Opinion
November 26, 1946.
January 6, 1947.
Unincorporated associations — Church property — Local congregation — Religious organization — Control of property — Trustees — Conveyance to separatist organization — Use of name by seceding group — Acts of April 6, 1855, P. L. 328 and June 20, 1935, P. L. 353.
1. Under the Act of April 6, 1855, P. L. 328, as amended by the Act of June 20, 1935, P. L. 353, the control of any local religious congregation over property conveyed to its use is to be exercised in accordance with and subject to the regulations and canons of the religious organization to which the local congregation belongs. [484]
2. Trustees to whom property is conveyed for the use of a local congregation which is part of a religious organization hold the property subject to the control of the latter as well as the former, and no action on the part of the congregation can authorize the trustees to impair in any manner the interest of the organization therein. [484-5]
3. A conveyance, by trustees who hold property for the use of a local congregation which is part of a religious organization, to a new organization which does not acknowledge the authority of the original denominational organization, constitutes a breach of trust and is void. [485]
4. A group which secedes from a religious organization may be enjoined from using its name or that of its local congregation. [486-7]
Before MAXEY, C. J., DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON, STEARNE and JONES, JJ.
Appeal, No. 83, March T., 1946, from decree of C. P., Fayette Co., No. 1829, in case of Church of God at Markleysburg, by Clarence A. Dennis et al., Trustees ad litem, etc., v. The Church of God at Markleysburg et al. Decree affirmed.
Bill in equity.
The facts are stated in the opinion, by CARR, P. J., of the court below, CARR, P. J., MORROW and McDANIEL, JJ., as follows:
This is a proceeding in equity to prevent an attempted diversion of church property from denominational uses and trusts. The plaintiffs are the Church of God at Markleysburg, Pennsylvania, hereinafter referred to as the Congregation, and the General Assembly of the Churches of God with headquarters at Cleveland, Tennessee, a denominational organization hereinafter referred to as the General Assembly, both of which are unincorporated associations.
It appears from the bill that the Congregation was organized for the purpose of conducting public worship according to the faith, doctrine, discipline, and usages of the General Assembly, but that subsequently a majority of the Congregation voted to secede from the General Assembly, and thereafter the trustees, who held title to the property of the Congregation in their individual names, conveyed it to the use of the seceding members under the jurisdiction of a schismatic denominational organization with headquarters at Pulaski, Virginia. The defendants are the pastor and trustees of the Congregation at the time of the secession and the rival denominational organization to which they now adhere. In the answer it is alleged that certain officials of the General Assembly to which the Congregation was originally subject have departed from its accepted teaching, and it is contended that the majority of the Congregation were therefore entitled to sever all connection with the General Assembly and to withdraw the property from its control.
Findings of Fact1. The Congregation was organized on March 1, 1931, for the purpose of conducting public worship according to the faith, doctrine, discipline, and usages of the General Assembly.
2. Immediately following the organization of the Congregation it determined to acquire a site for the erection of a church building, and to that end appointed a committee consisting, among others, of one Frank Fearer, now deceased, and the defendant Cyrus H. Glover, alias Cyrus Glover, both prominent and influential members, who, on its behalf, purchased from Emilie A. Sowers and Alvin R. Sowers two lots of land in Markleysburg known as Lot No. 8 in Row A and Lot No. 8 in Row B in the Sowers Addition to said borough, gave in payment therefor their own promissory note, and took title in their individual names. Said deed was dated March 23, 1931, acknowledged the same day, and recorded on April 3, 1931, in the Recorder's Office of Fayette County in Deed Book Volume 508, page 412. Subsequently, sufficient money was raised from contributions and loans to erect on said lots a frame church building costing approximately $3,500.00, which was dedicated on July 19, 1931, in accordance with the ritualistic forms and usages of the General Assembly. All of the loans obtained for building purposes have since been paid off by the Congregation except the sum of $120.00, for which a promissory note of the Congregation is held by Walter Glass, of Pittsburgh.
3. By the fall of 1937, the $400.00 note given by Fearer and Glover in payment for the two lots acquired as shown in our 2nd finding had been paid off by the Congregation, and at that time Fearer, Glover, and the latter's wife signed a deed conveying said lots to the trustees of the Congregation, but because of some question as to its form, Fearer's wife did not sign it and it was never completed or delivered.
4. On October 8, 1937, the Congregation purchased from the Receiver of the First National Bank of Somerfield, Pennsylvania, for use as a parsonage, a house and lot on Main Street in Markleysburg, taking title thereto in the names of the defendants Cyrus H. Glover and Frank Fearer, Arthur Chase and Earl Thomas as "Trustees of The Church of God, Markleysburg, Pennsylvania". The consideration paid for this property was $1800.00, of all of which was contributed by the Congregation except the sum of $130.00 for which a promissory note of the Congregation is held by Walter Glass, of Pittsburgh. Said deed was dated October 8, 1937, acknowledged the same day, and recorded on February 18, 1939, in the Recorder's Office of Fayette County in Deed Book Volume 549,
5. On January 4, 1941, said Frank Fearer and the defendant Cyrus H. Glover and their wives, for a consideration expressed as one dollar, conveyed the two lots referred to in our 2nd finding on which the church building had been erected to "Frank Fearer, Cyrus H. Glover, Earl Thomas, Everett Fearer and Dorsey Sullivan, trustees of The Church of God and their successors, Markleysburg, Pennsylvania, with headquarters at Pulaski, Virginia". Said deed was dated January 4, 1941, acknowledged the same day, and recorded on June 2, 1941, in the Recorder's Office of Fayette County in Deed Book Volume 571, page 122.
