[jecIIny]

The problem here is that the defense by the parish simply does not hold water. They claim that the bishop was acting illegally and in an unreasonable manner. Yet when they appealed to the Holy See (as is their right) they lost. The competent authorities in Rome ruled decisively in favor of the bishop. Rome has spoken. The matter is settled. Further defiance is in fact schism.

[PAR35]

I'm not taking a side on this one. I just wanted everyone to have the info so they can draw their own conclusions. I only actively encourage splits in the ECUSA and the PCUSA these days.

It is interesting in light of the litigation going on in Oregon as to the ownership of the parish properties. As I've noted on some of those threads, if you go towards setting up solid legal protection from the diocese creditors, the bishop will risk losing control of the property. On the other hand, if the bishop keeps too much control, he risks losing it to creditors.