Virginia Property Battle Redefining 'Church'

Well, we could all gather in the street, have Sunday School classes in the street, conduct marriages in the street, have funerals in the street, sponsor AA meetings in the street, celebrate Easter and Christmas in the street, have Youth Group meetings in the street, hold baptisms in the street - or we could meet inside and not be hit by traffic.

The Church is the people, but the buildings are the tools that encourage the local congregation to grow and thrive. The tools serve the congregation - not the other way around.

There are up to 15,000 people who attend these churches - where do you suppose they will meet if the buildings are lost? In the street?

-Mary

The part of Episcopalian church which promote gay marriage should own a brothel and leave the church building to those who oppose gay marriage.

Alas, Spidey's fervent wish of a brothel established by the Episcopalians will never be realized. He must find another house of ill repute to patronize.

This church, as an instrument of a particular religion, is as much or more concerned about wealth and property in this life, on this earth, as it claims to be about its mission to get the human soul to heaven.

In this there is nothing unique about the Episcopal Church. A church or temple brings people; the people bring power and wealth. The more people, power and money the institution accumulates, the more successful it is. After all, you can count the bodies and you can count the money. But the truth is, you cannot count or count on those bodies to turn into souls and transition to heaven.

And so, if a particular congregation decides to secede from the mother body, its members may likely count the stones, the bricks, the rafters, not to mention the plumbing, along with their ancestors' bones, as their worldly and heavenly treasures.

i would think the church was the people and not the building one way to check if this may be true might be to look and see what actually happens in real life when a fire or a storm or and eathquake destroys the building...the people are completely free to continue worshipping somewhere else or in the ruins until a new structure can be built... i have often wondered just what jesus would say about all these big empty buildings that shelter no one when there are so many without homes and healthcare in the real world. i'm not sure he would be too impressed with modern christianty.. it would seem the rituals have become more important than the message. i did a painting entitled this which unfornately myspace has chosen to censor because i guess it offend some christians with the truth there was no nudity or foul lauguage. ..people in power often seem to not welcome the truth.. i also did a multiple negative photagraph which i painted on when i went to tallahassee community college with may sets of eyes in the sky and a little church that was burning entitled FAITH DOES'NT BURN. it can be viewed on mypace page, I did this piece at a time when people were burning churches not realizing they could not destroy the faith of the people with the fire.. my point was faith does'nt burn...the church in the picture is a little church in the blueridge mountains. the flames are painted on it really isn't burning.. the piece was show at the end of the year show for all the money contributors to the school. as far as i know it hangs in a halfway house for alcoholics and drug addicts in tallahassee with some special words hand written on the back of it. thats my line of reasoning for whut it worth but please check 4 truth i'm just the dyslexic artist son of a virginia blueridege mountain hillbilly and florida state who i call fake-it state university because of thier pitiful ethics. they dont think i'm two brite. call t. k. weatherall the president of fsu and ask him why they can't be honest in his administration tell nim i sent you with the question he really does need to anser for the record and in public peace and truth are beutiful things because there is no need to retaliate for justice..

Churches in capitalist America are property-acquirers first and soul-savers second. We disobey our great purpose - to go OUT and spread the "Good News". Instead, we invest the vast majority of church collections on builing maintenance and salaried employees, who are paid to "Preach to the Choir", which is hiding out in the church - so they don't have to be bothered going out into the highways and hedges. Priorities are completely backward and have been for 1600 years, since Christ's church was co-opted by the politicized power of the Holy Roman Empire. There is no country on earth harder to practice REAL Christianity than in the America, where property has always trumped people's needs.

The best way to end ALL the nonsense in "church" is to teach scripture correctly. What would happen to disputes like these is the pew-sitters were taught the truth that ONLY JEWS TITHE! There is NO MENTION of tithing in scripture, within the timeline of the New Covenant. And for the first 800 years of Christianity there was no institutional titheing. Then someone got the bright idea to build a "pyramid scheme" in which pew-sitters are the slaves tithing to the salaried leaders at the top of the pyramid. The original church was a 2-tiered instituation - The triune Godhead on top and everybody else equally in submission to them. Another idea to take the "prophet motive" out of christianinty in America would be to end the IRS tax deduction for church giving. Were that to occur, the profit-seeking prophets would pull out of the church in search of other sheep to shear and the true scripture about tithing could, again be taught. But as long as our focus is on all things financial, we have failed in our mission. "The love of money..."

Let's assume a university has two colleges: a college of arts and science (where all the neo-hippie pinko liberals congregate) and a college of business (filled with the growning minds of young, committed capitalists).

Suppose the univeristy administration panders to the arts & science faction; the business students fear Karl Marx will become their next university president. So the business school decides as a college to leave the university. Do the members of the college have a moral/ethical claim to break away from university and keep all the physical material goods developed under the patronage of the university?

