Parker T. Williamson
Editor emeritus and senior
correspondent of The Layman
Turning real estate’s earthy vernacular into the language
of piety requires a bit of invention. But some of our presbyteries,
assisted by a document called “The Louisville Papers” which
was crafted by lawyers at denominational headquarters, believe they are
up to the challenge. When 97 percent of Montreat Presbyterian Church
voted to leave the Presbyterian Church (USA), leaders of the Presbytery
of Western North Carolina declared the three percent, inflated by the
dubious addition of denominationally pensioned clergy, “the true
church.”
What made the three percent “True?”
Nothing theological. “True” turns out to be real estate
language.
On behalf of its “true church,” presbytery leaders proceeded
to claim title to the 97 percent’s property. Then they unveiled an
olive branch. They invited the evangelical 97 percent to an out-of-court
meeting (all the while making private preparations to sue them) for the
announced purpose of praying and reasoning together.
Montreat evangelicals declined the invitation, a shun that evoked
wailing and gnashing of teeth from area institutionalists: “They
wouldn’t even sit down and pray with us!” they cried.
“Can you imagine that?” exclaimed presbytery’s pecking
order when hearing reports of the rejection. “They leave us no
option but to take them to court.”
Left out of the litany was the fact that the presbytery leaders had
attached a precondition to their invitation. They stipulated that their
ersatz church owned the property, not the 97 percent whose contributions
had paid for it. So, the prayer meeting’s agenda turned out to be
how much of the 97 percent’s former property might presbytery allow
the evangelicals to use, and for how long. The Montreat congregation
found it impossible to participate in an event based on this premise.
'Amazing Grace'
Its generosity having been so callously disdained, the presbytery
announced it would sue. Not only would it attempt to confiscate a
building owned by others, but it plans to have someone else pay its
legal fees. Western North Carolina will launch a national campaign,
presumably under the guise of preserving Montreat’s Presbyterian
heritage, to raise a $50,000 war chest from out of state donors.
Similar deceptions have been employed by the Presbytery of Greater
Atlanta, whose Timberridge Presbyterian Church is attempting to clarify
title to its property in court. The Timberridge congregation is rapidly
outgrowing its facilities, but its leaders will not conduct a capital
funds campaign while their property ownership is in doubt. According to
church trustee, Dan Patterson, major donors will not contribute to a
property that can be confiscated by presbytery.
Congregational leaders were familiar with “The Louisville Papers,”
that advise presbyteries to confiscate church properties, change the
locks, issue eviction notices, freeze bank accounts, defrock ministers
and depose church sessions. Anticipating retaliation by the presbytery
for its attempts to clarify title to its property, Timberridge prepared
a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and told presbytery leaders that the
document would be served and a court hearing scheduled if the presbytery
tried to do to the congregation what “The Louisville Papers”
were advising them to do.
Promises, promises
The presbytery responded with lofty language, imploring Timberridge not
to seek the court’s protection against fellow Christians and urging
instead that the parties reason and pray together. They promised
Timberridge that the presbytery would not take hostile actions against
it in retaliation for its attempts to secure clear title.
Inclined to accept the presbytery’s invitation, Timberridge
representatives said they would withhold setting its motion for a TRO
for hearing if presbytery lawyers would put their do-no-harm promise in
writing. But the lawyers balked. So, Timberridge served the TRO and,
after a hearing, the court granted it. The order enjoins the presbytery
from taking any action against Timberridge property while the ownership
question is being adjudicated.
Presbytery officials cried foul over the TRO, publicly denouncing
Timberridge for going to court in lieu of praying and reasoning with
fellow Christians. Omitted from their lament was the fact that
Timberridge had agreed to set aside its TRO if presbytery leaders would
sign what they had said. They also failed to mention something that is
now apparent – that, at the very time they were imploring
Timberridge not to serve its TRO, presbytery officials were preparing a
lawsuit of their own. Courthouse records show that the presbytery not
only answered Timberridge’s suit, but simultaneously filed an
extensive countersuit claiming an enforceable trust over Timberridge’s
property.
The Presbytery of Greater Atlanta – largest in the denomination and
home of a General Assembly moderator who has gone to her knees praying
that Presbyterians love one another – has brought shame upon itself
with this attempted slight-of-hand maneuver. Strip away the veneer of
piety and what remains is presbytery’s demand that the congregation
lay down its shield while presbytery lawyers sharpen their spears.
Fortunately for Timberridge, the judge who decided the TRO was moved
more by neutral principles of law than by religious rhetoric.
Four months later, the presbytery, in addition to its pending
countersuit, also filed a separate suit seeking to evict Timberridge
from its property. In its eviction suit, the presbytery not only claims
ownership of the property but alleges that the 94 percent of the
congregation that paid for it are trespassers. The congregation’s
answer alleges that the presbytery’s attempt to evict it
constitutes a clear violation of the TRO. In the presbytery’s
passion to punish Timberridge, it may find itself in contempt of court,
for in filing its eviction demand, presbytery is doing precisely what
the court ordered it not to do.
Timberridge has offered to settle, so long as it is not compelled to
give one dime to a denomination that it believes has left the faith. It
will give $10,665, an amount equal to its General Assembly per capita
payment, to an area soup kitchen if presbytery will match its gift and
drop all claims against Timberridge’s property. Presbytery refused,
demanding a blank check of $350,000 from the upstart congregation,
representing approximately one tenth of the congregation’s assets.
Upping the ante
At the outset, Timberridge sought only to clarify title so that it could
proceed with its building campaign. The question of leaving the
Presbyterian Church (USA) was not on the table. But when presbytery
leaders overreacted by requesting powers to remove the minister and
wrest control of the church from its elected officers, what began as a
corporate property matter became an ecclesiastical rebellion. The
Timberridge session called a congregational meeting and told its people
what presbytery leaders were preparing to do. By a 94 percent majority,
the congregation then voted to disaffiliate from the denomination.
How many more cases will emerge before PCUSA officials learn that the
strong-arm tactics and half-truths they recommend in “The
Louisville Papers” do irreparable damage to the very cause they
purport to represent? One cannot persuasively defend the truth by
telling only half of it. And one cannot promote a trust by engaging in
untrustworthy activities. Each time presbytery officials follow “The
Louisville Papers’” playbook, as the presbyteries of Western
North Carolina and Greater Atlanta have done, they sink this
denomination deeper into disingenuousness, and they alienate additional
congregations.
Attempting to coerce unity, General Assembly headquarters has forgotten
that we live in a country where churches are voluntary associations.
No law can tell people that they must belong to a particular church,
and no law can tell a particular church that it must belong to a
specific denomination. No rule can shackle people to associations they
do not respect and cannot trust. And no one can deny a gathering of
Christians the right to worship under whatever label they choose. In
such circumstances, presbytery property grabs are doomed to failure no
matter the legal outcome.
The best presbyteries that follow Louisville’s advice can hope to
achieve – and we predict that they won’t achieve it in a
growing number of cases – is a handful of dirt, for by confiscating
a congregation’s property, the denomination will drive away its
people.
What remains after that deed has been done can hardly be called a
church.
The Rev. Parker T. Williamson is editor emeritus of the Presbyterian
Lay Committee.