Christ Episcopal Church of Alexandria, one of the most venerable parishes in the Diocese of Virginia, has joined a historic lawsuit against several Northern Virginia parishes attempting to leave the denomination.
Members of the 235-year-old parish were informed Sunday at a parish meeting that the diocese will represent them in the largest property dispute in Episcopal Church history, taking place at the Fairfax County Courthouse. The multi-trial case will resume Oct. 14.
Circuit Court Judge Randy I. Bellows has dealt three consecutive defeats to the diocese and the denomination in their battle to retain millions of dollars of property held by 11 churches that fled over issues of biblical authority and the 2003 election of the openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.
RE: “In order to argue this case in court, the diocese needed Christ Church’s permission to act as its proxy. Although the diocese notified opposition attorneys on Sept. 5 that it would represent Christ Church, it was not until Sept. 22 that the vestry, or governing board, was told of the matter. The vestry approved it Sept. 24.”
Heh.
Heh heh heh.
[i]This. Is. Classic.[/i]
Just exactly how vestries are supposed to work. ; > )
Bishop Lee and PB Jefferts Schori and Booth Beers get into a huddle to figure out what-to-do. Come up with this plan. Go ahead and tell the courts that Christ Church will be their stooge, er puppet, er . . . . that “the diocese will be Christ Church’s proxy” . . . then take the trouble to “inform” the vestry two weeks later.
What a classic! I mean, just classic TEC. And the vestry hurriedly shuffles it through before the congregation can get wind of it. I’m betting they were told “why you just have to approve this — why, we’ve already told the courts that we’re your proxy!”
I mean — it’s incredible. They’re getting the vestry to claim that Christ Church “owns” Truro Church . . . as if it could actually handle that property and facility. Wonder who’s gonna be left with the bill if the courts “award” it to Christ Church?
Talk about being used, used, used, used.
You have to wonder how much more some of the institutionalists will be willing to take (probably more than we can imagine). Surely vestry members would feel obligated to take soundings BEFORE making such a commitment?
All power really does tend to corrupt, it would appear.
[url=http://catholicandreformed.blogspot.com]Catholic and Reformed[/url]
Wow these guys are really following the kitchen sink approach. Even if this novel theory holds some water, I would assume the law of adverse possession applies here. I don’t believe the guys who have swept the floors of TFC’s Historic Church for all these years were hired by Christ Church Alexandria.
Early on, the Bishop Lee of the Diocese of Virginia engaged in “good faith” negotiations with the dissenting orthodox parishes, including The Falls Church and Truro Church, in Northern Virginia.
These negotiations reulted in an agreement between the diocese and the dissenting parishes that was worthy of a Christian bishop and would have resulted in an honorable property settlement that would have been beneficial to both parties.
Then, Ms Schori and her chancellor intervened in this diocesan process and Bishop Lee reneged on his diocese’s prior negotiations in the matter. This constituted a dishonrable act on the part of the diocese and resulted in the diocese spending large sums of money, that should have gone to diocesan ministeries, on this continuously unfolding and costly law suit.
Now, the diocese, after scratching around in pre-Revolutionary War colonial archives, has come up with documentation, that brings Christ Church in Alexandria, VA into the lawsuit, and is trying to use it to establish ownership of the properties in dispute.
This brought the parish of Christ Church into the legal arena and presumably made it partner to the legal proceedings, to include legal costs and consequences. This has been done without a full consultation with the members of the congregation, particularly those who support the parish through their attendance, offerings and ministeries.
The following quote from the article cites that situation,
“Parishioners were not so accommodating. On Sunday, some worried that Christ Church’s involvement – however distant – in a lawsuit could make its finances precarious. The church has a $135,000 deficit, and only 507 of its 2,459 members – or one-fifth – actually give.
“There were quite a few people who were stunned and said, ‘We don’t need this,’ ” said one former vestry member who asked to remain anonymous. “[Parish leaders] didn’t give it much time.”
One vestry member who voted against Christ Church’s participation said several parishioners expressed reservations.
“We were reassured during the all-parish meeting that we would not be intervening in the lawsuit as a plaintiff or defendant,” said the woman, who asked to remain anonymous. “But apparently I was not the only one who was uncomfortable with the vestry taking a vote on such a serious matter without first consulting the congregation.””
So, Bishop Lee is dragging more of his congregants into a legal morass that he could have avoided if he had had the intestinal fortitude to stand up against the decidedly unChristian plans and actions of Ms Schori and her chancellor. But, he didn’t.
The situation in Fairfax County Court has a distinct aroma of a ‘spite action’ being conducted by the Diocese of Virginia and the national church, such as it is as an episcopal organization, against parishes and congregants whose only goal is to adhere to and to follow “…the Faith once given….”
Unfortunately, the Diocese of Virginia will probably reap the bitter fruit of its spiteful actions.
Most of the Episcopalians in Northern Virginia are not avant garde social revolutionaries who are eager to launch the church down paths of secular innovation, regardless of the consequences.
I foresee a continual weakening of the Episcopal Church in Northern Virginia. Just look at the situation in Christ Church, “…The church has a $135,000 deficit, and only 507 of its 2,459 members – or one-fifth – actually give.” Compare that to the vibrant and enthusiastic participation of the orthodox Anglicans in Northern Virginia who belong to Truro and The Falls Churches.
Does not their new argument, that a parish owns property (in this case CEC “owning” TFC), totally undercut them with respect to the other parishes in the proceeding? Surely there is no claim that Truro or the other parishes are owned by another parish?
This appears to be a “throw everything against the wall and see what sticks” strategy. In other words, it reeks of desperation.
No parish can own its property under the Beers’ doctrine. The lien or impressed trust would be on the actually property in question. I see no need for Chirst Church to be involved.
Set the members of one church against the members of another – a wonderful new strategy by the proponents of the wonderful new christianity. (No, I did not forget the capital “C”)
It is a logical move for the rector of Christ Church to join this suit against the Christian Parishes in Northern Virginia thus diverting attention from the obvious problems in his own parish….like only 20% of the parish contributing…I wonder what attendance is like?
Newspapers are notorious for not understanding much of what goes on in churches. The Washington Post is no better than the Moonie paper in which this article appeared, regrettably. I am fairly confident that the number cited refers to pledges, not total persons giving. Nonetheless, the stewardship of Christ Church is abysmal and speaks to a lack of leadership as well as a lack of understanding of the nature of Christian obligation.
#9, I think the writer is a member at Truro (and in any case has written for years about Episcopalian issues in VA), so this “Moonie” stuff is really misplaced
I wonder how much Christ Church has contributed to the upkeep and improvemnts on the Fall’s Church property all these hundreds of years…seems like the law of adverse possession would come into play and settle the whole miserable affair
Dear Kate,
It is my understanding that the Indians still own an implied trust interest in the Island of Manhattan. Please remit promptly.
Intercessor
Does any one in Virginia know why this is not a slam dunk case of adverse possession?
If at this late stage in the case, the Beersies have to drag Christ Church in as a plaintiff, then it sure sounds like the Beersies didn’t plan their case very well.
What a contrast to the surefooted counsel for the orthodox parishes.
I consider it a positive development that they are now saying the property should go to the entity with record title.
These are all events that predated the existence of the diocese so the diocese has no standing in the matter only Christ Church itself. If the thinking is Christ Church owns Truro, and the diocese owns Christ Church, its pretty twisted logic.
As a matter of neutral property rights if the names of the Trustees of Christ Church are not on the deed and Truro does not owe them any money — then I can’t see this as being a serious case. It sounds like a last desperate act on the part of the diocese.