Certainly the students and faculty may decide to leave, but I can't imagine they can also stay. Something about having your cake and eating it too. "I'm gonna split, but I'm not willing to go anywhere else either."

This says as much about screwy American identity as much as anything else. When else can we think of Virginians wanting to break away and keep everything they already have too?

And we can all find the same in our own lives, I'm sure. But c'mon...the Israelites did not take the pyramids with them when they got out of Egypt for Canaan.

bennyfactor:"The best way to end ALL the nonsense in "church" is to teach scripture correctly. What would happen to disputes like these is the pew-sitters were taught the truth that ONLY JEWS TITHE! There is NO MENTION of tithing in scripture, within the timeline of the New Covenant. And for the first 800 years of Christianity there was no institutional titheing."

If you want to speak the truth, you need to do a lot more research. Jewish tithes in the Old Testament were a tax system. Jews do not tithe today. If we raise funds for our temples and synagogues it is through charatible giving (in fact Jews have an entire structure to the kinds of giving there are, based on the reasons for giving, and how you give). So let's not get all aren't we of hte new covenant so superior. Lets laso remember that in medieval times it was the Church that forced Jews to commit usury so that the Church could claim the money but insist their own hands were clean (Jesus didn't like usury if you remember). This after so marginalizing Jews that very few professions were open to them, and banking and money lending, supposedly a "Non-christian" pursuit, were some of the very limited ways Jews could make a living. This the Church used to its advantage, from condoning massacres of Jews, (London and York, 1189-1190), virulent antisemitism and the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290. the Lombards, however continued the banking practices Jews no longer did, and they charged 250% interest. Yes- so Christian of them.

David,

You should know the whole story before you comment on it. Were you aware that the Dioceses created a process to determine if a congregation wanted to leave? That the congregations overwhelmingly voted to leave? That the Bishop was ready to negotiate a settlement so that the congregations could keep their property? That the congregations were willing to repay for the churches that they had already built and maintained? That only the Presiding Bishop and her chancellor forced the Bishop to begin legal proceedings in direct contradiction to the Bible?

As always, in a dispute between two factions of a "Christian" church, money is involved. There is no other reason, except for doctrinal disagreements that would make the "Christians" begin to seek from the "world" their blessing.
I am of the firm opinion that this matter should have been solved outside the realm of the court system, and now that the courts have gotten involved, the church will have to abide by the ruling of the world's system. No one least of all myself, wishes that this argument had gotten this far, but as in all disputes between two factions of the same church, believers in the same doctrines, they would not listen to one another and have forced themselves upon the world's stage to be judged by the world.
It is a sad commentary on the "Church" that the Episcopalians have had to resort to world judges to resolve their problems. No one wins in this kind of case for the name of "Christian" is dragged through the mud of the world and the world thinks less of the church for allowing themselves to be judged by the worlds standards.
Someone needs to shake the foundations of the church and wake these people up, for the Anglican Communion in America, cannot long stand, if they are going to resort to the worlds decisions every time there is a dispute between two or more factions of their denomination.
I am appalled at the resorting of the church to the worlds judgment, should someone ask me, I would be glad to mediate between the two sides of this disagreement. No one other than another Christian should judge between the two sides of this dispute.
I have to agree with sparrow4 in her assessment of the New Testament scriptures, there is no mention of tithing in the New Testament. Possibly because the people of the New Testament did not understand the need for tithing or because the fact that Paul, understood that these people were not Judaic people and were free from the need for tithing. Churches were in the homes of people they were not separate buildings that were not in use, when it wasn't Sunday. Church happened all the time, there was no separate services during the week other the to celebrate the Lord's Day, and fellowship with the Eucharist and dinner.
But time marches on, and now the factions of the Anglican Communion are faced with dissension and mistrust of one another, they should have gotten together with all of the factions represented in one place, the Lambeth Conference, but the African Churches of the Anglican Communion chose to go to Jerusalem instead and are now in the process of forming their own communion of churches that adhere to a strict interpretation of Old Testament Scripture and two passages in the New Testament regarding homosexuality and sex outside of marriage.
I am of the opinion that should the churches break away from the Anglican Communion, those churches that were held in trust by the congregations, should be returned to the rightful owners, The Episcopalian Church!

A church complex is more than just a place of doing religion it is an extended family home. Often members were married there, children were raised and dedicated there, family members had funerals there. Even people who don't attend the congregation anymore still have memories there. While money always plays a part, even small church buildings can be worth a lot because of the central property they sit on, it would be a mistake to think that money is the main concern.