6. The General Assembly was organized in 1883. Its constitution and laws consist of the Minutes of the Annual Meetings of the attending ministers and lay members of the local congregations of the Churches of God in North America. The General Assembly is vested with the exclusive power "to designate the teaching, government, principles, and practices of all the local churches composing said Assembly" (15th A. p. 50). The executive power is vested in a General Overseer, aided by Assistant General Overseers, State and District Overseers, and a Bishops' Council.
7. From the date of the organization of the Congregation until the winter of 1939 it remained in union with the General Assembly and was conducted in all respects in subordination to the General Assembly and in conformity to the constitution and laws thereof, its pastors having been appointed annually by the District Overseers, and regular reports and remittances made monthly and annually to the general headquarters at Cleveland, Tennessee.
8. For several years beginning about 1930, there appears to have been some dissension within the denomination concerning the true nature of the "Church of God" as referred to in the New Testament and its relation to salvation. In an endeavor to harmonize conflicting points of view, the Bishops' Council adopted in 1932, with the approval of the General Overseer, and in subsequent years reaffirmed the following statement of their belief, known as "The Bishops' Agreement": "We believe the Bible to be very plain in its teaching concerning the church. That there are scriptures that refer directly to the church as a literal, visible, organized body, and that we get into this body by joining is undeniable. That it is designated in the Bible as the Church of God, and should be recognized by all as the same today.
"We further believe that the Bible sets forth the church in its spiritual realm; and that we get into this realm by a divine process known as the 'New Birth'. All who are in Christ are in this spiritual realm.
"We believe the Bride of Christ will be selected only from a spiritual people and that belonging to a literal, visible organized church within itself does not in any way entitle a person to the rapture."
9. In 1939 the defendant H. W. Poteat, a former pastor of the Congregation, professing to be dissatisfied with the Bishops' Agreement as set forth in our 8th finding and with a sermon of the same general purport preached by one of the Bishops at Minot, North Dakota, on July 6, 1937, determined to withdraw from the General Assembly and to establish a new denominational organization of the same name, with headquarters at Pulaski, Virginia, of which he himself should be the head. He thereupon solicited a number of ministers of the General Assembly to join him, winning, among others, the support of the defendant Chester E. Glenn, the pastor of the Congregation, who personally called upon and advised the members of the Congregation to take their stand in opposition to the Bishops Agreement, to discontinue support of the Cleveland headquarters, and to ally themselves with Poteat. At a meeting of the Congregation held on February 11, 1939, a majority voted to do so, after which Glenn ceased to conform to the laws and regulations of the General Assembly, in consequence of which his ministerial license and his tenure as pastor of the Congregation were terminated on March 27, 1939, by the proper officials of the General Assembly, but he nevertheless continued and still continues to occupy the parsonage and to conduct services in the church building of the Congregation as a licensee of Poteat, to whose headquarters at Pulaski, Virginia, he causes the benevolences and funds contributed by the Congregation for denominational support to be remitted. On January 4, 1941, the property of the Congregation on which the church building stands was conveyed by Fearer and Glover as set forth in our 5th finding.
10. The law of the General Assembly in respect to the right of the Congregation to secede is set forth in the minutes of the 15th (1920) Annual Assembly, page 68, as follows: "The names of all the local churches recorded in various Minutes including this one are the result of the faithful services of the ministers and representatives of the General Assembly and when thus received by the said representatives of the General Assembly, they then became and composed a part of the General Assembly. We, therefore, do not recognize the right of any local church to withdraw from the General Assembly as a whole but those who prove disloyal to the government and teachings as promulgated from time to time by the General Assembly or otherwise disorderly are to be dealt with in individual manner and excluded as a member of said church."
DiscussionA local congregation which is a part of a larger religious organization cannot divorce or separate itself from the church family, set up a new independent organization, and by so doing entitle itself to retain the congregational property. The law of this Commonwealth concerning the control and disposition of property owned by religious societies that are units of a denominational system is embodied in the Act of April 6, 1855, P. L. 328, as last amended by the Act of June 20, 1935, P. L. 353, 10 PS 81, by the terms of which the control of any local congregation over property conveyed to its use is to be exercised in accordance with and subject to the rules, regulations, usages, canons, discipline, and requirements of the religious body, denomination, or organization to which the local congregation belongs. Hence, trustees to whom property has been conveyed for the use of such a congregation take and hold the property subject not to the control of the congregation alone but to that of the denomination as well, and no action on the part of the congregation can authorize the trustees to impair in any manner the interest of the denomination therein. It follows that the deed made by Fearer and Glover with the avowed object of withdrawing the property of the Congregation from its established connection with the General Assembly, as an integral part of which it was organized and whose protection and assistance it had since enjoyed, and of subjecting it to the control of the irregular denominational organization with headquarters at Pulaski, Virginia, as shown in our 5th finding, constitutes a breach of trust and in that respect is fraudulent and void: Canovaro v. Brothers of the Order of Hermits of St. Augustine, 326 Pa. 76.
