Our unity rests in Christ, not in real estate’
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, December 1, 2006
The Presbytery of Mississippi, which has historically opposed the property trust clause in the Presbyterian Church (USA), held a series of votes during a called meeting on Nov. 30 not to enforce it.
Mississippi is the first of the denomination’s 173 presbyteries to repudiate the trust clause, which says, “All property held by or for a particular church, a presbytery, a synod, the General Assembly, or the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), whether legal title is lodged in a corporation, a trustee or trustees, or an unincorporated association, and whether the property is used in programs of a particular church or of a more inclusive governing body or retained for the production of income, is held in trust nevertheless for the use and benefit of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)” (G-8.0201 in the Book of Order).
Weighing its congregations’ commitments to the great ends of the church versus the denomination’s claim to their property, the commissioners resolved that they will take “no action to enforce any general trust interest claimed by any higher governing body against any property, real or personal, held by any of its particular churches while they remain under its jurisdiction.”
Furthermore, the presbytery said it will not “resist any particular church of the Presbytery of Mississippi which would ask the courts of the State of Mississippi to clear its property of any claims made by higher governing bodies against that property.”
In order to allow full debate on each of the 13 declarations in the property policy resolution, a purpose statement, 13 declarations in a theological reflection and rationale and a conclusion, the presbytery considered and voted on the issues one at a time. A member of the task force that submitted the proposals said the votes were generally in the range of 35 in favor and 14 opposed.
The Mississippi document does not promote separation from the denomination. “The Presbytery of Mississippi desires to retain all of its congregations as sister churches based on our organic spiritual unity found in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit,” the commissioners said in their purpose statement. “Our unity rests in Christ, not in real estate.”
But the purpose statement did draw attention to actions that have heightened polarity over church property. “Matters concerning property within the bounds of the Presbytery of Mississippi would be largely academic, were it not for current events in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). In April of 2006, the Trustees of Eastern Oklahoma Presbytery filed an affidavit placing a claim on all the real property belonging to congregations within the bounds of that presbytery. This was a strategy recommended in a paper entitled “Church Property Disputes” which was produced for the stated clerk of the General Assembly. Many congregations throughout the Presbyterian Church thus believe they have reason to fear coercive action by their presbyteries.”
Lawyers for Clifton Kirkpatrick, the stated clerk, privately disseminated “privileged and confidential” papers on “Church Property Disputes” and “Processes for use by presbyteries in responding to congregations seeking to withdraw” – later dubbed the “Louisville Papers.” Those documents, which were published by The Layman Online after it received copies by an anonymous sender, lay out a harsh and aggressive strategy for taking over the property of congregations that are troubled by the direction of the denomination.
Since then, Kirkpatrick has personally warned presbyteries against ceding control of local church property to the congregations. He has also advised synods to take action if presbyteries do not fully comply with his view of the constitutional property requirements. If necessary, he says, synods may form administration commissions “to assume jurisdiction over a presbytery’s powers.”
The full text of the “Mississippi Presbytery Property Policy” is:
- I. Purpose of this Statement of Policy
- The Presbytery of Mississippi desires to retain all of its congregations as sister churches based on our organic spiritual unity found in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. Our unity rests in Christ, not in real estate. Quoting Isaiah 66:1-2, Stephen admonished his critics, “Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made with hands” (Acts 7:48). It has ever been thus in Israel and in this Presbytery. Property should neither hold us together nor pull us apart.
- Matters concerning property within the bounds of the Presbytery of Mississippi would be largely academic, were it not for current events in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). In April of 2006, the Trustees of Eastern Oklahoma Presbytery filed an affidavit placing a claim on all the real property belonging to congregations within the bounds of that presbytery. This was a strategy recommended in a paper entitled “Church Property Disputes” which was produced for the Stated Clerk of the General Assembly. Many congregations throughout the Presbyterian Church thus believe they have reason to fear coercive action by their presbyteries.
- The First Presbyterian Church of Baton Rouge, for example, has asked the courts of Louisiana to issue a declaratory judgment that the congregation alone owns its property, and the Presbytery of South Louisiana has concurred with that request.
- It is solely to allay such fears that the Presbytery reiterates and reaffirms its historic stand with respect to property issues. The Presbytery offers this Statement of Policy to its particular churches as the definitive statement on how this Presbytery interprets and intends to enforce the Book of Order with respect to real property.
- II. Policy Statement
- The Presbytery of Mississippi hereby:
- 1. Desires all its particular churches to remain in fellowship with each other under the jurisdiction of the Presbytery;
- 2. Resolves that pure preaching of the gospel and right administration of the sacraments are constitutive of the church, that our unity, purpose, and mission are found in Jesus Christ and nowhere else, and that decisions affecting ownership of property are subordinate to, and should support, our spiritual unity in Christ;
- 3. Resolves that the Great Ends of the Church found in G-1.0200 summarize the mission of this Presbytery and explain the purpose for the existence of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.);
- 4. Resolves that whenever particular churches of this Presbytery pursue the Great Ends of the Church they are in fact using their property for the benefit of this Presbytery and of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.);
- 5. Trusts its particular churches to make their own decisions concerning how best to use their property to accomplish the Great Ends of the Church;
- 6. Resolves that property has not been, is not, and shall not be a basis for our unity or an opportunity for division among us;
- 7. Recognizes that many of its particular churches believe they hold clear title to their own property;
- 8. Recognizes all its particular churches as having the ability to sell, lease, mortgage, or otherwise encumber any of their real property without further written permission of the Presbytery;
- 9. Recognizes all its particular churches as having the ability to acquire real property subject to an encumbrance or condition without further written permission of the Presbytery;
- 10. Resolves that it shall take no action to enforce any general trust interest claimed by any higher governing body against any property, real or personal, held by any of its particular churches while they remain under its jurisdiction;
- 11. Resolves that it will not resist any particular church of the Presbytery of Mississippi which would ask the courts of the State of Mississippi to clear its property of any claims made by higher governing bodies against that property; and
- 12. Resolves that nothing contained within this policy statement shall abrogate the authority and responsibility of Presbytery under sections G-8.0401 and G-8.0601 of the Book of Order; and
- 13. Orders that these statements be transmitted through the sessions of all the particular churches of the Presbytery.
