[sinkspur]

Does that have relevance in a civil court proceeding over property?

The courts ordinarily defer to denominational "law" in disputes over Church property. That's why this whole interdict business was so unnecessary.

Yes, Burke would have had to go to court. But he would have likely won there.

"Bull in a china closet" comes to mind for Burke.

[Torie]

The courts ordinarily defer to denominational "law" in disputes over Church property.

That quite suprises me actually, if title is vested in one name versus the other. I do know of a case when the "Bagwans" (whatever their name is or was) joined and took over the congregation of a Christian Scientist Church, holding very valuable acreage in Laguna Beach California; the CSC sued, and lost. It became a commune, and the Bagwans with their pink robes became much in evidence on the beach.

[Torie]

By the way, if you are right, then one would assume Burke would sue no?

[redgolum]

In Missouri law, it all depends on how the church property was incorporated. Depending on if the parish was set up as a part of the local Archdiocese Roman Catholic corporation, or as a stand alone corporation, the case could go either way.

I suspect that the actual charter states the parish is part of the Roman Catholic church, which would probably mean that the Archbishop would win.

[pseudo-ignatius]

"Bull in a china closet" comes to mind for Burke.

Have you met the man? Or are you just going off of media coverage of his various actions? Just curious.