Suits as Punishment?Truro, Others Stand on Solid Legal Ground
JIM OAKES
TIMES-DISPATCH GUEST COLUMNIST
Jan 21, 2007
Just before Christmas, my parish joined 14 others in Virginia that have voted this past year to separate from the Episcopal Church (TEC). This action was the result of a serious division building within the denomination over the past half-century concerning the role of Jesus in salvation and the interpretation and use of Scripture. The culmination for many was the refusal of TEC's General Convention this past summer to express regret for the consecration in 2003 of an openly gay partnered bishop, an action that defied explicit pleas from the leaders of the Anglican Communion and, we believe, the teaching of Scripture.
At the conclusion of the General Convention, the recently elected presiding bishop, the Rt. Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, spoke of TEC as a church with two minds, and used the metaphor of conjoined twins. She expressed concern that the two bodies could not yet be separated and live. But we and others had come to realize that we would die unless we separated.
For three years prior to our votes we met with Bishop Peter Lee of the Diocese of Virginia to explore ways that we might move forward together. Throughout that time he was clear in his position that if we did not remain within TEC the diocese would claim title to our property. Despite that stance, as it became apparent that separation was likely, he organized a committee to design an orderly process for parish votes and for subsequent negotiation over property. After our votes, the diocese appointed a property committee to negotiate with us, and this committee met with our representatives late last month.
Non-Litigation Agreement Ends
While there was no guarantee that these talks would be successful, both parties had stated repeatedly in public and private that they did not want to resort to litigation. The previous presiding bishop, Frank Griswold, had treated property disputes as a diocesan -- not national -- concern. So it came as a surprise when after an all-day meeting with David Booth Beers, the lead lawyer for TEC, the diocese reversed itself and announced last week that it was ending a non-litigation agreement (a "standstill agreement") designed to allow time for negotiation.
Why does the national Episcopal Church want our buildings? It certainly does not need them. In an undated report quietly released last year -- "Average Sunday Attendance 1995-2005 by Domestic Diocese" -- it was reported that Sunday attendance in Episcopal parishes across the country has dropped 8.1 percent since 2000, from 856,579 in 2000 to 787,271 in 2005. (During that period the U.S. population rose 5 percent.) The story in Virginia is similar: Average Sunday attendance in the Diocese of Virginia dropped 2.9 percent in that time, while the state's population grew 6.5 percent. Incidentally, although TEC has tried to portray us as an insignificant minority within the church, the 15 parishes that separated in Virginia accounted for 17 percent of the diocese's average Sunday attendance. Even more startling, our average Sunday attendance is greater that that of 45 of the 100 dioceses in TEC.
Our parishes are vibrant and lively. Not only are our buildings fully used on Sundays, they are bustling with activity throughout the week as well. We need the buildings to carry out ministry. Truro hosts almost 70 ministries that use our facilities, ranging from Scout troops to TESL classes to AIDS orphan support to prayer groups. Nevertheless, TEC refuses to negotiate and instead will bring a lawsuit to force us to move. Litigation will be costly for both sides. It is likely to breed or deepen hostility. It is something the Bible says should not happen within the church. So why has TEC chosen this path?
The explanation given by Beers is that the national church has an ownership interest in all property of parishes under a canonical rule it adopted less than 30 years ago. We, on the other hand, believe that the laws of Virginia support local parish ownership. Furthermore, we believe we have a moral obligation to our predecessors whose contributions purchased and built our facilities, and who would be shocked and dismayed to hear the theological positions espoused by the new presiding bishop in numerous interviews since her election.
Why Is Church So Aggressive?
But the legal argument of TEC is similar to that of the Diocese of Virginia, which until last week was willing to negotiate a settlement. So what is really going on to cause TEC to take this aggressive stance?
The only conclusion we can draw is that these lawsuits are intended to punish parishes that have voted to leave TEC and to intimidate any others that might be so inclined. This retributive approach is concerned primarily with creating homeless parishes, even if by doing so it increases its supply of empty Episcopal buildings.
Isn't that a shame.
Jim Oakes is the senior warden at Truro Church.
Read the full article by clicking on the headline above or click here.
20 comments:
Clearly the potentianl law suits are a big deal, evidenced by the article in the "gossip" section of the Legal Times. For those of you not in the Washington, DC legal field this is a must read for almost everyone. The big news, which firms and attorneys were representing both sides. Heavy hitters on both sides. I'm afraid this may have taken a life of it's own outside the theological realm. Once legal action begins or is threatened the lawyers take over and sometimes the need to win overtakes the need to deal with this as a matter of faith. My gut feeling is that TEC is afraid of a bad legal precedent when it comes to what it sees as it's property, thus the current statements and actions. I think they probably want to use Virginia as a preemptive strike. Probably good legal strategy. Sadly, good legal strategy is just that, strategy. It does not seem to take into consideration the other issues at stake. But we have entered the realm of man's law, not God's. As much as any of us in the legal field profess our faith, our goal has to be what is legally best for our client. We are required to zealously represent our clients. As far as those congregations that have chosen to leave, it seems to me that they have become the test case. It saddens me to say this, but I don't think the other side is going to back down from what they seem to see as make or break. I really think they are acting out of fear. I hope I'm wrong because the court system can become a nightmare. To my friends here at BB Online, and especially my dear friend and kindred spirit, BB, I wish you the best. I will be praying for wisdom and compassion on both sides.
