A local Episcopal parish that is defending its property against a claim from the Episcopal Church is filing a brief in a similar California case.
The Church of the Good Shepherd in Rosemont filed an amicus brief in a case against St. James Anglican Church Newport Beach, where the local Episcopal diocese is claiming St. James’ property because the church withdrew from communion with the Episcopal Church. The amicus, or friend of the court filing, outlines Good Shepherd’s side of the Montgomery County dispute for the court’s benefit. St. James has appealed a previous ruling of the California Supreme Court to the Supreme Court of the U.S.
“We see our amicus brief for St. James, Newport Beach as an act of witness to our parish motto ”“ non ministrari, sed ministrare ”“ not to be ministered unto, but to minister,” said Bishop David Moyer, the rector at Good Shepherd. Bishop Moyer added that the brief was filed out of “thanksgiving for the many blessings we have received from near and far in our struggles for the Gospel and the Catholic religion.”
“We see our amicus brief for St. James, Newport Beach as an act of witness to our parish motto – non ministrari, sed ministrare – not to be ministered unto, but to minister,” said Bishop David Moyer, the rector at Good Shepherd. Bishop Moyer added that the brief was filed out of “thanksgiving for the many blessings we have received from near and far in our struggles for the Gospel and the Catholic religion.”
I have to say that this is the first time I have seen the reasserters refer to lawsuits as ministry.
@1, you’re misreading it. The story is about a parish filing an amicus brief, not a lawsuit.
Also noteworthy is the amicus brief filed by Kenneth W. Starr for the Presbyterian Lay Committee, in support of the petition for certiorari in this case. It is linked at http://www.layman.org/News.aspx?article=26215, in the first line of the text of the article.
There were 100,000 signatures submitted to the Sec of state tp [;ace the invalidation of this law on the Nov. Ballot. Only 55,000 are required. These were gathered in four weeks. There is at present a very strong chance that LD 1020 with be invalidated.
MOreoever the bishop is laboring under a fundamental confusion. The state should NOT have the power to marry because marriage is a spiritual matter, religious in its best sense of the word, and the First Amendment demands that the state stay out of this issue. Only religious institutions have the power to marry not merely bless, but actually marry. Marriage is not a business contract, it is a sacrament.
Let the state continue to have the power to establish civil partnerships; this is inside their jurisdiction. On the other hand, TEC can marry however many, of whatever gender or species, it desires, and only the church canons can stop such bizarre combinations.
Maine has become overwhelmingly Democrat and blue, but the forces against ssm run deep and wide. And if Maine can turn ssm “civil”marriage down, so can any other state, and it is this message we hope we will be sending to the rest of the US. Larry
Oops. My entry above was meant for the ssm in Maine piece. I don’t know why I posted this here. Larry