A perusal of the
Church of the Brethren Web pages provides clear evidence that a commitment to pacifism is not limited to denominational headquarters: the 48
churches of the Northern Indiana District Conference have joined to urge «the use of nonviolent approaches and interventions» in response to the terror; the Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania,
Church of the Brethren has adopted a statement in which they «remain committed to walk in the Jesus way of nonviolent love, in which evil can only be overcome with redemptive acts of love»; a group of Brethren Volunteer Service Workers have issued a statement in which they «advocate the use of nonviolent means to settle
disputes» and «stand opposed to the increased drive toward militarization»; on October 7 members of
local Brethren
churches (along with Mennonites and others) organized a peace rally
at the state capitol in Harrisburg, «Sowing Seeds of Peace: Prayers and Petitions for Nonviolent Action,» which attracted over 300 people.
Nine years later, in Presbyterian
Church v. Hull Church, 393 U. S. 440 (1969), the Court held that Georgia's common law, which implied a trust upon local church property for the benefit of the general church only on the condition that the general church adhere to its tenets of faith and practice existing at the time of affiliation by the local churches, was inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and therefore could not be utilized to resolve church property dis
Church v. Hull
Church, 393 U. S. 440 (1969), the Court held that Georgia's common law, which implied a trust upon local church property for the benefit of the general church only on the condition that the general church adhere to its tenets of faith and practice existing at the time of affiliation by the local churches, was inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and therefore could not be utilized to resolve church property dis
Church, 393 U. S. 440 (1969), the Court held that Georgia's common law, which implied a trust upon
local church property for the benefit of the general church only on the condition that the general church adhere to its tenets of faith and practice existing at the time of affiliation by the local churches, was inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and therefore could not be utilized to resolve church property dis
church property for the benefit of the general
church only on the condition that the general church adhere to its tenets of faith and practice existing at the time of affiliation by the local churches, was inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and therefore could not be utilized to resolve church property dis
church only on the condition that the general
church adhere to its tenets of faith and practice existing at the time of affiliation by the local churches, was inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and therefore could not be utilized to resolve church property dis
church adhere to its tenets of faith and practice existing
at the time of affiliation by the
local churches, was inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and therefore could not be utilized to resolve
church property dis
church property
disputes.