Hallelujah!

TEC doesn’t need a band aid. It needs a tourniquet.

And the lawsuit commences when?

Katherine,
Monday AM when the courts open.
Too bad they aren’t open on Sunday.
(
PB note to self: Really must do something about that. Blue laws are a violation of the separation of church and state.)

I’m glad they aren’t waiting for the Ordinariate, since who knows how long that will take to set up or what it will look like. It does mean they will have to deal directly with the Archdiocese of Baltimore and I hope they did some preliminary work on that, since the welcome of AU parishes varies from place to place, bishop to bishop.

Bet David Booth Beers is working on the suit as he swirls his Sunday drink.

May God direct their path and decisions to His glory, and be protected from petty retaliation.

I’d bet the suit has already been drafted. Departures don’t happen overnight.

FW Ken, from the little I’ve seen, the Ordinariate may be about to get off the ground.

Archbishop Wuerl was the man put in charge of it for the U.S. Conference of Bishops, and he’s just gotten a red hat in the recent announcements for the November consistory:

“In September 2010 Archbishop Wuerl was appointed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith delegate in the United States to facilitate mass receptions of Anglicans in accord norms of Anglicanorum Coetibus issued in November 2009.”

So going from Archbishop of Washington to being a Cardinal plus overseeing the implementation of the Ordinariate – sounds like Rome (which is to say, the Pope) is supporting him and that means that things are going to have to happen pretty soon.

That is, “soon” by Vatican time, which you know *shrugs*

Though making the announcement of the Ordinariate and appointing a facilitator just a year later is positively whirlwind speed for the Vatican, so I’m definitely getting the impression that Benedict wants to push ahead with this and is throwing his support behind it.

Archbishop O’Brien of Baltimore is a good bishop: I’m sure that they will be welcomed despite the legal fireworks that are sure to ensue.

As for the property, I doubt the RCC is going to get involved here. It’s not in our best interest to set the legal precedent of parishes to depart a denomination with their property.

Ah, but Fuinseoig, I understand these folks are elderly and may be in a bit of a hurry.

But the archbishop has a decent rep, so maybe he will be ok to work with. The three bishops who welcomed what are now the major AU parishes in Texas were definitely Vatican II typea.

But the pope doesn’t always move slow.

http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2010/10/next-synod-new-evangelization.html

I’d bet the suit has already been drafted.”

I’d bet TEC can generate the suit by pressing one button in MS Word, they have done this so many times.

I wish and pray these folks all the best.

A friend of mine and his mother are members of this parish, and they apparently managed to buy off the diocese. Unless the national church/cult raises a fuss, which they may very well, they should be safe.

You guys (commenters) all seem to be out of the loop on this. Mme l’ archiflaminica said months ago that TE”C” would always sue any parish that tried to leave TE”C” for any other “Anglican entity,” but that (if the price was right) they would have no objection to a parish leaving for some (or any) “non-Anglican” destination. So if a parish leaves for Rome (or Orthodoxy) or (for Protestants) the PCA or the Missouri Synod, the way is clear — as long as you can pay for your “exit ticket.”

Tighe – you left out Islam . . .

Professor Tighe, you’re absolutely right but let’s face it, it’s simply irresistible speculating on the devious designs of the she-wolf of Second Avenue. Let people get their fix!

Islâm is not a Christian religion in the slightest, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!! It would be the same in this (and no other sense!) as Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, Shintoism, etc. ad nauseam!!!

It will indeed be interesting to see if TEC will permit a building to be transferred (for the right price) to an RC diocese. I don’t know if Dr. Schori can be taken at her word on this. We shall see.

“Islam is not a Christian religion in the slightest…!!!”

So what?

Same goes for that of 815.

Shori et. al. have no problem selling property to Mohammed’s followers even at a lower price than orthodox Anglicans may offer her, as happened in Binghamton, NY.

And of course the latest news is that:

a) the Iraqi government exists only at the pleasure of Tehran

b) the Afghanistan government is paid for by Tehran

The US Marine Corps. Making the world safe for extremist Islam since 2001.