Oakes never intended to work within the church. His radical roots are a long family tradition and Truro offered him the social status he enjoys, although the Episcopal Church was never fundemental enough for his spiritual tastes. He and Martin(sp.) have been scheming this schism for years, and his multiple Ugandan visits weren't really to help set up shoe repair businesses. He has been strategizing this split, and I have to admit, he has done well. The funny part is he thought he and Martin could keep the building. Those who voted "no" still have their church. Those who voted "split" may do exactly that.
Dear Anonymous
You have some interesting thoughts, but they are certainly not unbiased or substantiated. May I suggest respectfully that if you wish to make comments such as these, to do so without signing your name is cowardly.
Why would I want to break my anonemity knowing the dangers of dealing with the very driven (possessd) leaders of the Truro schism. It is importnat that all Episcopals know that it was never the intention of Jim Oakes to work within the confines of the Epicopals. He has been soliciting the aid of the Anglicans and the bishop was aware of this. Perhaps this is just a necessary house cleaning for the Episcopal Church.
Oh dear Anon, it does sound like your running when no one is chasing. You really seemed to fixate on one man, why not the senor warden last year or the year before that? Why this one? Have you thought about counseling for your paranoia?
Are we not replying to the Jim Oakes "I am just a victim" letter? The man is not a victim. He has calculated all of this at the expense of the Church. Are you in favor of the split? You do realize the courts will NOT allow the splitters to keep Church property.
RE:"Are we not replying to the Jim Oakes "I am just a victim" letter? The man is not a victim."
Well, you just explained something to me, you are not familiar with rules of logic, you keep attacking the man which mean we get to poke fun at you.
RE:"You do realize the courts will NOT allow the splitters to keep Church property."
Boy you are very presumptuous, first off you are incorrect because that did not happen in CA. Second there is §57.9, which reads in favor of parish not the diocese. However you really show that you know little about the justice system by your assurity of any court or why in terms of All Saints most lawyer all sounded off "a bad settlement trumps a good trial." There is ALWAYS a level of uncertainity in a court case. Here there two step process TEC would have to take (first they'd have to nullify statutory law, then in common law argue that this case is more like a brown cow case verse the spotted cow precedent the other side agrued).
So, I do not agree with your assessment. TEC is fighting an uphill battle, I'd say 90% chance of failure, but yes there is that 10% of hope for you.
The idea that Jim Oakes has "radical roots" is funnier than I can possibly say. I do believe that we are going through a grieving process and some are very angry - which can influence decision-making, as well as some comments. I understand that.
I got a great idea for Jim! The next AnglicanTV interview, he needs to invest in this.
For Blue:
"Influence the decision-making process"? The wonderful part of the Episcopal Church being able to reclaim their property from the stray flocks, is that there was a vote, and the members who have been disinfranchised due to the religious right that has crept into the Church will be able to remain Episcopal on Episcopal property. The Bapitist Church might be a better home for Truro's more hardline crew, but I still think there is no place for openly gay clergy in TEC.
This split has always been about money, power and the prestige of the Church's facilities. Oakes is now hurt. He is now saddened. Why? Because of a building, not becasue of a living Church that he has worked to destroy.
How do you know that the Lord is not using this refinement process to purify both parties?
I don't. It's a lovely thought, but while we await the Lord to appear and tell us what his Master plan is, the battle remains purely human, and humans better put aside their arrogance and righteousness and work together and repair this Church. There are enough little Jesus Huts along the interstates of America. The Episcopal Church symbolizes unity, strenth and hope to a Nation that is rapidly going to the dogs. Gay clergy must go, and so must Oakes and crew.
Jesus Huts?
I believe that's Anon #2's charity for our Pentecostal brother and sisters.
For Blue:
Jesus Huts - An irreverent term (coined anonomously by me) used to equate the ever spiraling, splintering factions of Christianity to the ever expansion of fast food.
Jesus huts?
LOL The term so nice,
he utters it twice.
"Why does the Episcopal Church want "our" building?"
This is a telling question: "our" building. The minority Episcopal congregation is still in "your" building waiting for your departure in order to resume Episcopal services.
Oakes knew what would happen if he left TEC He said himself that +Peter had earlier informed the churches that the Diocese of Virginia would keep the property if the churches voted to leave. If he did not immediately take action because of the agreement, that did not preclude him from doing so when the agreement expired.
It is evident that the breakaway people want to leave the Episcopal church and they are free to do so. However, they cannot claim still to be Episcopal parishes.
Turn over the keys and move on then!
As a fully paid up member of the Jesus hut brigade, dear brother anonymous, I thank you kindly for your inclusivity.
I thank God for the congregations who have joined CANA, and Anglican Mainstream around the world. Just when you lose hope for the dear old C of E, along come people like Babyblue. More power to you, and God bless. :-)
Post a Comment