NY Times: After Theological Split in Pittsburgh, a Clash Over Church Assets

After an overwhelming vote here over the weekend by the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh that created the second schism with the national church since the 2003 election and consecration of an openly gay Episcopal bishop, both sides were hoping for a simple resolution.

“If the national church would stay out of it, we could work it out,” said the Rev. Jonathan Millard, who favored secession and led the convention on Saturday. “And I think 90 percent of the churches here would agree with me.”

Mr. Millard was referring to that most secular of issues: resolving who owns what among the millions of dollars’ worth of diocesan and parish property.

It is a huge concern for both sides after the vote on Saturday, which realigned the majority of the 74 parishes of the Pittsburgh diocese with a more conservative branch of the church in South America. On Saturday, 119 of 191 lay members voted in favor of leaving the national church, as did 121 of 160 clergy members.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Culture-Watch, Episcopal Church (TEC), Law & Legal Issues, TEC Conflicts, TEC Conflicts: Pittsburgh

3 comments on “NY Times: After Theological Split in Pittsburgh, a Clash Over Church Assets

  1. Katherine says:

    It need not be a huge controversy, if TEC were to follow its own declared principles. DioPGH voted by a large majority to secede. Majority rules, right? The Diocese is generously offering to allow dissenting parishes, where the majority don’t want to go, to keep their properties, and to find a way to equitably share use of some of the diocesan facilities, if I remember correctly.

    But I will not be surprised to see, in short order, a lawsuit whereby the minority who didn’t want to be part of DioPGH any more suing to take its property, all of it. This is the pattern we have seen in San Joaquin, and we will see here and in Ft. Worth and Quincy.

    TEC therefore claims that majority vote changes doctrine and is, in fact, the working of the “Spirit,” but that majority vote has nothing to do with property.

  2. Dan Crawford says:

    Fr. Simon seems to be suggesting that the lawsuits are coming – a rather different perspective than the one he was disseminating before Saturday’s vote when he was saying he had hope that we could work it out.

  3. Irenaeus says:

    “If the national church would stay out of it, we could work it out”

    And probably work it out quickly, too.