Three choices only:
a) listen to the ABC, withdraw the troops and give the countries to the Mullahs. US defeat.

b) withdraw the troops and nuke ‘em all. US victory

I think I get it: the Episcopalians will be nice to Rome for ecumenical cred for example but not to ACNA with whom they’re in mortal combat for the privilege of sending their bishops to jolly old England every 10 years to meet the Queen, which is all being an Anglican means.

Anyway hooray for Mount Calvary; sounds like they can hold onto the building.

Alfonso, many Anglicans have personally been unbelievers since the 1700s but they happen to still have the creeds in their books and, in theory, still require belief in them so they’re still nominally a Christian denomination. (But such doesn’t define an Anglican because all of their teachings are changeable by vote.)

Now that the majority of members of congregation Mt Calvary Church voted to separate itself from The Episcopal Church, and seek admission to the Roman Catholic Church as an Anglican Use parish, do these members realize that they individuals or as a group may leave TEC, but the physical property and the assets of Mt Calvary Church they voted to leave does not go with them.

There are enough case law existing to prevent the property and assets from going with the faction that voted to leave TEC.

There will be another law suit and more money wasted by both sides with the same results as previous suits.

This is not like a divorce of a married couple where the spouses fight over the property, kids and assets…there is prenuptial’s called the Canons…

jff

Wow, not just a troll, but a troll who didn’t even bother to read the thread…

Well, they’ll be sued, lose the building. Then if they try to BUY the building PECUSA will sell it instead to the local mosque. If only you had to invent such an idea.

“Alfonso, many Anglicans have personally been unbelievers since the 1700s but they happen to still have the creeds in their books and, in theory, still require belief in them so they’re still nominally a Christian denomination.”

No, they are not nominally (even “a small degree”) a Christian denomination. They are nominally (“in name only”) Christian; though I don’t think this second definition was the intended one.

The god of 815 not only can be accessed apart from Christ, in fact it is only accessed apart from Christ, regardless of lingering historical use of Trinitarian terminology and aesthetics. Their god is not God. Their faith is not Christianity.

The “faction” was the active membership of the parish, which, I suspect, bought, paid for, maintains, and holds legal title to the property. Whether Maryland courts uphold the johnny-come-lately TEC Dennis Canon or consider the actual deeds will depend on Maryland property law; results of TECs lawsuits frenzy vary from state to state, and even case to case.

In any event, pre-nups should be signed before the wedding, and this parish property longs pre-dates the Dennis Canon.

Yes, I know… don’t feed the trolls… but this one was so easy…

I suppose the question as to whether there will be a lawsuit over property does come down to those who do not want to leave TEC.

Will they be treated by the national church as the “legitimate” parish, and thus the legitimate owners of the buildings and property? Will a replacment pastor be sent in?

Or if the departing parish does want to make an offer for the building, will TEC be happy to take the money (seeing as how it’s not from another rival Anglican group) and fold the remaining parishioners into another Episcopalian church?

I am wondering, seeing as how the precedents have been set. After all, if they tell the remaining – what, twenty per cent or so? – that they’ll just have to go in with another parish, what about the dioceses where the remnant was supported as the “real” parish/diocese?

FW Ken, the problem is that parishes which pre-date the Dennis Canon and hold title to their properties have nevertheless been losing in court in many states. This makes no sense to me; entities which truly own property tend to hold the title. I am sure that Roman Catholic parishes nationwide are titled to their dioceses, for instance. Alas, the troll is talking about what might actually happen should 815 choose to pursue the same course it has in Virginia, etc. The question is only whether it will decline to step in when a church is leaving Anglican-land. TEC has not shown a great deal of respect for Roman Catholics in recent years.

“TEC has not shown a great deal of respect for Roman Catholics in recent years.” Uh, other than euthanasia and buggery, what has it respected in recent years?

Sorry, Dr. Tighe, but having been raised in the Missouri Synod it’s very difficult for me to imagine the Missouri Synod accepting a group coming in with such a different ecclesiology.

Another one bites the dust, this time in the UK:
“London, 22 October (ENI)–The decision by an Anglican parish in south-east England to leave the Church of England to become Roman Catholic has taken some by surprise.

The elected parochial church council of St Peter’s, Folkestone, south east England, which has taken the unanimous decision to secede, is seeking a meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, to discuss procedure.” (from Touchstone Blog)

True enough, Katherine, but in some place they have won – South Carolina, for example, and some of the cases are not settled. And yes, Catholic property is titled to the diocese, since, I believe, the 1890s. There was a Polish parish in St. Louis that was an exception and they ended up in schism when the bishop tried to… well, be the bishop.

