By Daniel Burke
Religion News Service
The court battle over church assets between the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia and 11 breakaway congregations has already cost both sides more than $2 million, according to representatives.
The secessionist Anglican District of Virginia has spent about $1 million on legal fees thus far and anticipates spending as much as $3 million to $5 million on the litigation, said Vice Chairman Jim Oakes.
The money is being raised through donations from the 11 churches, Oakes said, though only five have contributed so far.
Patrick N. Getlein, a spokesman for the Diocese of Virginia, said the diocese has spent “over a million,” on legal fees to date. The diocese recently reported that it has taken out a $2 million line of credit for the litigation.
Financial figures from the national Episcopal Church, which is also a party in the litigation, were not immediately available. Getlein said the national church is not helping the diocese pay its legal fees.
Citing theological disagreements with the national church’s increasing acceptance of gays and lesbians, the 11 congregations split from the diocese and the Episcopal Church last January. They have sinced joined the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, which is headed by Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola.
Oakes said the assets in dispute are worth approximately $30 million; Getlein said he could not provide an estimate of their worth.
The Episcopal Church maintains that church assets are held in trust for the national church, and is attempting to block efforts by the congregations to assert ownership of the property.
The first phase of the trial, now being heard by a judge in Fairfax County, Va., is scheduled to wrap up later this month.
Arguments thus far have centered on whether a Civil War-era Virginia law allows a congregation to leave a religious body with its assets intact if that body is undergoing division.
The court has scheduled arguments on church ownership to begin this October, Oakes said. The litigation could take as long as three years to complete, he said.
c. 2008 Religion News Service
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted January 10, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Now, it seems to me that it would be nice of the state/national churches to just give the churches away; I mean, they (presumably) can afford to do such, and the buildings mean more to their congregations than to the wider church. That being said, of course, they do not have to, and since they are the legal owners (if I understand correctly), the traditionalists may have to give up their buildings for the sake of their spiritual pursuits, and should accept that if they have to.
God bless.
posted January 10, 2008 at 6:06 pm
If some of the dioceses or churchs wish to leave the TEC….no problem. And, if they have completed a period of discernment and still can not accept female clergy/bishops/presiding bishops and/or full equality for lgbt members…then, perhaps they should leave.
However, they must leave TEC property behind.
Peace!
posted January 10, 2008 at 6:48 pm
I’m getting a picture for a new business. Find a large group of people, join a church, take it over, break it up and sell its assets, then start over. All perfectly legal, I reckon. And if the secessionists win this case, apparently quite possible.
Maybe it could be called “The Church of Higher Values”.
posted January 11, 2008 at 1:17 am
Such are the COSTS and joys of discipleship.
They knew it would be costly from the beginning. If they did not know, they were greatly deceived.
Joey,
Your plan is lovely except many of these congregations owe their denomination for building or improving their churches. Why should other loyal members of other loyal churches be left holding the loan for these folks. Given the value of some of these properties the 2 million is just a small fraction the total worth.
In most of these cases it is one immovable object against another immovable object – such is the stubbornness of people with righteous causes.
Now, go to the next article and see if you can guess why so many unchurched people feel the way they do.
posted January 12, 2008 at 4:03 pm
If the TEC expect folk to pay for the buildings and pay the expenses to run the building but still claim the buildings to be theirs, they sound like a church mafia. Give the people what is theirs, they were raised in the buildings worshiped in them all of their lives and paid the TEC way more then they are worth.
posted January 13, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Quote: The Episcopal Church maintains that church assets are held in Trust for the National Church, and is attempting to block efforts by the congregations to assert ownership of the property.
I don’t think Churches are into this sort of activities. No body is raised in a church bldg., they are raised in their own homes. Maybe they have worshipped for 30 to whatever years there, but some of the Episcopalian Churches are 200 yrs. old on east and west coasts. Think there was a few people ahead of present generations. As far as their worth from this article they are worth many dineros.
Mafia, definition is a secret society or organization of persons engaged in criminal activities, expl. Sicilian org., the Godfather thing.
posted January 13, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Thanks for proving my point H22, a 200 yr old mortgage? What is that? And also to feel as you would have to make the point of people are raised in their own home really tells me a lot about you. Churches are a second home for many devoted Christians and many share generational history with their churches. Those who view this with a casual eye have not engaged their hearts in this situation. Those who do not value the church life are not these people’s peers and should not judge.
posted January 13, 2008 at 10:43 pm
What about the people of these dioceses that agree with the direction and leadership of the national denomination? The vast majority of Episcopalians are in total support of our leadership. The few thousand people leaving are abandoning the denomination.
Some of you make it sound as though everyone in these parishes and dioceses is in agreement. This is not the case.
These people who are leaving the denominatin seem to have more commitment to the buildings than they do to the denomination in which they were raised.
Peace!
posted January 14, 2008 at 11:24 am
Cknuck, I thought you would understand what I said, but I see you don’t and I have to explain it to you when I really should be doing something more important in our home. However I presented my opinion, not my judgment, by the way. When a Church has been paid for over the years, 200 hundred yrs. in my example, it has been paid for over and over again by other generations, so the newcomers have nothing coming to them if they choose to leave for whatever reason. Not complicated to understand. So you can think you know me by my statement that people are brought-up in their homes not church buildings? Stop your dislike for me in inane comments because I hold up the glbt, and you hold distain for them. I haven’t a casual eye for religion, by the way; rather a very studied eye from living and experience of living both sides of the problem this article brings out.
posted January 14, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Instead of draining the coffers of both groups, and financing the lifestyles of their atorneys, lets simply open the buildings to the communitys and let them put the facility to good use. I see nothing good coming from this battle.
posted January 14, 2008 at 8:57 pm
H22, I have no dislike for anyone I comment on statements that are agenda purposed and are contradictory.
jest you are right no good will come out of this but it unfortunately is just the beginning.
I would tell you why but you’d just think I’m trying to insult and I’m not I just know the nature of sin.