- III. Theological Reflection and Rationale
- 1. The Church is founded by Jesus Christ and should embrace his methods and his values. The Holy Spirit is building the church “upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20). Jesus established the church by calling and gathering the apostles to himself. He trained, taught, and commissioned them to preach, teach, make disciples, baptize, and celebrate the Lord’s Supper with the risen Lord. Our Book of Order recognizes that it is Christ who calls the Church into being, giving it all that is necessary for its mission, edification, and service.
- 2. Jesus did not call or train the church to deal with real property. When we turn to what Jesus had to say, this is what we find: When a man asked Jesus to settle an estate with his brother, Jesus replied:
- “Man, who has made me a judge or divider over you” (Luke 12:14)? Jesus refused to get involved with the property issue. Instead, Jesus used this occasion to warn people not to covet and place one’s trust in larger barns.
- When the sons of Zebedee were vying for power, Jesus said, “You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you” (Mark 10:42-44).
- “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man has nowhere to lay his head” (Matthew 8:20).
- 3. The Goal of the Church is not ownership but discipleship. “It belongs to Christ alone to rule, to teach, to call, and to use the Church as he wills, exercising his authority by the ministry of women and men for the establishment and extension of his kingdom” (G-1.0100(b)). Thus, the goal of the church is not to acquire, own, manage, buy, or sell real property.
- The goal of the church is to extend Christ’s reign on earth.
- 4. According to John Calvin, the marks of the church are the preaching of the gospel and the right administration of the Sacraments. Real estate is not and never has been one of the marks of the church. In the early church, congregations did not own real estate. People met in houses, often in secret. Our Book of Order and its historic principles of Church Government are derived from the example of the apostles and the practice of the primitive Church. This includes their attitude towards property.
- 5. The church is called to exercise spiritual discipline, not worldly power. St. Paul cautions the church at Corinth: The weapons of our warfare are not worldly [physical] but spiritual (2 Cor. 10:4). In the Institutes of the Christian Religion John Calvin carefully describes the spiritual character of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The spiritual power of the church-to resist offenses and eliminate scandal-should be “completely separated from the right of the sword” (Institutes IV.xi.5). The church does not exercise “power through fines or prisons or other civil penalties,” but through the power of the Word. This power is exercised by preaching, admonishing and use of “the final thunderbolt:” excommunication (Institutes IV.xi.5).
- Calvin thundered against the church’s attempt to usurp and wield civil power. He cites with approval Ambrose’s statement: “To the emperor belong the palaces; to the priest the churches” (Institutes IV.xi.8). He also cites Bernard, who admonished Pope Eugenius to refrain from making decisions regarding property: “What seems the greater honor to you: to forgive sins or to divide estates? There is no comparison. These base and earthly things have their own judges, the kings, and princes of the earth. Why do you invade another’s border?” He again cites Bernard: “This is the form of apostleship: lordship is forbidden; ministry is bidden” (Institutes IV.xi.11).
- Calvin also recalls a time, under Pope Gregory, when priests and bishops confiscated land. “Gregory then called a council of bishops together, inveighed stoutly against that profane custom, and asked whether they would anathematize the cleric who tried to occupy some possession by inscribing a title on his own initiative; similarly, a bishop who either ordered it done or let it go unpunished. All declared, ‘Anathema'” (Institutes IV.xi.14).
- 6. The Church should always operate out of love and fairness, so as to build up and not injure the faith of its members. Calvin discusses the fact that the church’s rule-making authority is subject always to the requirement that it not violate love. The church in Jerusalem decreed that the Gentile Christians should observe certain dietary laws, etc., (Acts 15:20). Calvin comments: “This is no new law laid down by the apostles, but the divine and eternal command of God not to violate love” (Institutes IV.x.21). Calvin concedes that constitutions are necessary to keep peace and order, but they must be “founded upon God’s authority, drawn from Scripture, and, therefore, wholly divine” (Institutes IV.x.30). When Jesus is silent on a point, the church may impose rules for order and decorum, but they should be tested by the law of love. “But love will best judge what may hurt or edify; and if we let love be our guide, all will be safe” (Institutes IV.x.30). “[W]e are mutually bound, one to another, to nourish mutual love” (Institutes IV.x.31).
- 7. In applying the law of love, the Presbytery should honor local custom.
- “Nevertheless, the established custom of the region, or humanity itself and the rule of modesty, dictate what is to be done or avoided in these matters” (Institutes IV.x.31).
- 8. In accordance with the mission of the church – to extend the reign of Christ in the world by pursuing the Great Ends of the Church – decisions by the church should be made with a view to the up-building of the witness of the local congregation. Fighting over title to real property damages faith and destroys the witness of the church.
- 9. In Mississippi, land and identity are deeply intertwined. This Presbytery has always regarded real property as part of the local congregation’s core identity. During the 1970s, a number of congregations in Mississippi elected to withdraw and join other Reformed denominations.
- These were difficult and heartbreaking decisions. Some of the decisions to leave were fueled by anxiety over what would become of the church property if they remained with the denomination. Many of the congregations who chose to remain in the PCUS believe that, when they exercised the exemption clause provided in G-8.0701, they retained their property free