Printer-Friendly
Email this Story
Post a Comment (0)
Fairfax judge rules in Episcopal property dispute
On Friday, the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia received another blow in its fight to retrieve eight properties from 11 congregations that recently left the church.
In early 2007, the 11 breakaway churches affiliated themselves with the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), a conservative missionary branch of the Church of Nigeria and other Anglican archbishops.
The breakaway was precipitated in 2003 when the Episcopal Church, which is the American branch of the Worldwide Anglican Communion, voted-in an openly gay bishop, Eugene Robinson, in New Hampshire.
In 2006, Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, a supporter of Robinson, became the national head of the Episcopal Church. This action further angered conservatives.
In January 2007, two of Fairfax County's oldest Episcopal churches, the Falls Church and Truro Church, made headlines by leading a secession of 11 parishes from the Episcopal Church, including the Church of the Epiphany in Oak Hill.
The group joined CANA, led by controversial Archbishop Peter J. Akinola, who has openly called for outlawing same-sex relationships in his own country.
The value of the eight properties in question is estimated at about $40 million. Both sides have already spent more than $2 million each in litigation costs
At the center of the litigation is the controversial Civil-War-era Virginia “Division Statute.” The statute (Va. Code § 57-9), provides that when a religious denomination or diocese experiences a “division,” member congregations may determine by majority vote which branch of the divided body they wish to join.
It also states that this determination governs the ownership of property held in trust for the congregation.
This past April, Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Randy Bellows ruled that the congregations, which now comprise the Anglican District of Virginia (ADV), properly invoked the division statute, stating that church majorities are entitled to church property when there is a division within their denomination.
This past Friday, Bellows threw another bone to the breakaway churches, ruling the statute as constitutional.
“Specifically, this court finds that the statute, as applied in the instant case, does not violate the Free Exercise or Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment, nor does it violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, nor does it violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment,” Bellows wrote in the conclusion of his 49-page ruling.
“Today's ruling upholding the constitutionality of the Division Statute in Virginia is regrettable and reaches beyond the Episcopal Church to all hierarchical churches in the Commonwealth,” the Virginia Diocese said on its Web site on Friday. “We continue to believe that this Division Statute is clearly at odds with and uniquely hostile to religious freedom, the First Amendment and prior U.S. and Virginia Supreme Court rulings. We are unwavering in these beliefs and will explore fully every option available to restore constitutional and legal protections for all churches in Virginia.”
“We are pleased with Judge Bellows’ ruling today,” said Jim Oakes, vice-chairman of ADV, on Friday. “The Division Statute states that the majority of the church is entitled to its property when a group of congregations divide from the denomination.”
Issues in the litigation still remain, however.
In two footnotes to his ruling, Bellows leaves open the question of whether the statute violates the contracts clause of the U.S. Constitution. A contract impairment may possibly be forbidden by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
“The one discrete constitutional issue raised in those briefs which the Court does not resolve in today's opinion is the assertion by [the] Diocese that [the statute] violates their rights under the Contracts Clause,” Bellows wrote. “Specifically, they assert that applying [the statute] to the instant dispute impairs their contractual rights by not giving appropriate weight and significance to the contractual relationships between the local congregations and the hierarchical church.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.