I have to agree with sparrow4 in her assessment of the New Testament scriptures, there is no mention of tithing in the New Testament. Possibly because the people of the New Testament did not understand the need for tithing or because the fact that Paul, understood that these people were not Judaic people and were free from the need for tithing.

Huh? Paul was, of course, Greek, always Paul, never Saul, as has been endlessly pointed out. The ancient Greeks had their own ways of extracting money from people, some of them like the Christians of today, for example, invading other nations, such as Iraq, bombing, killing, extorting, passing unfair trade laws while proclaiming free trade,continually butting into the affairs of other nations, etc. Internally, allowing the wealthy to grow wealthier, while crippling the poor with taxes--all ancient practices that are part of present-day Christian economic culture.

Jews do not tithe. Protestants tithe and now some Catholic churches do as well. There is a great deal in Christianity of every denomination that is not included in the Christians' testament. Where does one begin?

What's the big deal? There must be "legal" papers on file that states who the "legal" owners are of the real property in question! The contents may be a different matter; typically they belong to the "occupants" unless there is a clear contract that the contents go with the real property.

Because this is going to court; I presume the "legal" owners are the Church and I guess that Church is now one of those hazy Factoids of what "it" is!

I BELIEVE THE GREED OF THE PEOPLE BREAKING AWAY FROM THE CHURCH CORRELATES WITH THEIR LACK OF CHRISTIAN LOVE SHOWN TO THEIR NEIGHBORS.

Hello Sparrow4

Questions on the Jewish Tithe

Genesis 14:18, 20 show us Abraham tithed to Melchizedek, --- also Jacobs vow at Bethel which is found in Gen. 28:22 -- is where Jacob vowed to surely give a tenth to The Lord.

Are you saying Melchizedek levied a tax on Abraham and that Jacob imposed a tax upon himself?
What is the Jewish interpretation of these OT instances of tithing or should I say assessments?

In the Protestant vesion of things the will of God can be overturned by a majority vote.

Look, it's common knowledge that Episcopal spirituality has more to do with red wine vintage, European cars and pseudo-Roman affectations than any conscienable loyalty to the gospel of Christ. Let 'em have their little buildings, their little wine and cheese tastings, their pompous poncey priests and let them play Church as long as they want.

Meanwhile, I'll snuggle in a nice warm bed with my studly muffin partner and we'll visit God the way we know how -- and there ain't no building involved, let me tell you.

A church is a house of the Lord. And before there were formal churches, Christians would meet in each others houses. Nowadays, congregations are usually more than 10-15 people (but not everywhere - there are a lot of near empty churches on Sunday mornings). Are you telling me it's so difficult to rent a tent on a sports field somewhere? And let's face it, a lot of the congregation would rather BE on a sports field on a Sunday morning (to watch a soccer/football/baseball,etc game) than be in a pew. In a family dispute, assets would be liquidated and the money divided up. For too long the church has been about passing the collection plate and not about saving souls. More souls would be saved here if it was all sold off and the money donated to the nearest homeless shelter. Let them all start over from scratch.

Parish properties are owned by the dioceses, not the local congregations, for consistency over time. They are held in trust for those who have come before, those here now, and those yet to come.

In the Episcopal Church the individual parishes own their own buildings and just give part of the donations they get up the ladder to the higher parts of the church

This is an interesting crisis. On the legal side, the denomination usually owns the property rights to the building site. This is the case in my particular denomination (Church of God of Prophecy). I understand the reason why: the denomination was the one who bought and furnished the property themselves and has to have some protection in case the congregation decides that it wants to split from the denomination and seize the property for themselves. I feel for the individual communities in that they often pay for these facilities and equip them on their own, plus maintain the upkeep on the buildings; not to mention there's a sentimental factor behind keeping the property.
The trend nowadays is to move from traditional church buildings into less traditional. Congregations rent school buildings, movie theaters, or other types of buildings designed to hold larger crowds, such as abandoned stores or warehouses. The downside of all this usually means more costs in rent, tempermental landlords, and virtually no say in the decor of the joint.
If congregations adapt the lifestyle that it doesn't matter where we meet, they might be better off. After all, churches in other countries meet in houses, huts with dirt floors, or sometimes no building at all.

RJLUPIN1 :
"In the Episcopal Church the individual parishes own their own buildings and just give part of the donations they get up the ladder to the higher parts of the church"

A parish may or may not hold the deed to real property (I don't know which it is), but Canon Law (the laws of the Church, for those not familiar with the term) is specific to the idea of being held in trust.

From the Constitution & Canons of The Episcopal Church:

CANON [I]7: Of Business Methods in Church Affairs

Encumbrance of property
requires consent.
Sec. 3. No Vestry, Trustee, or other Body, authorized by Civil or
Canon law to hold, manage, or administer real property for any Parish,
Mission, Congregation, or Institution, shall encumber or alienate the
same or any part thereof without the written consent of the Bishop
and Standing Committee of the Diocese of which the Parish, Mission,
Congregation, or Institution is a part, except under such regulations
as may be prescribed by Canon of the Diocese.

