RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Property Prophecy
by its constitution or recognized usage with supervisory and supreme control over the constituent parts to determine all questions pro-
2. Stahism £jucjng gchisms and division between Church. tne members and to recognize and
decide what faction is in the right, the civil courts have laid down the following rule: The title to the property is in that part of the congregation which is acting in harmony with its own law, and with the ecclesiastical laws, usages, customs, and principles which were accepted among them before the dispute began. In such cases it is the duty of the civil court to decide in favor of that faction, whether a majority or a minority, which adheres to the doctrines maintained by the congregation. The only exception to this rule is the case of a usurpation of power in the governing body so revolutionary in its character as to result either in the creation of a new and essentially different organization or in such a radical change of the articles of faith as to constitute an essentially different religion.
Where there has come to be a voluntary division in the denomination where the controlling ecclesiastical authority of the denomination
3. Partic- anows eacn congregation to decide for
' itself to which branch of the division it will adhere, this question is to be determined according to the vote of the majority, and the minority can not therefore retain control of the property on the ground that such action of the majority constitutes a diversion. The particular church may also refuse to adhere to either branch and will not thereby lose its title to property which has been specifically conveyed to it. The rule as to chapels and other subordinate organizations founded in connection with a congregation or parish is that they will not be allowed to secede from the church by which they were established and carry with them the property acquired in part or in whole by the contributions of the parent church or its members, or that which persons not connected with either organization may have given for its support as an adjunct, to the parent church. In cases where property is purchased by a congregation or society to be held for its benefit free from the interference and control of the denomination at large, the ownership of the property is in the congregation or society and will remain with the majority in case a minority secedes and develops a separate organization. The fact that persons not members of the church or society contributed to the fund which was used by it in the payment of land sought to be impressed with a trust for charitable uses does not make them owners of the land itself, nor authorize them to impose restrictions on the right of alienation, the church not being a mere owner under a donor for charitable uses, though the grantor as to the balance of the price was a donor. When a church which has withdrawn from its denomination returns to its ecclesiastical connection it is not thereby reinstated in its former property rights.
Many American churches are strictly congregational in their polity, each being governed solely within itself either by a majority of its members or by such other local organization as it may have in-
stituted for the purpose of ecclesiastical government, its property being held either by way of purchase or donation with no specific trust Self- attached. In such cases where there is c£ver^m8: a schism which leads to a separation into distinct and conflicting bodies the rights of such bodies to the use of such property must be determined by the ordinary principles which form voluntary associations. If the majority rules, then the numerical majority of members must control the right to the use of the property. If, however, the power and control are vested in officers of the congregation, then those who adhere to the acknowledged organization by which the body is governed are entitled to the use of the property. The minority in choosing to separate into a distinct body and refusing to recognize the authority of the governing body can claim no rights in the property from the fact of their membership in the church or congregation. As there was no trust imposed upon the property when purchased or given, the court will not imply one for the purpose of expelling from its use those who by regular order or succession constitute the church merely because they have changed in some respects their religious views. George James Bayles.
Bibliography: B. Hiibler, Eigenthiimer des Kirchengutes, Leipsic, 1868; J. S. Mill, State Interference with Church Property, in Dissertations and Discussions, 4 vols., London, 1859-75; W. Strong, Relation of Civil Law to Church . Property, New York, 1875; R. P. Day, Fixtures as applied to Eccles. Benefices, Canterbury, 1899; C. Meurer, Bayerisches V ermogensrecht, 2 vols., Stuttgart, 1892—1900; A. Poschl, Bischofsgut und Mensa episcopalis, Bonn, 1909; Archiv fur katholischen Kirchenrecht, xxxiv. 50 sqq., Ixi. 255 sqq.; KL, vii. 691-715.