On July 18, the Minnesota State Supreme Court denied the petition from the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area (PTCA) to review the decision of the Minnesota Court of Appeals in favor of Prairie Community Church of Twin Cities (formerly known as Eden Prairie Presbyterian Church).
The Court of Appeals’ April 24 decision upheld the March 24, 2016 ruling by the Fourth Judicial District Court, which concluded that the Prairie Community Church of Twin Cities “owns the disputed property and that the disputed property is not held in trust for the PCUSA, and the PTCA and PCUSA have no legal interest in the disputed property.”
The Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area had decided to appeal that ruling fearing that it “turns [the Presbyterian Church (USA)] into a congregational church, where each congregation has the freedom to pick and choose what it will and will not accept regarding church organization, government, and doctrine.”
In its presbytery report on why it was appealing, the PTCA’s Administrative Commission (AC) called the court’s decision “deeply disappointing, and we’re concerned about the impact it may have on our Minnesota congregations, our presbytery as a whole, our neighboring presbyteries in Minnesota, and the wider church. … We believe the decision of the Minnesota Court of Appeals potentially jeopardizes our presbytery’s authority to make decisions in the future regarding congregations who seek to leave. Additionally, we believe the decision may also place in jeopardy our foundational understanding that the Book of Order, in its entirety, applies to all members of the PCUSA.”
Therefore, the AC “decided unanimously to direct our attorney to prepare and file a Petition for Review of this decision by the Minnesota Supreme Court.”
Court of Appeals decision
The Court of Appeals ruled that the District Court was correct when it applied neutral principles of law. Under neutral principles, the court bases its decision in neutral, secular principles, looking at official documents such as property deeds and state statutes.
The court’s decision stated that while the church had created an express trust when it modified its articles of incorporation in 1999, it had also retained the right to modify the documents by a majority vote of the active church members at a properly called congregational meeting.
So, in 2010, when the church voted to remove all references to the trust and the PCUSA from its Articles of Incorporation, “it was within its rights.”
“Thus, EPPC retained the power to revoke the trust and properly revoked the trust by removing all trust language in 2010,” it read.
6 Comments. Leave new
The 1st thing to understand about the PCUSA property in trust clause is that its genesis in the mid 1970s was a reactionary response to an event, the rise of the PCA and the fallout of the Kenyon case. In that sense it was this odd thing, sort of shoved into the Presbyterian/reformed root , and like a foreign body or an invasive species or plant, infects and takes over the whole system. To the point now, the contemporary PCUSA is nothing more than a property in trust clause, period. Nothing more or less. But in its genesis is the PCUSA’ s own demise.
The PCUSA/Presbytery appeal rises and falls with this absurd understanding of the policy and reformed faith. That when a TE/RE or even a member joins a PCUSA affiliated church, they with full knowledge and consent choose to set aside their civil and religious US Constitutional rights as citizens. That they knowingly and willingly agree to place in some blind trust their rights and freedoms of speech, assembly, association, rights of petitions for redress of grievance. Guaranteed other Americans. The PCUSA is now arguing to the Courts that much like the Roman Catholic Popes of the 12th century, the speak “ex-cathedra” or their God given wisdom is beyond the review of courts and civil reviews. Or the 2017 PCUSA Book Of Order now needs to take its place along the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights on display at the National Archives in DC, so all may come and wonder at its magic and power. Maybe even bow and worship it.
Such a stance is patently absurd from a tort and common sense understanding of law. As my father would say, “that dog will just not hunt”. On appeal, again the PCUSA may prevail, maybe not. But this is much is true, they constructed this house of cards assuming people will be intimidated, bullied or just silenced by employing either church or the State to do their bidding. Houses of cards and indeed very unstable and it will all come down around their heads at some point, if not in this Court then another. 50 states, 360 million people, more lawyers per capita than any place on earth. God Bless America.
If a church votes to join the PCUSA, they are eagerly welcomed onboard. When a church votes to leave the PCUSA, the presbytery and national church fight it with tooth and nail. That is wrong, wrong, wrong. A church that votes to leave should be blessed to leave with honor and dignity, not dragged through the dirt. Same when a church splits: some leave and some remain in the congregation. Those who leave leave with nothing. Those who remain, have everything. Majority wins. Period. So when a majority of a congregation votes to leave the PCUSA, they should be permitted to leave with their finances, their property, and their ministry. The presbytery, is it so chooses, can spend its money ministering to those who remain in the PCUSA now without a church home instead of supporting lawyers and court fees. C’mon, PCUSA, lets get on with bringing Christ to the world and get off this kick of property above all. My presbytery dismissed 15 churches, closed several small ones, merged one or two, dissolved some ecumenical partnerships, and ended up so small that we had to merge with a neighboring presbytery. No property fights, minimal bitterness.
Good, I just feel bad for the other churches who paid bookoo bucks to the presbytery just to keep their own property, at least no more blackmail.
As usual Mr. Gregory, you aptly opined. The PCUSA has become, in essence, a commercial real estate company using/capitalizing on ‘assets’ paid for by sweat and toil of wonderful souls at the grass roots level for the glory of the Lord. P.S. I’m beginning to like Minnesota higher courts after all.
Recently, the Administrative Commission responsible for prosecuting Twin Cities Presbytery’s case against Prairie Community Church sought to ground the PC(USA)’s Property Trust Clause in Presbyterian Ecclesiology, claiming in essence that it is an essential doctrine of the Word of God and the standards of the PC(USA) “that property is an instrument for accomplishing the mission of Jesus Christ in the world, (and) that the way (the PC(USA)) owns and holds property is a doctrinal (as opposed to civil) matter.” The AC contended that it fully intended to prosecute the PC(USA)’s Property Trust Clause against Prairie Community, not because of revenge, property, or money, but because of Presbyterian identity as “followers of Jesus Christ who covenant to live together and bear witness together and proclaim the love of Christ together within structures of mutual support, mutual love, and mutual accountability, … (who) stand up for the values we cherish, the faith we profess, and the promises we make—to God and to one another!” The AC feared the repercussions of the Minnesota Courts’ decisions, if allowed to stand (as they have in the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear an appeal in this case), on this seemingly idyllic vision for church unity. “The decision is…deeply disturbing for us as we contemplate its import on our future and life together. … We’re concerned that other provisions of the Book of Order may be ignored or violated, and that the (civil) courts will not respect or enforce a subsequent decision by presbytery to impose order or assume original jurisdiction of a congregation.” “In the simplest terms, we’re concerned that this decision, in effect, turns us into a congregational church, where each congregation has the freedom to pick and choose what it will and will not accept regarding church organization, government, and doctrine.”
Having colossally failed to maintain the peace and unity of the denomination through pure doctrine “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone” (Eph. 2.20), the bureaucracy of the Presbyterian Church (USA) seeks instead to found its doctrine on the Holy Book of Order, the Property Trust Clause Itself being the cornerstone. It is these, not a common faith in Jesus Christ and an unshakable trust in the absolutely reliable Word of God (as communicated inerrantly through the Apostles and Prophets), that the bureaucracy of the PC(USA) would bind our hearts in Christian love. Discipline has utterly failed to restrain heresy in the PC(USA), thus destroying any meaningful ground for unity in the denomination, but by hell or high water, the bureaucracy will fight unto the very literally bitter end to defend any attack against that Holiest of Holy Cornerstones, the Almighty Property Trust Clause. Blessed be the ties that bind.
What did the denomination thin would happen when PCUSA abandoned the authority of scripture. They basically attempted to use extortion to keep membeership.