Judge Stanley Ott said he recognized that the civil courts were barred from making any judgments about ecclesiastical authority, but said he recognized that church property cases could be heard based on "neutral principles".

Both attorneys cited the case of St. James the Less, a parish in the Diocese of Pennsylvania that fought and lost in a property dispute with the diocese.

Ruggio argued that the Good Shepherd case is distinguishable from St. James the Less because Good Shepherd did not set up a separate corporation. "The church (St. James) took an affirmative legal step to leave The Episcopal Church and through legal action to remove itself from the diocese and national church that provided a bright line," he said.

St. James set up a separate corporation that the courts do not recognize.

Judge Ott cited par. 26 in one of the pleadings which said that Good Shepherd is no longer a constituent part of the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Pennsylvania."By normal English definition" it seemed clear to him that the parish had done so, he said.

Ruggio said the parish has not left TEC, that nothing has changed to indicate that they have left, and this was so since the church was founded in 1910.

Kohart argued that since Moyer has been deposed and is no longer a priest in The Episcopal and is now in fact a bishop in another Anglican jurisdiction not recognized by either The Episcopal Church or the Archbishop of Canterbury, he therefore has no claim to the property.

Ruggio argued that the defrocking of Fr. Moyer was not recognized by the then Archbishop of Canterbury (George Carey) and numerous other Anglican provinces, that he never released himself as an Episcopal priest nor did he remove himself actively from The Episcopal Church.

Ruggio said there had been no formal act of disassociation since 2002 and that nothing has happened or changed in eight years. He asked why the Episcopal Church is now interested in the property some eight years later. He said the Vestry is immune from civil liability and that this is also an issue in the stature of limitations. Judge Ott said there is nothing clearer than the statute of limitations.

In her remarks, Kohart said these are jurisdictional issues and cited "neutral principles." She said the diocese and Good Shepherd are voluntary members of a non-profit association setting aside the religious rules. The property is held in trust for the Diocese and The Episcopal Church.

"This case is stronger than St. James because the property deed has trust language...that the church may use it and by certified by the church. In a hierarchical church if a determination has been made, then the courts must enforce it." She said the highest body for a church is the diocese.

Judge Ott: The Diocese is an autonomy?

Kohart: That is true.

Judge Ott: Is it recognized by other jurisdictions?

Kohart: The Archbishop of Canterbury has no authority over The Episcopal Church.

Judge Ott: Can you have multiple ordinations?

Kohart: You cannot be a rabbi and an Episcopal priest.

Judge Ott: You can't be a rabbi and a priest in The Episcopal Church?

Kohart: No.

Judge Ott: Moyer has no right to be a priest in the Diocese of Pennsylvania?

Kohart: The church (parish) must get an Episcopal priest. This Episcopal parish has thumbed its nose at the Diocese. Past parishioners put money for the trust and deed and worship in an Episcopal Church. His (Fr. Moyer's) jurisdiction is an interference. Paragraph 38 says this property is held in trust for The Episcopal Church.

In an earlier e-mail to VOL Earl Whipple, parish spokesman
said, "We're deeply disappointed that the leaders of the Episcopal Diocese of PA want to confiscate the assets and property of an active, diverse, community-based church celebrating its 140th year of worship."

The hearing was adjourned.