What prompted these legal disputes over church property?
My guess is that there are about 100 congregations around the country involved in this type of litigation. Most of the lawsuits have involved more conservative congregations leaving national denominations due to a perception that the national denominations have become too liberal, particularly on issues involving homosexuality.
The breakaway congregations want to retain ownership of church property, but the national denominations claim that they own the property and that the breakaway congregations forfeit any right to the property when they leave.
The primary type of property at issue in these disputes is the congregation’s house of worship. For example, in a case taking place in Virginia, the fight is over the historic Falls Church, where George Washington was a church warden. But disputes also involve other sorts of property. One case, for example, involves a corporate jet that the local congregation bought.
“It would be helpful at this point in time for the Anglican Communion to make up its mind whether the needs of the world and the mission of the church in response to those needs will be better served by a more strictly and centrally regulated structure, or by a more open model deployed for ministry. We favor the latter as more in keeping with Christ?s commission to the church, which is focused not on itself and its structures but on the proclamation of the saving message to a wounded world. It appears that the more we attempt to secure our inner agreements the more we focus on the things that divide us.”
Wait a moment.
Aren’t ECUSA’s leadership, Schori, Beers and revisionist bishops, using “a more strictly and centrally regulated structure” to persecute orthodox parishes and clergy?
Does this mean that the Diocese of New York is in disagreement with that leadership?
Or, is this, just possibly, a statement that is brim full of hypocrisy?
Elves, please excuse me, but somehow, my comment was misposted.
Please remove it from this blog listing. I will repost it in its intended location.
Pity they’re buying the canard about George Washington and Falls Church. Washington’s Falls Church died out in the last quarter of the 18th century, surviving only in its Christ Church, Alexandria branch. The predecessor of the current Falls Church was organized in 1836. Zion Church, from which the present day Truro Church descends, was an 1843 offspring of the new Falls Church.
http://www.jrgundersen.name/historic.htm
One case, for example, involves a corporate jet that the local congregation bought.
Oooh, I would love to know the details….
Maybe someone can explain to me WHY a local congregation in that area needs a corporate jet? Is it a minijet like the one Honda now builds, or a Jetstream V? Both sell for well over $10 million, the last I heard! Maybe those high-priced lawyers in those wealthy parishes use them to to and from wealthy clients!
I remain puzzled as to why those departing did not depart, particularly given the resources (at least in places like Truro and the Falls Church) they can command to quickly establish their own facilities. The legal fees are now approaching a point where a substantial down payment on new property could have been husbanded instead of paying lawyers. The time lost in seeing the litigation through also makes it harder to readjust and make alternative plans in the event of a defeat. I share the theological views of the departing congregation, but think the clarity of their position is very much compromised by trying to cling to the property. The run-up to the vote should have made clear that the intention was to not just leave the Diocese and ECUSA, but to establish new facilities for worship.
Let’s see; I remember weeks ago that of the 9 churches at the that were sued by the TEc for buildings, property, etc., etc. The TEC lost 7 of the suits – first time around. But if this same ratio holds true for a 100 church suits in process does this mean that 70 or more parish churches will win. The losers legal fees for this hoorah could cost the TEC a big chunk of dough.
Harvey, it’s costing all sides a “big chunk of dough” – money that could be better spent in missions that everyone either side of the separation would support. In any event, if you’re talking about the Virginia situation, I didn’t think there had been any clear ultimate victories or losses to date on either side – the litigation is ongoing. If you’re talking about nationally, I was under the impression that outside of Virginia, where there are no “Division Statutes” like the one in play here, the departing parishioners are generally being told by the courts to depart already, a result that strikes me as sensible and just. Trying to depart and taking the bricks and bank accounts with you just complicates the situation unduly.