ECUSA Diocese argue that the historical evidence demonstrates that it is only the “major” or “great” divisions within 19th-century churches that prompted the passage of 57-9, such as those within the Presbyterian andMethodist Churches. ECUSAjDiocese argue that the current “dispute” beforethis Court is not such a “great” division, and, therefore, this is yet another reason why 57-9(A) should not apply. The Court agrees that it was major divisions such as those within the Methodist and Presbyterian churches that prompted the passage of 57-9. However, it blinks at reality to characterize the ongoing division within the Diocese, ECUSA, and the Anglican Communion as anything but a division of the first magnitude, especially given the involvement of numerous churches in states across the country, the participation of hundreds of church leaders, both lay and pastoral, who have found themselves “taking sides” against their brethren, the determination by thousands of church members in Virginia and elsewhere to “walk apart” in the language of the Church, the creation of new and substantial religious entities, such as CANA, with their own structures and disciplines, the rapidity with which the ECUSA’s problems became that of the Anglican Communion, and the consequent impact-in some cases the extraordinary impact-on its provinces around the world, and, perhaps most importantly, the creation of a level of distress among many church members so profound and wrenching as to lead them to cast votes in an attempt to disaffiliate from a church which has been their home and heritage throughout their lives, and often back for generations.
Whatever may be the precise threshold for a dispute to constitute a division under 57-9(A), what occurred here qualifies. For the foregoing reasons, this Court finds that the CANA Congregations have properly invoked 57-9(A). Further proceedings will take place in accordance with the Order issued today.
This is a first step and a great incremental victory in this single battle in a long war. Praise and Glory be to God!
A prayer.
My first reaction is that this finding of fact is historically important, if for no other reason than the sheer excellence of its description of events and positions.
Secondly, ECUSA were soundly spanked, for example on pages 58 and 60, but most particularly on page 83 when the judge declares:
[blockquote][i][b]it blinks at reality to characterize the ongoing division within the Diocese, ECUSA, and the Anglican Communion as anything but a division of the first magnitude[/b], especially given the involvement of numerous churches in states across the country, the participation of hundreds of church leaders, both lay and pastoral, who have found themselves “taking sides” against their brethren, the determination by thousands of church members in Virginia and elsewhere to “walk apart” in the language of the Church, the creation of new and substantial religious entities[/i][/blockquote]
The essence of ECUSA’s argument was that the only permissible divorce could be an amicable divorce. That was rejected, utterly.
And finally, the true moment of division has been made clear.
[blockquote][i]The former Presiding Bishop had said that in matters of division of churches leaving Diocese, [sic] that was going to be left up to the Bishop. But now it was going to be-it was going to become a matter of concern to the national church. The [new Presiding] Bishop said [b]there’s a new sheriff in town[/b], the situation is different. [/i] (p 34)[/blockquote]
The petty power politics of academia were fused with Baby Boomers’ perpetual adolescence, and a church was riven.
For those who may no be familiar with 57-9(A), and do not want to read the entire ruling, here it is:
[blockquote]57-9. How property rights determined on division of church or society.
A. If a division has heretofore occurred or shall hereafter occur in a church or religious society, to which any such congregation whose property is held by trustees is attached, the members of such congregation over 18 years of age may, by a vote of a majority of the whole number, determine to which branch of the church or society such congregation shall thereafter belong. Such determination shall be reported to the circuit court of the county or city, wherein the property held in trust for such congregation or the greater part thereof is; and if the determination be approved by the court, it shall be so entered in the court’s civil order book, and shall be conclusive as to the title to and control of any property held in trust for such congregation, and be respected and enforced accordingly in all of the courts of the Commonwealth. [/blockquote]
I’d say that TEC and the Diocese of Virginia got their heads handed to them. Good!
The Oven Mit Miter has just gone up in flames!
As of Noon EST there has not been a jot or tittle about this defeat on the official ENS Website. Lots of announcements about little to nothing, and guest commentary from ivy-coated gurus on how to beat a dead horse back to life.
“…the Court finds that the evidence of a “division” within the Diocese, the ECUSA, and the Anglican Communion is not only compelling, but overwhelming.”
If it looks like a duck…
The response from the Episcopal Diocese about state interference and church rules reminds me of the story of the defendant charged with murdering his parents who pleaded for judicial mercy because he was an orphan.
Jill Woodliff’s prayer linked in #2 above is beautiful…may we be clothed in humility and charity in light of this decisioni
#10 — Amen! I just left a comment with appreciation for Jill over at SF (where someone else had thanked her for this prayer), and I should repeat it here:
——
I want to echo Betty Lee’s appreciation of the [url=http://anglicanprayer.wordpress.com/2008/04/04/virginia/]prayer Jill wrote[/url].
Indeed may the Lord keep all of us in the ADV congregations from gloating or arrogance.
I hope this isn’t seen as hijacking the thread here, but I also want to offer my public thanks and appreciation as to how Jill has kept Lent&Beyond;going and been faithful in continuing this ministry of intercession.
For months I’ve been focused much more on local ministry and not had time or energy to devote to blogging, thus I never found time to revamp the L&B;site (which was originally merely a backup site) following the CaNNet crash and our need to switch from the original site.
I’m hoping to get 4 – 5 hours tomorrow evening (Sat) to work on Lent & Beyond and move it far beyond it’s current bare-bones and not very useful (no archives, no search) set up. Hopefully that bit of admin and blog design work will help keep L&B;going strong and will make the prayer blog and ministry even more useful & fruitful. As so many have testified even in relation to this ADV ruling, this is still only one battle in an ongoing war—and it IS spiritual warfare.
I’m reminded of the quote by Martyn Minns which was what prompted me to launch Lent & Beyond 4 years ago:
[i] “… the defining issue [in the Anglican Communion] is … two different understandings of Truth. This is a spiritual battle for the Church that will not be won in a Commission but only by prayer and the full armor of Godâ€[/i]
None of that has changed even with this wonderfully favorable and encouraging ruling. Prayer is still needed—perhaps now more than ever!