Posted on 03/03/2015 5:06:39 AM PST by Gamecock
A judge has ruled in favor of First Presbyterian Church in Houston in its legal battle with New Covenant Presbytery for its property.
On Feb. 20, Judge Wesley R. Ward granted the church’s request for summary judgment, “finding that there is no genuinely disputed issue of material fact and that plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
In his decision, Ward found that there was “no enforceable trust or property interest created by any version of the Presbyterian Church (USA) Book of Order or the Presbyterian Church of the United States Book of Church Order under the neutral principle factors set forth by the Texas Supreme Court in Masterson V. Diocese of NW Texas.”
“Judge Ward’s decision is firmly rooted in Texas law and the facts of this case,” said one of the church’s lawyers, Lloyd J. Lunceford, who is also a member of the board of directors of the Presbyterian Lay Committee. “The court rejected the presbytery’s argument that a valid trust arose under the express trust clauses that were added to the PCUS and PCUSA constitutions in the early 1980s, and the court rejected the presbytery’s novel, fallback argument that a trust or other property right arose under the denomination’s dissolving clause that dated to 1925. Needless to say, the leadership of FPC Houston is gratified and is looking forward to a bright future of Christian ministry without any distracting threat or confusion about the property rights of the local church. The local church’s legal representation was a team effort, involving my Baton Rouge firm, Taylor Porter, the Dallas-based firm of Craddock Davis & Krause, and the Houston-based firm of Susman & Godfrey. It was a privilege to be a part of that team and to help represent such a wonderful client.”
The decision stated that “all property … is held and owned by First Presbyterian Church in Houston … in full, complete, unfettered, fee simple and absolute ownership and title, all in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas.”
It also stated that the “trust and other property interests claims” made by the presbytery are “unenforceable and without legal force and effect.”
The judge’s decision included a permanent injunction that barred the presbytery, the Presbyterian Church (USA) and any people or entities related to it from doing anything that would interfere with or disturb First Presbyterian’s “ownership, use, control or disposition” of the property.
The background
On May 29, 2014, the church filed a civil lawsuit seeking to clear the title of the church property from claims by the denomination that it holds a trust interest in FPC’s property. In a letter to the congregation citing its reasons for filing the lawsuit, the clerk’s of session referred to the congregation’s recent experience in working through New Covenant Presbytery’s “Reconciliation and Dismissal Procedure” and its failed voted to leave the PCUSA.
Earlier in the year, on Feb. 23, the church held a congregational meeting to vote on leaving the PCUSA and joining ECO: A Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians. The vote fell 36 votes short of attaining the required two-thirds majority.
Out of approximately 3,100 members, 1,681 attended the meeting, with 1,085 of them voting in favor of leaving the PCUSA. The congregation needed at least 1,121 votes in favor of the motion for it to pass.
While the church was working through the discernment process, the presbytery “made it clear that it believes that FPC owns its property for the benefit of the PCUSA. The FPC session believes it is necessary to resolve this issue once and for all – does PCUSA have any interest in FPC’s property?” according to a May 29 letter from the session to the congregation. “Clearing up property rights will honor the legacy of our past and provide stability for our future.”
The clerks of session – Jane Costello, Lesley Lilly and David McCarty – wrote that“It’s important to stress what this lawsuit is not.FPC is not seeking to leave the PCUSA through the filing of this legal action. Nor is this lawsuit seeking another vote on whether FPC should leave the PCUSA. All this action seeks is a determination from the court of whether FPC completely controls the use of its property.”
This is usually the case for mainlines, the local congregation owns the church building and the parent can only claim moral rights for as long as the congregation consents to be with the parent?
... that is, they would not have even needed to have joined some other kind of Presbyterian body. They could have turned into a generic bible church etc.
That’s good news, but, as with the cases in California, it probably has to do with unique trust laws in place in Texas.
And the history of this Presbyterian church says that a trust clause was imposed on that church some time after that church had already come into existence.
There are other denominations (mine own included) whose denomination included trust clauses at the inception of the denomination and one of the stated purposes was to prevent outside groups from invading a congregation, outvoting its membership, and then taking their property away. It was probably a good purpose at the time, but no one foresaw those denominations becoming ungodly bastions of homosexualism.
In the PC(USA) the home office holds the title, not the local church.
In the PCA the title is held by the local body. They learned their lesson well back in 73. (or was it 72?)
So with PCUSA the congregation has to leave the building behind, or if the home office consents, to buy it. Bummer, but if the Lord wants it He will bless.
Exactly.
That is what keeps a lot of congregations in place, fearing that they will lose their building. In the mean time the larger denomination is spinning further and further into apostasy.
Back in the early 1930s a lot of churches left the old Northern arm of the liberal Presbyterian church and had to leave their buildings. They went on to worship in barns, gymnasiums and whatever other buildings they could find. Gradually they built new churches, not as grand as the ones they left, but a more modest, traditional style. And that is how the Orthodox Presbyterian Church was started.
There are remnants of the PC(USA) all over the country in the PCA, OPC and a couple others. Truly sad, but God’s word will prevail.
The OPC does the gospel better than the mainlines. Although I have to disagree with its problems — orthodoxy declared as such has a way of sliding into its own kind of pride. In the end no label or denomination can save a church. Only a Name, which is not just the letters that spell Jesus but all that Jesus personally means to each congregant.
What I would say: don’t be afraid to go even beyond the limits of a particular religious system if Christ calls you there and the bible backs it up.
I agree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.