|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: "A Church Divided": Aftermath of Virginia Anglican/Episcopal Battle
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Does that mean that the Catholics should be given all our medieval Anglican parish churches back, then, by us naughty Anglican schismatics?
Apart from the ones built before 1054, of course, which should belong to The Plot™ ![[Biased]](wink.gif) . Of course, the older it is, the more likely it is that the roof leaks...
I was wondering when somebody would point out this particular elephant in the room.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
I skirted round it myself a couple of times...
Actually, I'm not sure it is an elephant in the room, as the Catholic church is not after them. They specifically rejected attempts to include physical assets in the ordinariate setup. So honestly, the USA situation is pretty much sui generis (a thing of its own kind).
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
I'm not sure the fact that the Catholic Church isn't specifically claiming title alters the moral principle being advicated by some on this thread, namely that schismatics should return church property.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Does that mean that the Catholics should be given all our medieval Anglican parish churches back, then, by us naughty Anglican schismatics?
Not at all. Adverse possession, and what not - I think the statute of limitations has run.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
I'm not sure the fact that the Catholic Church isn't specifically claiming title alters the moral principle being advicated by some on this thread, namely that schismatics should return church property.
I've neither claimed that it's moral or immoral for the Episcopal Church to maintain their property. I *have* claimed that it is their right to do so, and the courts have thus far agreed.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingale:
I still don't see why the Episcopal Church should bend over backwards for people that hate us.
Anyway, far be it from me to hope the success of the Episcopal Church.
I'll pray for you.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
originally posted by Mockingale:
I still don't see why the Episcopal Church should bend over backwards for people that hate us.
Me either
Good thing Jesus didn't say something stupid like, "Love your enemies."
We're commanded to love our enemies. We're even commanded to turn the other cheek. But we're not commanded to load the gun that our enemy is pointing at our face.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
jordan32404
Shipmate
# 15833
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingale:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
I'm not sure the fact that the Catholic Church isn't specifically claiming title alters the moral principle being advicated by some on this thread, namely that schismatics should return church property.
I've neither claimed that it's moral or immoral for the Episcopal Church to maintain their property. I *have* claimed that it is their right to do so, and the courts have thus far agreed.
I advocate their right to do so, as well. And it makes sense, if there is a viable congregation of Episcopalians to sustain the building but, to me, it doesn't make sense to spend millions of dollars on litigation and the building if there is no remaining TEC congregation and no guarantee of the ability to sell the building to another Christian body (I'm completely opposed to denying a Christian congregation the ability to worship in a church and selling it to be a mosque or something else, a la Binghamton).
Posts: 268 | From: Albany, NY | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingale:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Does that mean that the Catholics should be given all our medieval Anglican parish churches back, then, by us naughty Anglican schismatics?
Not at all. Adverse possession, and what not - I think the statute of limitations has run.
I think that English civil law is complex on statutes of limitations. In any case, the Holy See accepted compensation in the early 1700s in consideration of any claims it might have.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
There is some indication that TEC policy will treat the Ordinariate differently than "Continuing" Anglican schismatics. Mount Calvary, Baltimore is apparently being permitted to leave with their building and other property, going to the Roman Catholic Church/Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter. I assume that all or virtually all of their congregation decided to depart for the Ordinariate along with their clergy. IIRC, the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland has first right of refusal in any future sale of Mount Calvary's property -- IOW the TEC diocese would be able to buy the property back on favourable terms. As I understand, the thought is that the Ordinariate is not in competition with TEC or actively trying to subvert TEC, whereas the Anglican schismatics are seen as taking that course. However, I must disagree with that assessment. IME there are some Anglo-Papalists who would be disposed to foment a sort of coup in their parishes, aimed at taking the parish into the Ordinariate and retaining its property. This will fail, of course, as long as such elites are strongly opposed by a majority of the congregation, but where they are able to sew confusion, demoralisation, and general discord - driving TEC loyalists out - such efforts at a grab-and-run might well succeed. Thus, I think TEC ought to investigate the membership roles and transfers-out of parishes seeking to leave for the Ordinariate with their property, and only settle on generous terms with any such parish if it is reasonably clear that there has been near-complete unanimity of sentiment amongst parishioners and parish clergy for a move to the Ordinariate.
Mount Calvary and St. Luke's, Bladenburg negotiated lease deals with options to buy. The TEC dioceses have not just handed the properties over. Both parishes had almost complete unanimity about joining the Ordinariate.
[ 19. April 2012, 13:34: Message edited by: CL ]
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jordan32404:
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingale:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
I'm not sure the fact that the Catholic Church isn't specifically claiming title alters the moral principle being advicated by some on this thread, namely that schismatics should return church property.
