Now ELCA wants it back and is going to court for it.
Hey, ELCA, we thought only Missouri did that!
American Lutheran Publicity Bureau
Here's an interesting story. One of the congregations that has left the ELCA in the Sierra Pacific is Life Lutheran Church, Richmond, CA, one of two Chinese ministries in the synod (the other one left as well). Some years ago they had been given the property of a closed congregation (closed, actually, if I recall correctly, by the present pastor of herchurch.org). Now the synod's attorneys are telling them that they must vacate the property and turn it back to the synod. The justification for this is that when the synod deeded the property to the congregation, there was a clause in the deed saying that it would revert to the synod should it ever ceased to be used in mission in the furtherance of "this church." Now "this church" clearly is the way the ELCA refers to itself (rather grandiosely, IMO), and in the ELCA constitution it is clear that when they say "this church" it's the ELCA they are talking about. It does not, however--or so I've been told--say this in the deed by which the property was conveyed to the congregation. And so the legal question is an interesting one, since one has to read it against the clear constitutional provision that when a congregation leaves to affiliate with another Lutheran denomination (and they have affiliated with LCMC, as I understand it), they keep the property.
Interesting legal questions aside, I'm astonished that the synod wants to put itself in the situation of bringing suit to recover property given to an ethnic minority congregation, located in a place where the ELCA had been unable to keep a viable congregation going.
I have to admit that I have a special feeling about this congregation, since before they were given this property by the synod, they rented space from a Methodist congregation that was my first assignment in my previous life (though that was long after I was gone).
