Presbytery committee opposes overture to toss out property clause
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, November 21, 2005
The Presbytery of Donegal in Pennsylvania is considering an overture – and a committee response that opposes it – that would essentially eliminate the property chapter in the Book of Order.
The purpose of the overture is to remove the trust clause that says local congregations own their property in trust for the denomination. If approved by the General Assembly and ratified by the denomination’s presbyteries, the proposal would eliminate any property claim on the congregation’s land, buildings and holdings if that congregation voted to leave the Presbyterian Church (USA).
The overture from the Forks of the Brandywine Presbyterian Church, which was established in 1735, was presented at the September meeting of the presbytery. A report by the presbytery committee was presented at the November meeting. A debate and vote on the proposal is expected early next year.
The committee on overtures and amendments said its members unanimously recommended that the presbytery oppose the overture.
The denomination’s rules on property, including the property trust clause, are in Chapter 8 of the Book of Order. That chapter came into being after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1979, in a Presbyterian case titled Jones v. Wolf, that church property disputes could be decided by neutral principles of law, rather than simply honoring the hierarchal claims of the denomination. Furthermore, the court said, denominations should make explicit their property claims as one of the neutral principles of law.
The United Presbyterian Church (USA) adopted a property chapter with the trust clause in 1981 and the Presbyterian Church U.S. enacted a similar chapter in 1982. When the two branches of the mainline Presbyterian Church united to form the PCUSA in 1983, they both approved the current Chapter 8.
The property clause states that local congregations hold their property in trust for the benefit of the denomination if the congregation ceases to be or leaves the PCUSA to affiliate with another denomination.
The PCUSA interprets that clause to mean that congregations must forfeit their property and assets or provide compensation to presbyteries to retain it. Several civil suits are currently under way in which the denomination’s ultimate ownership of local church property is being challenged.
The Donegal committee said the Forks of the Brandywine overture “is not consistent with the Reformed Protestant understanding of the organic and connectional nature of the Church. We believe that the Scriptures gave this basic understanding, instruction and model in Acts 2:44: ‘All the believers were together and had everything in common.'”
The removal of the property trust clause “would hinder presbyteries and other higher governing bodies in the discipline and oversight they are to exercise over our sessions and congregations,” the committee said. “While some see the current chapter 8 and abuses of it by certain higher governing bodies as coercive, it is difficult to see how discipline could be exercised without Chapter 8 at the current time.”
It added, “While some members of the … committee are uneasy with the present Chapter 8 of the Book of Order, none of us think that the sudden disappearance of it would add to the peace and unity of the PCUSA at this time. Such is the level of discontent within some parts of the PCUSA, that some congregations might leave simply because they could.”
But the committee did not recommend that the property clause be applied heavy-handedly. It cited five factors that should be considered in property disputes:
- 1. “The Book of Order does empower presbyteries to dismiss entire congregations with their property to other Reformed denominations. G-11.103 (i & y)”
- 2. “Polity Reflections Note # 32, in dealing with the “property issue,” urges Presbyteries to carefully consult with congregations that may desire to leave the PCUSA. One of the things the presbytery is to keep in mind during such consultations is that the denomination doesn’t want the land and building. It wants a congregation that looks and acts like the church described in the Book of Order.”
- 3. “There is currently a great deal of fear within some congregations in the PCUSA regarding their presbyteries and their properties. This fear is because of the theological differences within the PCUSA. Some members of the PCUSA fear that the day may come when, in order to maintain the integrity of their beliefs, they may have to leave the PCUSA. It angers them to think that those who disagree with them would seize their church home and work to divide their congregation. We must all be aware that such fear, anger, and suspicion exist within the PCUSA. We must by our words and actions try to relieve such anger and suspicion rather than escalate it.”
- 4. “Some presbyteries in the past and the present have acted precipitously in seizing property of dissident congregations and sending armed guards to keep church members and pastors at bay and requesting large sums of money from congregations before letting them leave with their property. These actions have attracted the attention of secular and religious news media. However, there have also been many presbyteries that have worked quietly in bringing fair resolutions to the property problem when congregations have desired to sever ties with the PCUSA. If our presbytery ever has to deal with this problem again, it is our recommendation that the committees involved do the research to discover the noble and wise resolutions reached by many other presbyteries.”
- 5. “It is our belief that the Scriptures are clear about church entities (members, sessions, congregations, presbyteries) taking other church entities into the secular court systems to resolve disputes (I Cor. 6: 1-7). Such behavior is unbecoming for Christians and is to be avoided.”