Suits as Punishment?:

Truro, Others Stand on Solid Legal Ground

JIM OAKES
TIMES-DISPATCH GUEST COLUMNIST

Jan 21, 2007

Fairfax. 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.