That's right, the Vast Majority of Episcopalians are no longer Christians

Los Angeles Diocese Wins Summary Judgment in Property Case

NEWPORT BEACH, CA (ANS) -- St. James Anglican Church in Newport Beach, California, has received a serious set-back in its legal case and in their fight to retain their property from being confiscated by the Episcopal Church, of which it was formerly a part, after it withdrew from it and joined the Anglican Province of Uganda and the Diocese of Luwero in August of 2004.

Steps to disassociate from the Episcopal Church were initiated by the leadership of this evangelical Anglican church as a result of widening differences of biblical interpretation an example of which was evidenced when controversial decisions made at the General Convention in the summer of 2003, most notably, the confirmation of the first openly gay Episcopal bishop, Gene Robinson.

In August 2004, this decision, along with other theological differences, led the Rector, wardens, vestry, and a nearly unanimous congregation, to vote overwhelmingly to disaffiliate from the Episcopal Church and to affiliate with the conservative Anglican Church of Uganda.

 St. James Church was soon joined by All Saints Church in Long Beach and St. David's Church in North Hollywood. All three churches were then sued for their property by the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles and the national Episcopal Church.

 Since 2004, the church has received national attention over its legal case against the Episcopal Church, but now, in a story by George Conger of Anglican Ink, the church's case, that it should be able to retain the property, has been rejected by an Orange County (California) Superior Court Judge.

 Conger wrote that the Judge had ruled that a Bishop of Los Angeles had "no authority to give the parish of St James in Newport Beach a written waiver exempting the congregation's property from the reach of the Episcopal Church's Dennis Canon."

 He went on to say, "In a ruling for summary judgment handed down on May 1, 2013, Judge Kim Dunning ordered the parish to hand its multi-million dollar properties over to the Diocese of Los Angeles."

 "The decision was unexpected," Daniel Lula - an attorney for the parish -- told Anglican Ink, as the matter had been set down for trial later this month.

 In an email to his congregation, the Rector, the Rev Richard Crocker said: "We have received notice this morning from our attorneys that the court has handed down a significantly negative ruling in our court case. This of course changes the landscape of next week's trial," he noted, inviting the parish to a meeting with Mr. Lula "to offer explanation of what we know about the ruling at this point."

Conger stated, "In her decision, Judge Dunning said the Episcopal Church's rules governing parish property on the diocesan and national level took precedence over civil property and trust laws. She dismissed as non-binding a 1991 letter signed by the then Canon to the Ordinary D. Bruce MacPherson, later to become the Bishop of Western Louisiana, on behalf of Bishop Frederick Borsch that released the diocese's claim to the property."

 Bishop MacPherson said in a deposition, "The purpose of the conversations between the Diocese and St. James was for St. James to hold title to its property in its own name free of any trust . . . [as] part of an agreement in order for St. James to secure substantial donations for its building program."

 Conger then wrote, "However, this waiver did not amend the parish bylaws and diocesan canons she held. Even if it did, according to the present leadership of the Episcopal Church's interpretation of the canons 'the Bishop of the Diocese did not, and does not, have authority to amend any of these instruments.'"

 Judge Dunning cited the declaration by the Episcopal Church's expert witness Robert Bruce Mullin in support of her deference to canon law over the evidence of the deeds and waiver noting the "Mullin declaration concerns 'religious entity governance and administration,' and this court is bound by it.

 "The court further stated that it believed a parish was a subordinate unit to a diocese and had no existence outside the diocese. While the Episcopal Church could exist without St James, St James could not exist without the Episcopal Church - and as it had no existence independent of the diocese, the loss of its property to the diocese could not harm it."

 Conger continued by saying that in 2011 the California Supreme Court rejected an argument of the Episcopal Church that the 1991 letter had been declared invalid by its first review of the case in 2009. The Court said, "We express no opinion regarding the legal significance, if any, of the 1991 letter. We merely hold that a court must decide the question," overturning an appellate court ruling that did not allow the parish to put forward a defense.

 In 2005 the Orange County Superior Court ruled the Episcopal Church's allegations were legally defective, but an appellate ruling reversed the trial decision and adjusted the approach to church property law in California. The Parish appealed to the California Supreme Court, who reversed the Appeal Court and returned the case to the Superior Court where St. James answered the complaint, raised affirmative defenses, and began discovery proceedings. This court denied a motion from the diocese, which took a writ to the Appeal Court for summary judgment in the case. This was granted before a trial had occurred and judgment given, and the Parish again appealed to the California Supreme Court. In early 2011, the California Supreme Court ruled for the Parish and sent the case back to the Orange County Superior Court.

 "If the parish does not appeal the decision it will have to vacate the property in the near future," said Conger.

 In his invitation to the parish meeting Mr. Crocker said: "I ask that all members of St. James come together in unity at this time to hear from our attorney and to pray together. The Lord is not surprised by this decision and He is in our midst. But His strength is particularly manifested when we come together in unity and prayer."

Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California, sent a letter to Christianity Today magazine offering the campus of his Lake Forest, California mega church to St. James to use if they are forced to vacate their Newport Beach property. Rev. Crocker responded to Warren's offer with the following, "We are overwhelmed by his generosity. It is an encouraging sign of support from Christians in the community."

Theological education in crisis

Michael Jensen
October 4th, 2011

1. Theological education - meaning 'tertiary level academic theological study' - is under attack, from forces both within and without the church. It is seen by some as too expensive. Other see it as too impractical and too inflexible, in that theological education providers cannot give them the educational setting they would like in an area where online degrees and part-time study is proliferating. It is too academic and therefore too unspiritual in the eyes of some. And it is too slow for impatient young church planters or would-be church leaders who don't want to waste valuable gospelling years in the study.

2. Why do we need theological education? 

a) for the spiritual health of churches, and the Christians in them. Knowledge and learning are not the whole of what it means to grow spiritually in the NT, but they are certainly major components of spiritual health and growth. Paul spends three years teaching the Ephesian elders, for example. Jesus gives the apostles 40 days - Peter's Acts 2 sermon didn't come out of nowhere!

b) for effectiveness in mission Once again, being well thought-through and informed is not the be-all and end-all of mission. But it sure helps! Paul is determined to 'take every thought captive' for the sake of the gospel of Christ (for example). And if we believe that the gospel applies across cultures and times then we commit ourselves to the difficult work of contextualization.

c) for the preparation of ministers for a life-long ministry Full-time ministry is a long haul in difficult conditions. People who are called into this task need as much deep-level preparation as they can get. Souls are at stake. Could we demand any less of them?

3. Who needs theological education?

The short answer: all Christians need to see themselves as learners and in the market for some theological education of whatever kind. And this means that church leaders - pastors, bible study group leaders, lay preachers - are in particular need of a more concentrated level of theological study. It is also the case that those who have particular opportunities to witness in their workplaces would benefit enormously from some higher level theological study - especially teachers and academics, but also many others too.

4. What to avoid in a theological educationa) an institution that majors on flexibility - if an institution is determined to give you what you want and to ask nothing of you, don't go there. Education in general has become a market, and students have become consumers. This has been a disastrous change in mentality - because true education actually asks us to become disciples and to submit to a process of learning from authoritative teachers.

b) an institution that makes sure you don't meet other students Online or distance education is what the market wants at the moment. But we need to keep reminding ourselves it is a poor third best.

c) an institution that doesn't have ministry in view as the goal of theological education - not just professional ministry of course, but the ministry that all Christians share in. Theological education exists to serve the church.

d) an institution that doesn't care or cares little about academic standards. If a college has fallen for the current fashion of ‘dumbing it down’, avoid it like the plague. Do not support it.

5. What to look for in a theological educationa) is the whole Scripture central and authoritative in the institution?You can't claim to be studying the knowledge of God if you aren't taking the Scriptures with utmost seriousness, or if you are prizing other sources above holy Scripture.


b) is it theological?I object to the term 'bible college' because the purpose of theological education is not to know the Bible better: it is to know God better. The word 'theology' indicates that study of the texts is the means and not the end. It also indicates that there will be a prayerful integration of the curriculum, and that the confessions and creeds of church history will have their place.


c) are the original languages emphasised?Not every Christian or even every Christian leader needs to learn Greek and Hebrew to have an effective ministry, but I don't think theological study is really serious if it does not ask you to learn at least one of these languages. Given the choice, most people would NOT learn even Greek. Don't take the easy option - because serious study of the Scripture by someone who would teach God's people demands the harder path!


d) are Church History and Ethics and Philosophy a part of the course?These subjects are all auxiliaries to the study of Theology in a way. But without them the theological task is scarcely complete.


e) is community life emphasised?The nature of theological knowledge is that it is a shared knowledge - learning it on your own is counter to the kind of knowledge it is.


f) is there regular corporate worship and prayer?Goes without saying.


g) are the practical ministry subjects taught in a theological way?You aren't going into theological education to learn secular counselling methods, or bits of pop psychology.


h) is the theological curriculum calibrated for ministry and mission?I would be asking why a theological curriculum does not address itself to the context in which those who are studying it are going to have to work. These days, it is simply not enough to say 'we teach the theology stuff, you work out how to put it into practice where you are'.

A clue is to ask current or recent students about their studies. If they say 'it was hard, but it was good' - then I think you have found a good place. If they say 'we had a ball' - I'd be worried. Proper theological education ought to be an uncomfortable exercise - it ought to stretch the student and challenge the student in ways that are sometimes unpleasant.


But having said that: there ought to be a joy in theological education. The knowledge of God ought to be joyful because it is the knowledge of God - the God of all mercies. There ought to be many, many glimpses of his glory in the experience of theological education!

Michael Jensen teaches doctrine at Sydney's Moore Theological College