Property held in trust.
Sec. 4. All real and personal property held by or for the benefit of any
Parish, Mission or Congregation is held in trust for this Church and
the Diocese thereof in which such Parish, Mission or Congregation is
located. The existence of this trust, however, shall in no way limit the
power and authority of the Parish, Mission or Congregation otherwise
existing over such property so long as the particular Parish, Mission
or Congregation remains a part of, and subject to, this Church and its
Constitution and Canons.

Sec. 5. The several Dioceses may, at their election, further confirm the
trust declared under the foregoing Section 4 by appropriate action, but
no such action shall be necessary for the existence and validity of the
trust.

CANON [II]6: Of Dedicated and Consecrated Churches

Evidence of
affiliation.
Sec. 1. No Church or Chapel shall be consecrated until the Bishop
shall have been sufficiently satisfied that the building and the ground
on which it is erected are secured for ownership and use by a Parish,
Mission, Congregation, or Institution affiliated with this Church and
subject to its Constitution and Canons.

Consent required to encumber or
alienate consecrated property.
Sec. 2. It shall not be lawful for any Vestry, Trustees, or other body
authorized by laws of any State or Territory to hold property for any
Diocese, Parish or Congregation, to encumber or alienate any
dedicated and consecrated Church or Chapel, or any Church or Chapel
which has been used solely for Divine Service, belonging to the Parish
or Congregation which they represent, without the previous consent
of the Bishop, acting with the advice and consent of the Standing
Committee of the Diocese.

All Churches to
be held in trust.
Sec. 4. Any dedicated and consecrated Church or Chapel shall be
subject to the trust declared with respect to real and personal property
held by any Parish, Mission, or Congregation as set forth in Canon I.
7.4.

BIGSPRNGS is right.

The problem in Va is that during the civil war era the legislature passed a law to allow southern congregations to take church property and leave denominations over the issue of slavery -- the division in the church spoken of in the statute was a division of opinion over slavery. If the satatute is interpreted to allow the same because of a division of opinion about matters of church doctrine and polity (which is what the dissenters say they are annoyed about) then the sweep of the statute will in effect be to dissolve all denominations in Virginia into rival piracy groups. A different take on, say, the trinity would will empower a vocal and aggressive group with organizing talent to steal church property with the sanction of the courts.

Many think this would involve the courts in interpretation and enforcement of church doctrine and polity in violation of constitutional prohibitions against establishment of religion, or infringement of the free exercise of religion. But even it it survive constitutional scrutiny, it will affect only the Commonwealth of Virginia. In the rest of the country, as far as I know, the actual commitments of congregations to their dioceses or conferences or denominations, will be upheld and the ones who want to leave will have to leave.

Early Christian economics 101:

The Baptizer drew crowds and charged for the "dunking".

The historical Jesus saw a good thing and continued dunking and preaching the good word but added "healing" as an added charge to include free room and board. Sure was better than being a poor peasant but he got a bit too zealous and they nailed him to a tree.

Paul picked up the money scent on the road to Damascus. He added some letters for a fee and "Gentilized" the good word to the "big
buck" world. i.e. Paul was the first media evangelist!!!

Along comes Constantine. He saw the growing rich Christian community and recognized a new tax base so he set them "free".

The Holy Roman "Empirers"/Popes/Kings/Queens et al continued the money grab selling access to JC and heaven resulting in some of today's
richest organizations on the globe i.e. the Christian churches (including the Mormon Church) and related aristocracies.

An added note: As per R.B. Stewart in his introduction to the recent book, The Resurrection of Jesus, Crossan and Wright in Dialogue, ( Professors Crossan and Wright are On Faith panelists).

"Reimarus (1774-1778) posits that Jesus became sidetracked by embracing a political position, sought to force God's hand and that he died alone deserted by his disciples. What began as a call for repentance ended up as a misguided attempt to usher in the earthly political kingdom of God. After Jesus' failure and death, his disciples stole his body and declared his resurrection in order to maintain their financial security and ensure themselves some standing."

In conclusion, money is a major foundation of Christianity to include Mormonism. Ditto for Islam.

The martyred apostles ran afoul of Roman political and religious authorities because they preached, healed, and baptized for the conversion (and profit) to a non-Roman way of life. This support of an anti-Roman cult resulted in the typical murder/crucifixion of the cult leaders. The apostles' conversions also caused a dramatic drop in Roman/Jewish temple appearances and contributions and just like Jesus' Jewish temple outburst, it resulted in added punishment to include crucifixion.