A new beginning

I am working on a 3 article series for my opinion writing class about the Anglican realignment. Hence I have been reading innumerable articles and statements from The Episcopal Church, the Virginia Diocese, The Falls Church, Truro Church, etc about perspectives, history, the court case, etc. The court case seems to have gone very well. We'll know the fate of the church properties in about two months when the judge announces his decision, but the trial could hardly have gone worse for TEC. At one point the presiding bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori basically admitted that she had lied to Archbishop Rowan Williams, the bishop of Canterbury.

Anyway, so I've been going through all of the documents again, and I just can't believe some of the things that TEC is claiming! They've basically written their own gospel! I just can't see how someone can say that they believe in the Bible and use the Bible to prove their own points, and then say that all expression of human sexuality in any context is okay.

To validate a church statement because it's societally acceptable is logically, and theologically, incorrect. That's like saying that if it became societally acceptable to lie, we should get rid of that commandment. Mike and I had a bewildered discussion about this after reading through TEC statements together while I was working on my articles. Will post them later today after they are done.

"A New Beginning," by the way, is the title of the series. Let's hope.

To tide you over, here is my series proposal:

The organization of the Christian church is a pressing issue of our time. In recent years, debates have centered around theological differences and methods of church leadership. Such debates have been divisive and caused rifts in more than one historical denomination. These rifts have lead to further discussions about church property and whether or not a denomination can legally halt the secession of a member church. The Episcopal Church is currently suing over ten Virginia churches that have voted to disaffiliate with the overarching church body over theological differences. The lawsuit over the church properties went to trial on Tuesday, November 13.

I would like to examine the arguments and actions of The Falls Church and Truro Church, the two Virginia churches most invested in the debate, to validate their dual claims that they should be able to split from the church body and keep their church property. I will not consider their theological arguments; that is for them to defend. Rather, using historical evidence from the Virginia Division Statute, Virginia Code § 57-9, which recognizes the right of congregations to keep their property when separating from a divided denomination or diocese, and examining their actions from 1996-2007 I will show that they are well within their right legally to disaffiliate and that they did their best to resolve the debates before taking drastic measures.

My main opinion is that the churches have acted in accordance with the law and should be allowed to part ways. My first piece will introduce the debate and the main opinion, setting the tone for a more thorough examination in the latter pieces. My second piece will examine the Virginia Division Statute and my opinion will be that the court should hold up the law and allow the churches to keep their property. My third piece will examine the actions of the churches to seek reconciliation with the overarching church body and my opinion will be that they sought every means necessary to close the rift, felt that there was no other option, and so conducted their vote in a reasonable manner. They should be allowed to part ways.