Calvary Presbyterian Church of Baltimore City v. Presbytery of Baltimore of United Presbyterian Church in U.S.
Decision Date | 12 May 1978 |
Docket Number | No. 1114,1114 |
Citation | 39 Md.App. 405,386 A.2d 357 |
Parties | The CALVARY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF BALTIMORE CITY, etc., et al. v. The PRESBYTERY OF BALTIMORE OF the UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, IN the UNITED STATES of America, et al. |
Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Richard W. Kiefer and Dorothy M. Beaman, Baltimore, for appellees.
Argued before GILBERT, C. J., and MORTON and MOORE, JJ.
The commandment of Watson v. Jones, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 679, 20 L.Ed. 666 (1871), addressed to the courts, is that thou shalt not delve deeply into jurisdictional disputes among churches. 1 That precept is a direct outgrowth of the First Amendment's fiat that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . ." 2 U.S.Const. amend. I. That language, as Thomas Jefferson viewed it, built "a wall of separation between church and State." 3 The "wall of separation" does not mean that courts have been stripped of all power to inquire into disputes arising among church members. Indeed, "(t)he state has a legitimate interest in keeping title and ownership in land settled and secure." Note, Judicial Intervention in Church Property Disputes Some Constitutional Considerations, 74 Yale L.J. 1113, 1130 (1965). The State's interest in the protection of its citizenry necessitates that it know "at all times the owners of property within its borders," Id., so that in the event one is injured on that property, the owner may be readily located. Id. Moreover, the State is cognizant of the words of Sir Henry Wotton (1568-1639) that "(t)he itch of disputing will prove the scab of churches," 4 and it affords the disputants a forum for "some recourse other than the sword for settling their disputes. . . . " Id. See also the Maryland and Virginia Eldership of the Churches of God v. The Church of God at Sharpsburg, Inc., 249 Md. 650, 677, 241 A.2d 691, 706-07 (1968), vacated and remanded, 393 U.S. 528, 89 S.Ct. 850, 21 L.Ed.2d 750 (1969).
The Circuit Court for Baltimore City was the forum in which the parties to this appeal went to resolve a church property ownership question. The late Judge Robert L. Sullivan decided the matter in favor of the appellees, The Presbytery of Baltimore of the United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (United), an unincorporated association. 5 The appellants, The Calvary Presbyterian Church of Baltimore City (Calvary), a body corporate of the State of Maryland, 6 unmistakably aggrieved at Judge Sullivan's decision, have appealed to this Court.
Calvary advances two (2) issues, videlicet:
More ingeniously, the question before us is who owns the church property, Calvary or United?
THE FACTS.
From the "Agreed Statement of Facts," we learn that United is organized and functions pursuant to a constitution which consists of two (2) parts: The Book of Confession and The Book of Order. It is the latter with which we are concerned.
The Book of Order 7 is divided into three (3) main subdivisions: 1) "The Directory for the Worship of God"; 2) "The Form of Government"; and 3) "The Book of Church Discipline." The first and third subdivisions deal with "questions of discipline, or of faith, or ecclesiastical rule, custom or law." Watson v. Jones, 80 U.S. at 727, 20 L.Ed. at 676. As such, we are precluded from inquiring into them by the constitutional barrier, erected by the First Amendment, between the church and the State. 8 We, therefore, turn our attention to The Book of Order subdivision entitled, "The Form of Government."
It is necessary to know that Calvary is one of the seventy-nine (79) United Presbyterian Churches located in Baltimore City and the counties of Allegany, Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Frederick, Harford, Howard, and Washington. United is an association of Presbyterian churches governed by four (4) bodies styled as "judicatories." In ascending order of authority, the four (4) are:
1) the session which is "charged with maintaining the spiritual government of the congregation," The Book of Order, "The Form of Government," Ch. XI § 41.06 (1967), and those matters appertaining thereto. The session has "exclusive authority over the uses to which the church buildings and properties may be put . . . " Id. at § 41.07;
2) the presbytery "consists of all the ministers . . . and at least one ruling elder commissioner from each church, within a certain district . . . (composed of not less than) twelve churches." Id. at Ch. XII § 42.01. It "has power to . . . decide (all) appeals, complaints, and references," Id. at § 42.08, properly brought, "and in cases in which the session cannot exercise its authority," Id., the presbytery may assume original jurisdiction. Of more direct importance to the instant case is the fact that the presbytery possesses the power "to review and approve the records of church sessions, and to require their correction; to redress whatever they may have done contrary to order, and to take effectual care that they observe the Constitution of the Church . . ." Id.;
3) the synod is comprised "of the ministers and ruling elders of not fewer than three presbyteries within a specific geographic region." Id. at Ch. XIII § 43.01. Inter alia, it decides appeals from presbyteries;
4) Id. at Ch. XIV § 44.01. (Emphasis supplied.)
The "Agreed Statement of Facts" contains the following background eventually leading to the matters being before us:
In 1913, the Presbyterian Association, an arm of the Presbytery, acquired title to unimproved land on the west side of Patuxent Street, now Linwood Avenue, and bounded on the south by McElderry Street and to the north by the center of Logan Street, and sold and conveyed a portion to CALVARY in 1914. CALVARY borrowed Eight Thousand Dollars ($8,000.00) from the Church Erection Fund of the General Assembly of The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America secured by a mortgage on the property. In 1930, The Presbyterian Association sold and conveyed the remainder of the land to CALVARY. CALVARY Church borrowed Four Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($4,500.00) from the Board of National Missions of The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America secured by a mortgage on the property. All loans and mortgages have been paid, and title to the real property remains in the name of CALVARY.
CALVARY has been a member of and subject to the jurisdiction of the Presbytery of Baltimore since its founding in 1911 and has, until the latter part of 1975 or early part of 1976, been a full voting participant in the affairs of the Presbytery. For the past 64 years, from 1911 through 1975, the CALVARY session regularly submitted its records to the Presbytery for review and approval in accordance with the Form of Government. . . .
"The first official record of any conflict between the members of the CALVARY session and the Presbytery appears in the minutes of the regular meeting of the session held June 11, 1975. The minutes relfect (sic ) the following entry:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Nouri v. Dadgar
-
Fonken v. Community Church of Kamrar
... ... the membership of Colfax Center Presbyterian Church ... Considered en banc ... disputes is affected by decisions of the United States Supreme Court construing the impact of the ... Kamrar, Iowa, four of its members, the Presbytery of North Central Iowa, and the United ... an impermissible inquiry into doctrine for us to determine whether this function was consistent ... First Regular Baptist Church of Mason City, 62 Iowa 26, 17 N.W. 143 (1883). The Supreme ... Presbytery of Baltimore of the United Presbyterian Church in the United ... 428, 449 A.2d 1190 (1982); Calvary Presbyterian Church of Baltimore City v ... ...
- Nouri v. Ghazirad
-
Vaughn v. Faith Bible Church of Sudlersville
...(citing Mt. Olive , 348 Md. 299, 311, 703 A.2d 194 (1997) (quoting Calvary Presbyterian Church of Balt. City v. Presbytery of Balt. of United Presbyterian Church in U.S. , 39 Md. App. 405, 417, 386 A.2d 357 (1978) ) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). In Maryland, courts resol......