A model settlement

The wise resolution of a church property dispute

This week the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh and nine churches that broke away from the diocese in 2008 finally settled their differences over property rights, and they did so in a refreshingly evenhanded way.

Pittsburgh was the center of a national debate about orthodoxy within the Episcopal Church that had been brewing for years. When the national church named an openly gay priest as bishop of New Hampshire in 2004, the Pittsburgh diocese and many of its members objected and began the process of splitting into two separate dioceses.

The agreement that the Episcopalians and the breakaway Anglican Church of North America announced allows the nine churches to continue their ministry in the buildings they currently occupy. The parishes continue as title holders to their property, while the Episcopal Diocese retains its role as legal beneficiary. The nine will pay annual fees to the Episcopal Diocese for the use of the properties and will not be able to sell their properties without approval.

Earlier disputes over financial assets took years in the legal system, rising to Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. This agreement is not the result of litigation or a judge’s ruling. It is the result of intensive negotiations between the two dioceses with the help of mediators David McClenahan of K&L Gates and Mark Nordenberg, chancellor emeritus of the University of Pittsburgh. Anglican Bishop James Hobby called the settlement “quite remarkable, given the litigious culture in which we live.” It allows the churches to move forward with longdelayed repairs and capital projects.

During the past decade, several Protestant denominations have gone through internal conflict and division over issues of theology and human sexuality. These disputes within churches are in part a reflection of the culture wars going on in the broader society. But theological divisions have a way of leading to legal and financial fights, as happened here.

Civility and charity also happened here. When opposing groups reach an amicable agreement in an area of life fraught with emotion, such as religion, they provide hope that other cultural divides in our society can be healed.