Preservation board clashes with church

Catholic mission insists on covering Protestant marker

By MIKE HOOVER
Daily Record/Sunday News

Nearly 30 years ago, the First Presbyterian Church in York wanted to tear down the historic Billmeyer House.

York’s Historic Architectural Review Board refused to grant permission. The board argued that the elegant Victorian Italianate home, built in 1863 for railroad car manufacturer Charles Billmeyer, should be preserved.

The controversy became a landmark national case testing the legality of preservation efforts verses the rights of property owners.

HARB and the city won the fight, which ended in state appellate court. Today, the Billmeyer House stands at 225 E. Market St., fully restored by the church. It is on the National Register of Historic Places.

Melinda “Mindy” Higgins, director of Historic York, talks about the Billmeyer House each time HARB comes under fire. The story of “First Presbyterian Church of York v. the City Council of York” is legendary in historic preservation circles.

“It was our first legal test. It became a landmark legal case in the preservation law books. Since then, we have been able to deal with challenges locally,” Higgins said.

Now, the Billmeyer precedent is expected to be tested in a controversy involving a datestone at Saints Peter and Paul Catholic Mission at 129 S. Beaver St.

Offended by the reference to a Protestant Church, the mission covered an inscription of “New Holy Chapel Church 1973” with a layer of concrete. HARB wants the datestone restored. The mission refuses and vows a legal fight if the City Council sides with HARB. The council is awaiting a legal opinion from Assistant Solicitor Don Hoyt before deciding.

Higgins believes HARB will win, citing the authority granted in the Billmeyer case.

Dr. David Drew, chairman of the mission’s governing body, disagrees, saying religious freedom outweighs historic preservation.

In order to prevail under the Pennsylvania Religious Freedom Act, he said, the city would have to show that restoring the datestone was necessary to preserve the building’s history. That standard will be difficult to establish, Drew said, because HARB has said that after the datestone is restored, it will be premissable to drill holes in the marker and cover it with a bronze Catholic plaque.

“I don’t know how they can defend this as necessity. They are clearly wrong,” Drew said.

Higgins said that HARB said the marker could be covered to address Drew’s concerns about the Protestant sign. But the marker underneath would be protected, she said, and it could be shown in the future, if the building changed owners.

“Our preference is to leave it uncovered. But I don’t think the compromise we offered is a bad one,” Higgins said.

Drew said the datestone is offensive because it represents a Protestant doctrine, which is contrary to Saints Peter and Paul Catholic Mission, a traditional Catholic church not sanctioned by the Roman Catholic diocese or ordained by the diocese’s bishop.

“The Protestants deny the sacrament, priesthood and a visible church. This is a fundamental and foundational issue. We are serious Catholics,” Drew said.

Besides a possible appeal to county court, Drew said he is considering a federal lawsuit, alleging his civil and religious rights are being violated.

“The bigoted aspect of this is they think their idea of history is the overriding authority, law and principle that should be governing this.” Drew said. “That is incredibly offensive to me.”

Council President Cameron Texter said Drew knew the city’s historic district rules when the building was purchased a year ago. The building was built in 1906 as the city’s first synagogue, the Adas Israel Synagogue, Texter said. The building has copper Turkish domes, known as “onion domes,” that are found nowhere else in the area, he said.

HARB’s request is reasonable, Texter said. The city is not burdening, inhibiting or denying the mission’s religious activity, a standard that has to be met to be in violation of the religious freedom act, he said.

Texter, who is Roman Catholic, said he doesn’t understand Drew’s resistance to a 2 foot-by-2 foot datestone.

“His view is political bigotry,” Texter said. “I thought we are all Christians. Do we all follow the teaching of Christ? He is saying the Protestant faith is not a true Christian faith.”

Texter said he is also appalled that Drew ignored city regulations by covering the datestone without permission.

“Even Christ in his teaching said man had to follow the law of man,” he said.

Rob Boston, spokesman with Washington-based Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said York had a textbook case of balancing religious freedom against preservation. He said the city would have a stronger argument if the mission made a major change or altered the building’s historic character.

Boston said he couldn’t believe the city was making a federal case out of a small datestone.

“Religious leaders have a right to make decisions about their own buildings. If members of this church have a strong belief and find it offense, their rights should be respected,” he said.

Higgins said the fight is about more than a datestone.

“The biggest concern everyone has is what precedent will this set. The bigger issue is if you own property in the historic district, are you subject to the rules. It’s a legal issue,” Higgins said.

For more news visit ydr.com.
To subscribe to home delivery visit inyork.com/subscribe/.
Send comments, questions to web@ydr.com.
Copyright York Daily Record 2004 - This article may not be printed or published without permission

Saints Peter and Paul RCM Home Page