Fairfax, VA: Episcopal suit testimony ends

By Julia Duin
November 21, 2007

Virginia Episcopal Bishop Peter J. Lee avoided cross-examination yesterday in the church's property trial.

Testimony in the largest property trial in the history of the Episcopal Church ended quietly yesterday after two prominent witnesses managed to avoid the withering cross-examinations that had been typical in the bitter dispute.

Virginia Episcopal Bishop Peter J. Lee, whose diocese, along with the national Episcopal Church, is suing 11 breakaway congregations, was only asked basic questions about his occupation by his attorney, Brad Davenport.

This move seemed to stymie the attorneys for the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), which is representing the 11 churches. They left the denomination almost a year ago over disagreements on biblical authority and the 2003 consecration of a homosexual bishop and took an estimated $30 million to $40 million worth of property with them.

"They limited the direct exam dramatically," said George Peterson, an attorney for Truro Episcopal Church, one of the CANA churches.

But Bishop Lee said after the hearing he had not asked for any special treatment.

"I'm very impressed with the evenhandedness and thoroughness of the judge," he said in reference to Circuit Judge Randy I. Bellows, who is presiding over the case. "I also have an overriding sadness that we're here."

According to the Episcopal News Service, Virginia and a few surrounding dioceses lost 15,554 members in the past year, primarily because of the 11 departing churches plus another four that left earlier over the same issues.

David Beers, chancellor to the denomination, was also on the stand yesterday. A partner in the D.C. law firm Goodwin Procter, he was briefly questioned by his fellow partner, Heather Anderson, the lead attorney for the denomination.

Under cross-examination, he was asked to point out where in the Episcopal Church's canons it says a parish cannot disaffiliate. Mr. Beers would only repeat that a parish is a creation of the parent diocese and that if its members decide to leave the denomination, they cannot take the parish with them.

"We were shocked at the lack of testimony they presented," Truro chancellor Robert Dilling said. "After this morning's cross-examination of witnesses, they chose not to repeat that."

He was referring to earlier questioning of church historian Robert B. Mullin, a professor at General Theological Seminary in New York. Mr. Mullin, who was questioned by CANA attorney Gordon Coffee, revised his testimony on the stand.

Mr. Coffee's questions were on whether the Episcopal Church had ever experienced a "division." Central to the case is CANA's argument that Virginia law allows a majority vote of congregations in a divided church to determine which side of the division to adhere to and retain the property. The diocese and the Episcopal Church say the state's 1867 division statute does not pertain to the CANA churches.

Mr. Mullin had just testified that he had never said the Episcopal Church could divide when Mr. Coffee produced a 1983 book by Mr. Mullin using the word "division" in regards to the denomination. Mr. Mullin, who appeared obviously rattled, said he would not use the word now.

"You'd like to revise your history?" Mr. Coffee asked.

"I'd like to revise that word," Mr. Mullin responded.

At the end of the trial, Judge Bellows gave both sides until Jan. 17 to present further briefs for the case. A ruling is not expected until after then.

This article comes from the Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/

The URL for this story is:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071121/NATION/111210047/1002/Nation