Editor’s Note: This article spells out in language that a lay person can understand the issues at stake in church property rights, not only in Georgia, but in many other states where the ‘neutral principles of law’ are followed

The Presbyterian Lay Committee (PLC) has filed an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief before the Supreme Court of Georgia on behalf of the Timberridge Presbyterian Church. At issue is the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta’s attempt to confiscate Timberridge’s property after it left the Presbyterian Church (USA) and joined the Evangelical Presbyterian Church.

The presbytery’s claim was affirmed at the trial court level but was overturned by the Georgia Court of Appeals.

The stated clerk of the PCUSA filed an amicus with the Georgia Supreme Court on behalf of the presbytery. The PLC answered that brief, telling the high court that the denomination’s position on church property is “plainly wrong.”

In its amicus, the PLC argued that at the time of the merger between northern and southern Presbyterian denominations (PCUS and UPCUSA) in 1983, “hundreds of old-line southern churches opted out of the new denomination’s Book of Order’s purported ‘trust clause.’” Timberridge was one of those churches. In signing that waiver, said the PLC, these churches “expressly stated their intent not to be subject to such a trust.”

The denomination’s “imposition” of a purported trust violates Georgia law and the denomination’s own constitution which states that its ecclesiastical regulations have “no civil effect,” said the PLC. Georgia law requires that a trust can only be established by the property owner, not by a self-proclaimed beneficiary, and Timberridge never agreed to place its property in trust for the denomination.

The Book of Order is ‘self limiting’

The denomination’s constitution (Book of Order G-9.0102) states “Governing bodies of the church are distinct from the government of the state and have no jurisdiction or power to impose civil penalties.” On that basis, the PLC argued, “If forfeiture of property is not a civil penalty, then what is? By its own terms, the Book of Order cannot be used to bring about a forfeiture of property. It is self limiting in this regard …”

“Although it makes perfect sense that a denomination should have the ability to regulate ecclesiastical conduct within its jurisdiction,” said the PLC, “a denomination cannot usurp civil law functions, override civil law determinations, or set aside statutory regulations on ordering civil affairs. The PCUSA can no more override state statutes regarding trusts and titled property than it can tell a local church to ignore local fire regulations and zoning codes. Property ownership is a matter of civil law, and compliance with such governing regulations is not subject to a denomination’s constitution’s dictates.”

Reading Jones wrong

“The proposition that the PCUSA’s purported trust clause legally divests Timberridge of its property is predicated upon an incomplete and improper reading of Jones v Wolf, 443 U.S. 595 (1979)” said the PLC. In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court favored a “neutral principles of law” approach when adjudicating the disposition of local church property.

Read More

[Editor’s note: the original URL (link) referenced in this article is no longer valid, so the link has been removed.]