It is true, as the defendants argue, that no denomination can be entitled to exercise its share of control so as to require the property to be used for the propagation of doctrines in conflict with the fundamental faith and teaching of the denomination as accepted at the time that the congregation whose property is involved united with it, but that is not here the case. The defendants did indeed attempt at trial to show such a situation by introducing a statement of belief formulated by certain highly placed officials of the church, referred to in the testimony as the "Bishops' Agreement," and a sermon preached by one of them in support of it, as shown in our 8th finding. It seems, though the substance of the controversy is not altogether clear to us, that the defendants, among some others of the denomination, regarded certain biblical references to the Church of God as signifying literally a visible institution ordained by God as the sole medium of His grace, and identifying their own particular sect as the veritable Church of the scriptures, believed that those who had been received into membership by covenant and the right hand of fellowship alone of all mankind would be saved. On the other hand, the leaders of the denomination, including the bishops, considered inadequate the idea that mere membership in the institutional church would of itself assure salvation. While recognizing the validity of the conception of the Church of God as in its outward life and practice a visible institution, they held that in its inner meaning it connoted holiness of life, idealism, ecstatic contemplation or spiritual rapture, and therefore comprehended all who by faith had accepted God's rule and been born again in Christ. Apparently the desire of the bishops for a broader and more spiritual conception of the biblical meaning of the Church than that entertained by the defendants is regarded by them as "backsliding." In particular they take exception to the assertion that there is a divine process known as the new birth by which all who accept Christ are made members of his mystical body and thereby saved. They have not, however, been able to point to any article of faith ever officially adopted tending in the least to warrant their censure of the Bishops' Agreement, but even if the latter was actually so much at variance with previous teachings as the defendants have apparently been pursuaded to believe, there is no evidence that it has yet been promulgated as the accepted doctrine of the General Assembly, and therefore it is immaterial to the issue here involved.
In any view of the case, it would be a mistake to think that a local congregation subject to superior ecclesiastical judicatories could be permitted to sit in judgment on questions of orthodox belief, since in that event opportunistic desires and ambitions would render denominational authority vain and ineffectual. Nor will we ourselves assume to override an ecclesiastical judicatory unless a departure from accepted faith and teaching threatening to divert property to a purpose radically different from that for which it was acquired is plain and unmistakable, for it is not to be supposed that judges of the civil courts can be as competent to interpret the religious doctrines of every denomination as are the ablest men in each in respect to their own. It should be realized that differences of religious opinion are the inevitable result of moral, spiritual, and social growth, and may not be suppressed if conscience and intellect alike are not to be stunted: Nagle v. Miller, 275 Pa. 157, 118 A. 670.
Finally, it must be seen that to permit the defendants, after seceding from the General Assembly, to copy its name and that of the local Congregation would not only lead to confusion and promote deceit, but would result in material damage to the plaintiffs: Master, et al. v. Machen, et al., 28 Pa. D. C. 47.
Conclusions of Law1. The Congregation is subordinate to the General Assembly and subject to its laws.
2. The real and personal property of the Congregation may not lawfully be devoted to any use not sanctioned by the General Assembly.
3. The property described in the deed dated March 23, 1931, and recorded in the Recorder's Office of Fayette County in Deed Book Volume 508, Page 412, made by Emilie A. Sowers and Alvin R. Sowers to Frank Fearer and Cyrus Glover, as shown in our 2nd finding, was acquired by said grantees in trust for the Congregation and the General Assembly.
4. The deed dated January 4, 1941, and recorded on June 2, 1941, in the Recorder's Office of Fayette County in Deed Book Volume 571, Page 122, made by Frank Fearer, et ux. and Cyrus Glover, et ux. to Frank Fearer, Cyrus H. Glover, Earl Thomas, Everett Fearer and Dorsey Sullivan, trustees of The Church of God and their successors, Markleysburg, Pennsylvania, with headquarters at Pulaski, Virginia, as shown in our 5th finding, constituted a fraud committed by said grantors upon the Congregation and the General Assembly, and should be reformed so as to eliminate the phrase "with headquarters at Pulaski, Virginia."
5. The defendant Chester E. Glenn may not lawfully preach or conduct services in or upon the property of the Congregation or occupy its personage, until his right to minister to the congregation has been restored by the General Assembly.
6. The defendants may not lawfully use the name "The Church of God," or any similar name, to designate any other denominational organization than that of the General Assembly.
7. The plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief.
Defendants appealed.
Wade K. Newell, for appellants.
Frank R. Crow, Jr., with him Henderson, Parshall Crow and D. W. Henderson, for appellees.
Argued November 26, 1946.
The decree of the court below is affirmed on the opinion of President Judge CARR; appellants to pay the costs.