filing of petitions with the California Supreme Court to settle a church property dispute case that affects countless churches and their members throughout California. The three churches are St. James Church in Newport Beach, All Saints’ Church in Long Beach, and St. David’s Church in North Hollywood.
In July 2007, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three, reversed the Orange County Superior Court’s prior ruling that the three former Episcopal churches, which ended their affiliation with the national denomination in 2004, did not forfeit their property by changing their affiliation to another Anglican church. This division of the appellate court broke with nearly thirty years of California church property law applying “neutral principles” (i.e., who holds the deed, who bought or donated the property, and whether the local church ever agreed to turn over the property), and instead ruled that denominations can take over local church property by simply passing an internal rule – even if the local church is separately incorporated, bought and maintained the property, and never consented to the rule.
“Californians respect property rights, and no one, especially a big church bureaucracy, should have the right to confiscate someone else’s property just by passing a rule. For nearly thirty years, and based on U.S. Supreme Court precedent, California courts have respected the property rights of church members who have bought and maintained their property,” said Eric C. Sohlgren, legal spokesman. “By turning the clock back to cases from the 1800’s, the court’s opinion has given big institutional churches a power greater than eminent domain, and thrown this area of law into turmoil and uncertainty. California courts, religious corporations and church members are now left with a patchwork of conflicting court decisions governing ownership of church property,” Sohlgren said.
St. James, All Saints’ and St. David’s, as the sole property owners, never agreed to relinquish their property to the Episcopal Church upon changing their affiliation, and they have consistently maintained that they have the right to use and possess the property they have owned and maintained for decades.
“We are asking the Supreme Court to intervene and declare explicitly that California courts are to apply neutral principles of law in resolving church property disputes,” Sohlgren added.
The churches also seek the Supreme Court’s guidance on a California statute which allows courts to expedite cases where people are sued for exercising their free speech rights, known as the anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute. The statute subjects to early scrutiny cases filed by large private interests to deter individuals from exercising their political or legal rights to free speech or to petition the government. Attorneys for the three churches argued that The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Los Angeles are large, wealthy and powerful religious organizations that sought to stifle these fundamental rights when church members spoke out about their disagreements with the Episcopal Church, including through the act of disaffiliation itself.
* * *
A Brief Recap
The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles brought lawsuits against St. James, All Saints’ and St. David’s Anglican Churches and their volunteer board members in September of 2004. Subsequently, the national Episcopal Church intervened into the lawsuits against the three local church corporations and their volunteer board members.
On August 15, 2005, the Honorable David C. Velasquez of the Orange County Superior Court ruled in favor of St. James against the complaint brought by the Diocese of Los Angeles. In October 2005, Judge Velasquez issued a similar ruling in favor of All Saints and St. David’s. The Diocese of Los Angeles appealed the rulings to the California Court of Appeal.
In August 2005, the Complaint in Intervention filed separately by the national Episcopal Church (“TEC”) was still pending in the Orange County Superior Court.
In Fall 2005, the Court granted the three Churches’ challenges to TEC’s original Complaint in Intervention, but gave TEC an opportunity to amend the Complaint (but only if it could do so in good faith). TEC filed a First Amended Complaint in Intervention, which rehashed many of the church-rule arguments the Court had already rejected in prior rulings. The three local churches filed another challenge (called a demurrer) asking the Court to dismiss the First Amended Complaint without further leave to amend on the ground that even if all of the factual allegations were true, they did not state a legal wrong under California law. TEC also appealed that ruling to the California Court of Appeal.
In July 2007, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three, in an opinion authored by Presiding Justice David G. Sills, reversed the Orange County Superior Court’s prior ruling that three church corporations which disaffiliated from the national denomination did not forfeit their property. This division of the appellate court broke with nearly thirty years of California church property law, and Division Two of the Fourth Appellate District, by ruling that general churches can take over local church property by simply passing an internal rule – even if the local church is separately incorporated, bought and maintained the property.
Rather than double-post, I will just refer to [url=http://new.kendallharmon.net/wp-content/uploads/index.php/t19/article/4949/#91985]my comment below.[/url]
This is a press release from the three churches, right? Who is the author?
#1: The most pernicious factor in this case is the sudden intervention of something calling itself “TEC”…i.e. the alleged “national church” as a party to this dispute.
It is arguable that the diocese has an organic connection to the many parishes and missions with which the bishop, on behalf of the diocese with which he is in communion.
However, there is no organic connection between this fiction called “the national church” and the parishes in dispute in California.
It was only the middle of the 20th century…way late in the game…that there was even a notion of a “national” church. Everyone understood that the PB was a purely honorific role, and there were no pretensions to either a “primatial” role, or a “national church” jurisdiction.
The deeper question is why the bishops of TEC have spent blood, sweat, tears and mucho “dinero” filing suits against Christian congregations…and precious little b,l, s, t and $ listening to the call to repentance uttered repeatedly by those who “hierarchiacly” are above them: the real primates of the AC
Re #3: It is simply not true that there was no national church until 1950. The PECUSA/TEC Constitution was adopted, along with the initial Canons and Prayer Book, in 1789 and the General Convention has met every three years since. Every TEC bishop after Seabury has taken a promise of conformity and obedience to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of that church. Those promises have been enforced by church courts since the beginning. The constitution of every diocese, including those organized before 1789, contains a statement that the diocese similarly accedes to the jurisdiction of the national church. It was the national church that organized the missionary districts that eventually grew into every diocese west of the Appalachians. There have been other national institutions operating between General Conventions since at least the 1830s. There are probably fewer people on the national payroll now than there were fifty years ago. Clearly, the national church has become much more visible (in part because of the modern media of communication), but its nonfictional existence has been apparent for 218 years.