Many of you have probably seen this. While each of us here could write volumes on the subject, it just seems simpler to point you to the master of curmudegeonly thought.
What is it about New York courts? They do not seem to like to hold trials—-you know, those hearings in front of a judge and jury where two sides actually put on evidence with witnesses and documents, and out of the opposing versions some sort of truth emerges? But in New York, at least in cases involving its home-grown, common-law behemoth, the “Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America”, the courts decide the matter without the bother of a trial, and even without burdening the record with any evidence. All they seem to need are allegations—-and based on those (as long as they are made under oath), they make up their minds and issue judgments.
For the latest example of such a judicial shortcut, see this decision by Judge Ferris Lebous in the lawsuit brought by the Diocese of Central New York against the Church of the Good Shepherd in Binghamton. Earlier, Judge Lebous granted summary adjudication to the Diocese on its claim to own by forfeit the parish’s real and personal property after the parish voted to leave the Diocese. (Never mind that there were not enough parishioners remaining to allow the building to stay open; it’s the principle of the thing, don’t you understand? “People may leave, but buildings stay put, even if they are empty. We can always sell them—-but not to those who left, you understand—-and put the cash to good use in suing other parishes for their property.”)
By granting summary adjudication, Judge Lebous necessarily found that there were no facts in dispute that needed a trial to sort them out. No, all was clear from the respective affidavits submitted on either side. The Dennis Canon, after all, was not only part of the diocesan canons (Canon XXIII “reaffirms” its principles, even if the Diocese itself never bothered to accede to the ECUSA canons), but had even been enacted as a statute by that most considerate group of Christians, the New York Legislature, who of course wanted only to help their local parishioners in their desire to give everything they had to the national church, instead of to (God forbid!) their own parish. Given this state of affairs, it was not difficult for Judge Lebous to conclude as a matter of law that the parish did not really own its own property, but held it in trust for the Diocese and the national church.
15 Comments •
I find it stunning that the judge would decide that Mr Brannan would care about the label “Episcopalian” just because he attended a parish that was Epicopalian. Wouldn’t it be just as logical to say that he attended a particular parish and would be most likely to go where the overwhelming majority of the parish went?
There’s a simple test. Have the practices and/or doctrines of Good Shephard changed substantially since he passed away? Have those of the parent denomination? My assumption is that the answer would be quite clear.