I've neither claimed that it's moral or immoral for the Episcopal Church to maintain their property. I *have* claimed that it is their right to do so, and the courts have thus far agreed.
I advocate their right to do so, as well. And it makes sense, if there is a viable congregation of Episcopalians to sustain the building but, to me, it doesn't make sense to spend millions of dollars on litigation and the building if there is no remaining TEC congregation and no guarantee of the ability to sell the building to another Christian body (I'm completely opposed to denying a Christian congregation the ability to worship in a church and selling it to be a mosque or something else, a la Binghamton).
Truthfully, if I were Presiding Bishop (heaven forbid), I would lease to the breakaways in the event that no other Christian church wanted the space. I would require them to take certain actions to make clear on their signage that they were part of the Anglican Church in North America and not the Episcopal Church. I would also retain the right to terminate the lease with adequate notice if an Episcopal congregation wished to take over the property.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
I advocate their right to do so, as well. And it makes sense, if there is a viable congregation of Episcopalians to sustain the building but, to me, it doesn't make sense to spend millions of dollars on litigation and the building if there is no remaining TEC congregation and no guarantee of the ability to sell the building to another Christian body (I'm completely opposed to denying a Christian congregation the ability to worship in a church and selling it to be a mosque or something else, a la Binghamton).
What you have been refusing to understand for 6 pages of thread now is that TEC is not wasting money getting this property back. Part of the litigation is endowments, often worth millions of dollars. Real estate is also worth money, and in most of these cases TEC is sending money after a sure bet. TEC is, furthermore, going after assets it has every right to. If anything it's the schismatics wasting money.
Your fraught logic about "selling to filthy moors," or whatever, forgets the fact that the cash from such sales is invested in TEC, where it is used for the propagation of the Gospel, according to Church canons, anyway.
[ 19. April 2012, 14:08: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
BulldogSacristan
Shipmate
# 11239
|
Posted
That does sound reasonable, but what then about endowments, plate, vestments, and other things like that which are very important as well. Should they be held in trust for a future Episcopal Parish?
Posts: 197 | From: Boston, Massachusetts | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
That all depends on the situation. Even the Gospel has to rely on pragmatism sometimes. It's always a sad day when churches are forced to sell their plate. A church here in Boston was forced to sell its Paul Revere plate to the Museum of Fine Arts to fund a renovation of its building.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
That does sound reasonable, but what then about endowments, plate, vestments, and other things like that which are very important as well. Should they be held in trust for a future Episcopal Parish?
I'd say that any pre-schism endowments belong to the Episcopal Church. If the breakaway parish wants to keep vestments and small items of property like candles, books, and eating utensils from the parish hall, I say let them take them.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
There is some indication that TEC policy will treat the Ordinariate differently than "Continuing" Anglican schismatics. Mount Calvary, Baltimore is apparently being permitted to leave with their building and other property, going to the Roman Catholic Church/Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter. I assume that all or virtually all of their congregation decided to depart for the Ordinariate along with their clergy. IIRC, the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland has first right of refusal in any future sale of Mount Calvary's property -- IOW the TEC diocese would be able to buy the property back on favourable terms. As I understand, the thought is that the Ordinariate is not in competition with TEC or actively trying to subvert TEC, whereas the Anglican schismatics are seen as taking that course. However, I must disagree with that assessment. IME there are some Anglo-Papalists who would be disposed to foment a sort of coup in their parishes, aimed at taking the parish into the Ordinariate and retaining its property. This will fail, of course, as long as such elites are strongly opposed by a majority of the congregation, but where they are able to sew confusion, demoralisation, and general discord - driving TEC loyalists out - such efforts at a grab-and-run might well succeed. Thus, I think TEC ought to investigate the membership roles and transfers-out of parishes seeking to leave for the Ordinariate with their property, and only settle on generous terms with any such parish if it is reasonably clear that there has been near-complete unanimity of sentiment amongst parishioners and parish clergy for a move to the Ordinariate.
Mount Calvary and St. Luke's, Bladenburg negotiated lease deals with options to buy. The TEC dioceses have not just handed the properties over. Both parishes had almost complete unanimity about joining the Ordinariate.
That is not my understanding, per several published reports on the internet, such as this one. The property was deeded to Mount Calvary and TEC retained first right of refusal in the event of future sale of the property -- as I stated.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
I should add that Mount Calvary was at the time of its vote to leave TEC, a parish of 45 souls, with a total of 26 attending the meeting at which the vote was taken to withdraw from TEC. Of those voting, all but three or four voted to leave TEC. It wasn't the most viable parish in the world, which may be another reason the Diocese of Maryland let them go on very favourable terms.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
