California Judiciary Interferes with Valley Church

We all fear the day when the government starts to take over the internal workings of a church. Well, for an evangelical church in Central California, that fear has become an unbelievable reality: at least for now.

It all started when a small group of churchgoers did not appreciate what the pastor was preaching. While the messages this pastor was preaching were straight from Scripture, they did not align with the more liberal thinking of these few church members. They also felt that they had lost control over the more “moderate” mainstream direction of the church. After the small group disagreed with the evangelical sermons and decided not to attend the church, the church elders let them know that their church memberships would be revoked.

However, before doing so, the elders went out of their way to graciously give them an opportunity to appear before the elder board if they wished to remain a part of the congregation.

None of this is unusual. Disgruntled members leaving a church and having their membership revoked is fairly commonplace among many congregations. It is what took place next that shocked not only this congregation, but also all of us here at PJI.

Instead of following the procedures outlined by the church itself, this small group of disgruntled church members filed a lawsuit challenging the right of a congregationally-based church to decide who could or could not be members of the church. Surprisingly, the court came down with a shocking decision, which ordered the church to allow these individuals back into the congregation.

How could the court make such a decision? First, it completely ignored the religious doctrine of the church as well as the church's scriptural reasons for not allowing the disgruntled individuals to continue as members. But the court didn't stop there. It then went on to make an even more shocking pronouncement.

According to the judge, this church was not owned by an ecclesiastical order (e.g., Episcopal), and therefore, the church was owned by all its members; thus, the members had property rights in their memberships. Since courts rule on property rights issues, the judge felt entitled to decide whether these former members’ property rights were being violated in any way.

Consequently, in this precedent-setting case, if this court's ruling stands, virtually every church not controlled by a structured hierarchy will be subject to judicial jurisdiction over fundamental church issues, such as church membership.

This is why we at the Pacific Justice Institute decided to help represent this church in its case, which is on appeal before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. While we seldom get involved in intra-church disputes, we do take seriously any attempt by government entities to undermine the constitutional sovereignty of how a church decides to interpret Scripture and apply it.

The pastor of this church could have “played it safe” and never preached a sermon that offended anyone, never used the term “born-again,” never referred to the Bible as the Word of God, and never had another alter call. In today’s politically correct society, too many clergy are being asked to compromise in order to please certain factions of their churches. However, no pastor should ever have to compromise simply to avoid intervention by the state!

That is why we at Pacific Justice Institute are putting much effort into this case as we prepare for appeal. The famous phrase “separation of church and state,” coined in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, was intended to directly address this very type of state involvement and control. Through this litigation, we hope to restore the proper understanding to this widely misunderstood phrase, and restore to churches the freedom to govern themselves without fear of judicial intervention.

As our legal staff works on this case, please pray for the church that is undergoing this outrageous assault upon its religious liberty. Thank you so much for your continued support for this and other cases we are committed to undertake on behalf of individuals and churches.