Yes, this is still a Presbyterian blog and I don’t plan on regularly covering the Anglican and U.S. Episcopal church.  But I do drift off in that direction on occasion, like now, when the developments either (1) intersect with Presbyterian politics, or (2) are interesting to a polity wonk or GA Junkie.  Both cases are true at the moment.

The major news with significant implications for hierarchical churches in the United States, including the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is that the St. James Church case from California has now been officially appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.  This has been reported by Anglican Mainstream, Stand Firm, and VirtueOnline.  But as usual, if you want a detailed analysis you look to the Anglican Curmudgeon.  He has started a series of posts on the Constitutional arguments why the Court should over turn the California Supreme Court Decision on First Amendment Establishment Clause issues.  From the petition to the Court for review he quotes one of the arguments:

I. The California Supreme Court Has, By “Legislative Fiat,” Empowered Self-Proclaimed Hierarchical Churches to Unilaterally Create Trust Interests For Themselves in the Property of Affiliated Local Church Corporations, Impermissibly Preferring Hierarchical Religion and Infringing on the Free Exercise Rights of Local Congregations.

Now I need to think this through a bit more myself, and the root of this case is a specific section in the California Corporate Code that applies only to hierarchical churches, based on the 1979 Supreme Court decision setting forth “neutral principles.”  I do wonder if there is a logical conclusion if generalized further — If under the establishment clause the state can not make or enforce laws that relate to the hierarchical church being able to govern a congregation without that congregation’s explicit consent, then does it effectively reduce all congregations to being able to opt-out effectively reducing the denomination to a congregationalist government.  Again, I will say that I am thinking generally about something that, if accepted by the court, will be tried on very specific merits and that has gotten me in trouble before.

(In an interesting related case there is a brand new state appeals court decision that affirms that the Assemblies of God church is a hierarchical denomination.)

A second news item related to the PC(USA) is that the Episcopal Church will vote at its General Convention in two weeks on an agreement for full communion with the Moravian Church. A similar agreement with the Moravian Church was agreed to by the last PC(USA) General Assembly and affirmed by the vote of the presbyteries.  In reading Mark Harris’s endorsement of the Episcopal-Moravian agreement I also learned that the Episcopal Church has a full communion agreement with the ELCA, again like the PC(USA).

(Another aside – while the PCA may have had their General Assembly at the second “Happiest Place on Earth^®,” Orlando, Florida, the Episcopal Church will have their Convention at the first “Happiest Place on Earth^®,” Anaheim, California.  (And yes, the phrase is a registered trademark of the Mouse House.))

Now, in case you missed it, the big news coming from the Anglican/Episcopal branches in North America is the establishment this week of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA).  This church is intended to be a parallel church to the Episcopal Church in the U.S. and the Anglican Church of Canada but with a conservative stance.  The inaugural assembly in Bedford, Texas, had all the attendant pomp and ceremony including the installation of an archbishop for this new province of the Worldwide Anglican Communion.  The problem is of course that while it has been recognized by several other Provinces, mostly in the southern hemisphere, it has not been recognized yet by the whole communion and certainly not by the currently existing provinces on these shores.  But, in one ecumenical relationship the ACNA was recognized by the leader of the Orthodox Church in America.  Another endorsement of the new province came from the Rev. Rick Warren who addressed the Assembly last Tuesday Morning.  To say “This could get interesting” would be an understatement.

And finally, the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin in California gives us our polity question of the week — If the vote of a diocesan convention is necessary to elect a bishop but that convention does not have a quorum what do you do?  Specifically, on March 29, 2008, 21 clergy were present at the meeting and 61 were absent.  Under the church canons a quorum for such a meeting is one-third plus one or 28.  The bishop’s answer was to go ahead and have the convention elect him, then depose the 61 who did not show up, sort of giving a retroactive quorum.  I have simplified this a great deal, but the situation is very real and plays into the California trial court case concerning the situation of property when not just a congregation but a significant portion of the diocese chooses to leave a denomination together.  As always, check out the Anglican Curmudgeon for the details and keep watching the news to see what the civil courts do with this.