LONG ISLAND: Court rules for diocese, wider church in property case

[struggle4progress]

By Mary Frances Schjonberg, March 26, 2008

The Supreme Court of Queens County, New York, recently ruled that the property of St. James' Episcopal Church, Elmhurst, is held in trust for the Diocese of Long Island and the Episcopal Church.

The majority of the members of St. James, Elmhurst voted in March 2005 to leave the Episcopal Church and join the Anglican Church in America. Those members formed what is now known as St. James Anglican Church, which is listed on the Anglican Church in America's website.

The departing members then sued the diocese and the Episcopal Church, asking for a ruling that neither entity had an interest in the parish property. The dissidents relied heavily on the fact that the parish was originally established as a part of the Church of England, arguing that the parish predated the Episcopal Church and they were therefore independent of the church and free to leave. St. James Church was founded in 1704 and officially chartered in 1761 by King George III. It was the first parish in Elmhurst, called Newtown in colonial times ...

The court rejected the dissidents' claim and ruled that St. James became an Episcopal parish after the American Revolution, and has existed as a part of the Episcopal Church, subject to its authority, since that time. The court noted that St. James, along with other New York parishes of similar status, petitioned the New York state legislature in 1793 to be allowed to incorporate as a parish of the Episcopal Church ...

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/81803_95981_ENG_HTM.htm

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. It will be interesting to see how this affects the suit by the Diocese of the San Joaquin

The entire diocese declared themselves apostate and left the ECUSA. I hope the court rules against them, too, saying that the diocese held property in trust for the national church.

[struggle4progress]

2. Different states -- and if the cases ever land in Federal Court, different districts

In California, I suppose, they might "note" this decision but it has no precedential value