When a congregation breaks away from a denomination, who keeps the real estate?
That’s become a contentious issue within the Episcopal Church ”“ the US branch of Anglicanism ”“ as almost 100 parishes have voted to leave the church in the wake of its 2003 consecration of a gay bishop. Most aim to stay in their houses of worship while realigning themselves with conservative Anglican bishops in other countries.
On Wednesday, Anglican bishops from around the world gather in Britain to discuss their differences over scriptural interpretation and homosexuality at the once-a-decade Lambeth Conference. But in America, those differences are already ending up in court.
The stakes are high. Not only are some of the properties valuable, the legal battle over them is wrenching apart close-knit religious communities. Presbyterians and other denominations are keeping a close eye on the wrangling because they also have conservative congregations that are trying to pull out in response to actions of their denominations.
So far, the courts have not clarified the issue. Some congregations have had to forfeit their houses of worship. But on June 27, a Virginia county court upheld the constitutionality of a Civil War-era state law that would allow 11 congregations to leave the Episcopal Church and take their property with them. The law, called the “Division Statute,” provides that when evidence exists that a church is in a state of “division,” the local congregation can decide who controls the property.
“A lot is at stake here, including the freedom of Virginia churches to organize themselves in ways related to their religious beliefs.”
I’m sure the secretary of the diocese is regretting he said that since the ADV churches could claim the same thing!
I love the photo, with this caption,
[blockquote]Sued: The Episcopal Church is suing former bishop John-David Schofield to reclaim property of the San Joaquin Diocese.[/blockquote]
So why does he look so happy?
Overall,I think the article needs balance. No comments from “former” Bishop Schofield were in the piece, yet his photo leads it off.
It is not strictly true to say a church in Texas paid 1.2M for their property. The payment was for the loss of revenue to the diocese over a five year period. The same is true of Overland park Kansas.
This would be a good principle for all to follow.
http://www.pwcweb.com/ecw
#3 — In that case, it is even less true to say that payments were/are for a loss of revenue. Because one the church leaves the diocese, it will not be receiving that revenue anyway. I am not aware of other churches paying for “losses of revenue” AND not retaining the property.
That being said, RUN — do not walk — away from TEC. Pay whatever the price. It is and will be worth it.
Follow the money, not Jesus. The mantra of the PB et alia.
I am appalled at the bias crawling out of this article. A generation (30years) ago, the CSM was an even-handed newspaper (a rarity even then). No more.
#6 You’re not alone.
[blockquote]But on June 27, a Virginia [b]county[/b] court …[/blockquote] The Fairfax County Circuit Court is a state court, not a county court.