Yes, it’s state by state. Texas is looking promising for the Fort Worth folks so far. Virginia, who knows? South Carolina, all’s well at this point. California, “neutral principles” were supposed to apply and didn’t. North Carolina, the diocese wins no matter what the deed says. I don’t know anything about Maryland law and whether, as some have suggested, TEC will let property go if it doesn’t go Anglican.

Ya’ll did hear that one of the TEC FW parishes has sued Bp. Iker because the part of the parish that left TEC is using the name. The irony is that it’s one of the parishes Bp. Iker gave the property. Sorry so-and-sos. This is said to be the 4th lawsuit.

Ah, William Tighe. You forget that a parish can simply pay their ticket and join the Continuing Church. And as far as “Protestantism” goes, the last time I checked Anglicanism was Protestant anyway: it affirms the historic BCP, the Thirty-nine Articles, the Ordinal, and the Homilies as well as putting pride of place on the first four Councils and the teaching of the Fathers.

In reference to the PCA, a former Episcopalian could do far worse: they are probably the fastest-growing evangelical church in the US today, don’t teach theological liberalism (hint, hint), do not ordain lady bishops or other clergy, and have vital ministries in their communities instead of hosting Anglophile Burial Societies. So, you know, there’s that.

Well, yes. Unless they think that there are such things as Catholic Order and Apostolic Succession, or restrict their tulips firmly to the garden and the vase.

Apostolic succession just might fall under the category of ‘vain genealogies’ in spiritual matters.
Somewhere along the line the Jews lost track of their genealogies coming forward from Adam. What matters is the One Blood and Water Family into which we are born BY THE SPIRIT, not by any attachment to Rome, Constantinople, Moscow, etc..

wyclif, The PCA is looking better and better all the time. I have to agree with Dean Munday who said he had about come to the opinion that bishops are mal esse.) There certainly is a preponderance of evidence to support such a conclusion.

>What matters is the One Blood and Water Family into >which we are born BY THE SPIRIT, not by any >attachment to Rome, Constantinople, Moscow, etc..

But, is the Family Meal the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ ? Rome, Constantinople and Moscow all say yes. (So do the Copts, I believe.) Geneva says no.

I think that would probably be a deal-breaker for many…

“Ya’ll did hear that one of the TEC FW parishes has sued Bp. Iker because the part of the parish that left TEC is using the name.”

Yes, saw something about that – suing on the grounds of trademark infringement? Can it get any more ridiculous? “Oh, no, we’re the real St Tiggywinkle’s and nobody else can use the name!” Are they going to sue that big church in Rome for using the same name as one of their churches or what?

Biting my tongue so hard about this because come on, guys, if a part of a church leaving the majority is going to be sued on the grounds of using the name in vain… *coughEnglishReformationcough*

Check the early church, especially in the second century. There were do-it-yourself churches poping up. What seperated a goofy church (e.g.,the gnostics) from one that was orthodox was Apostolic succession. Refer to Irenaeus’s Against Heresies, esp. book III. At any rate, if those Bishops in the first centuries were invalid, then their compiling the New Testament has no reason to be valid either. Sort of a package deal.

The geneaology thing refered to ethnicity, and is quite the straw to grasp at. If the geneaology verse (in the New Testament) refered to successors to the Apostles then why not just make that plain? Why did not the Apostle John warn of such things which were going on while he was still alive and while he was still writing (i.e., why not call out Clement and other Bishops of Rome, or bishops anywhere for that matter, as usurpers)? Why did Paul give advice to Timothy instead of telling him that there was no such thing as a Bishop?

I spend time in my youth at a Baptist church and did attend a Prysbeterian church for about three years after leaving the Episcopal church. One issue at those decentralized places is yes, there is not a hierarchy to go off the rails, but without a hierarchy the church doctrine is weak milk–the theology is an inch deep and a mile wide.

Regarding the Anglicans, either apostolic succession is not true, or they have the wrong successors. Last Easter I decided to go with a different set of successors, and so far, spiritually, it has been the best thing that ever happended to me.