Traditional Anglicanism in America
Sarah
The Washington Times Latest Report on the Virginia Parish Property Suit



But for Julia Duin of the Washington Times, [and here’s the link to her latest with lots of great details], and BabyBlue, none of us Episcopalians would know a thing about any of this.  Thank God for bloggers and the Internet and this reporter.  I will be emailing out the stories to all of my Episcopal friends, and I hope others will too.  . . . Because . . . they sure won’t learn the details from ENS or a friendly diocesan newsletter.

And you know, I don’t have any idea who will win in this lawsuit—and it actually doesn’t matter, since whoever loses will appeal—but I don’t get the sense that the Episcopal church’s attorneys were very . . . er . . . fluent, in their defense of the Episcopal church’s actions.

“Under cross-examination, he was asked to point out where in the Episcopal Church’s canons it says a parish cannot disaffiliate. Mr. Beers would only repeat that a parish is a creation of the parent diocese and that if its members decide to leave the denomination, they cannot take the parish with them.

“We were shocked at the lack of testimony they presented,” Truro chancellor Robert Dilling said. “After this morning’s cross-examination of witnesses, they chose not to repeat that.”

He was referring to earlier questioning of church historian Robert B. Mullin, a professor at General Theological Seminary in New York. Mr. Mullin, who was questioned by CANA attorney Gordon Coffee, revised his testimony on the stand.

Mr. Coffee’s questions were on whether the Episcopal Church had ever experienced a “division.” Central to the case is CANA’s argument that Virginia law allows a majority vote of congregations in a divided church to determine which side of the division to adhere to and retain the property. The diocese and the Episcopal Church say the state’s 1867 division statute does not pertain to the CANA churches.

Mr. Mullin had just testified that he had never said the Episcopal Church could divide when Mr. Coffee produced a 1983 book by Mr. Mullin using the word “division” in regards to the denomination. Mr. Mullin, who appeared obviously rattled, said he would not use the word now.”






Posted November 21, 2007 at 8:39 am
The URL for this article is http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/7789/

©2007 Stand Firm, LLC. All rights reserved. Permission to copy and distribute free of charge is granted, provided this notice, the logo, and the web site address are visible on all copies. For permission for use in for-profit publications, please email contact@standfirminfaith.com.