The Falls Church and Truro Episcopal Vote to Leave Episcopal Church USA

Glenn Lucke's picture
Submitted by Glenn Lucke on Sun, 12/17/2006 - 19:23

Yates_john_falls_church_rector Pictured:  Rev. John Yates, rector of The Falls Church.

Ninety percent of members in The Falls Church, an historic Anglican community in the Washington, DC area that has remained faithful to historic Christian orthodoxy voted to leave the Episcopal Church USA (hereafter ECUSA).  Likewise, ninety-two percent of communicants at Truro Episcopal Church voted to leave ECUSA.  Both churches remain in the worldwide Anglican communion and are seeking ecclesiastical authority and oversight from the Archbishop of Nigeria.

The Washington Post has the story (here).
NY Times story (here).

It remains to be seen whether The Falls Church and Truro will be successful in this attempt to leave ECUSA with their property.   ECUSA will likely sue the churches to retain the church property.  If The Falls Church, Truro and other congregations are allowed by the US courts to leave, I suspect many other congregations in ECUSA and the PC(USA) may try to leave as well. 



Bookmark/Search this post with
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Startling and incendiary

Mon, 12/18/2006 - 09:58 — Michael (not verified)

Startling and incendiary quote from Bishop Lee in the AP article:
Virginia Bishop Peter Lee, a centrist, had won praise even from his critics for his extensive outreach to all sides in the conflict. He said Sunday that the votes "had compromised these discussions and have created Nigerian congregations occupying Episcopal churches."

I find this development of

Mon, 12/18/2006 - 13:38 — Vicky (not verified)

I find this development of events incredibly sad. The Christian church has been plagued by centuries of variance, strife, and factions. And now come even more factions within the Episcopal denomination. Recently the odd idea popped into my mind that perhaps churches should all dissolve and people could form house churches in their neighborhood, or with likeminded believers, and this would alleviate all kinds of problems: doctrinal arguments, very public strife, and unChristian behavior of many sorts. It would also remove certain financial burdens such as the cost of maintaining church buildings and hierarchies; money could be sent to the poor instead. Or perhaps I am just feeling frustrated at this turn of events. Nonetheless: is it time to question the world of denominations? What are your thoughts on this, anyone? Glenn?
Vicky

Denoms, at their best, are a

Mon, 12/18/2006 - 15:32 — GL (not verified)

Denoms, at their best, are a form of unity-- one body of Christ denominated in various particular fellowships. They are not the ultimate ideal of unity, but they are one form of unity.
Schisms are painful, period. I don't think anyone who loves Christ and loves His Church wishes schism. Ideally the Church would be true, pure and one. Less ideal, but still a net 'good' is the scenario when those who reject truth and purity leave the Church becuase they cannot bring themselves to submit oneness with truth and purity. Considerably farther from the ideal of true, pure and one is when the Church, or a portion of it, manages to attain positions of authority and reject truth and purity. I don't see how oneness can be maintained with those who reject truth and purity. In that case,as important as oneness is, it is better for the faithful sheep to leave compromised sheperds.