Truth Magazine

By Spencer Miller

(Editor’s Note: The following article is written by a Christian who is a practicing attorney. Brother Miller serves in a law firm with three other attorneys, two of whom are Christians. Brother Miller has also preached quite a bit in the Kansas City, Missouri area and respects the word of God. Hence, he is amply qualified to address the question under discussion in this article.)

Most members of the body of Christ have become familiar with the civil suit in Collinsville, Oklahoma where a member of the church who had been withdrawn from received a judgment in the aggregate of $390,000.00. The theory of recovery pursued by the plaintiff in that case included the concept of invasion of privacy with a request for actual and punitive damages. Since the verdict in the Collinsville case, lawsuits against the church and/or individual members have been reported in Garden Grove, California; Lafayette, Louisiana, and Del Rio, Texas. As a result of these activities, brethren everywhere are pondering what they ought to do to prevent the possibility of a disastrous verdict against the local church where they are members. Although there is not a simple answer to that complex inquiry, this article will propose certain actions which may be taken to alleviate the problem.

Fulfilling Our Responsibility

Initially, it is noted that a proper course of conduct does not include the decision to stop withdrawing from those wayward members who need to be disciplined. As faithful members of the Lord’s church, we have a God-given responsibility to comply with the commands set forth in passages such as 1 Corinthians 5.

Shirking our responsibility is not now, nor has it ever been, a proper response to adversity.

Consistency

Now more than ever before there is a need for congregations to be consistent with their application of discipline. In the past there have been circumstances where withdrawing fellowship was applied on a hit and miss basis with no consistency at all. Such a course of conduct is not only inconsistent with sound doctrine, but it could also be used against a local church in a civil suit.

In almost every case that has been filed against various churches of Christ, there has been a claim for punitive damages. Historically, punitive damages have been allowed only in those cases where there has been intentional conduct that has been motivated by malice. Malice has been legally defined to include “hatred, ill will or spite.” Like many other matters, malice is seldom, if ever, susceptible of direct proof. Rather, there is usually an attempt to prove malice by circumstantial evidence. It could be argued that the fact that one particular member is singled out for withdrawal while others who have been guilty of similar conduct were not is circumstantial evidence of ill will directed to the person from whom the congregation has withdrawn.

In light of these circumstances, it is imperative that God’s people consistently practice God’s plan for discipline. Inconsistency will certainly not be tolerated by the Almighty and may not be tolerated by a civil jury.

Authority And The Use Of The Lord’s Money

Another threshold question that must be addressed iithe issue of what a local congregatiod may do with the Lord’s money in this context of lawsuits against the church. It is not the purpose of this article to provide an extensive analysis of this issue. However, it has been assumed that there is scriptural authority for a local congregation to own a meeting place and the property associated with it. If that is true (and the author believes that it is), then God expects us to be good stewards. We cannot squander the Lord’s assets or allow them to be misused. With this concept in mind some of the recommendations set forth herein will be more meaningful.

Insurance

Probably one of the most cost efficient methods for approaching the problem of lawsuits against the church is the procurement of a liability insurance policy which includes coverage for claims of invasion of privacy, libel, slander, defamation, etc. Such policies are available on the market. Two companies which issue such policies are Church Mutual Insurance Company and Lumberman’s Mutual. The cost is not expensive. If we have secured insurance policies in the past in order to protect against the loss of the church building by fire, then there is even a greater need to protect the Lord’s property from a rebellious member and his or her attorney.

In purchasing an insurance policy there are several important considerations. First, the policy must be designed to provide the coverage needed. It is more than just a fire insurance policy. Advice from an attorney or independent insurance agent may be necessary to insure that the policy purchased is adequate.

Second, the policy must have a very broad definition of who is an insured under the policy. The definition of “insured” should include the church collectively and those acting on behalf of the church, such as evangelists and elders. In the cases that have been filed to date, individuals have been sued as well as the church collectively. Therefore, broad coverage is essential.

Third, consideration must be given to the possibility of purchasing coverage in addition to the basic coverage. An endorsement is available with some policies which includes counseling malpractice which would involve those situations where marital counseling by the elders or the preacher results in a claim that the situation was mishandled. Also, umbrella coverage may be purchased in addition to the basic coverage which would increase the applicable limits of liability. A question to consider is related to the value of the local church’s property. It would be unwise to believe that a $100,000.00 liability insurance policy would be sufficient to protect the assets of a congregation where the fair market value of the church building and preacher’s home is in excess of $300,000.00.

By purchasing an insurance policy, one item that is covered which is extremely important is the cost of defense. That means that the attorney’s fees and associated defense costs which includes expert witness fees, deposition expenses, etc. will all be paid by the insurance company. Without an insurance policy those expenses necessary for protecting the Lord’s property will probably be paid out of the church treasury. Those expenses could be substantial and could put a strain on any church’s finances.

In The Event There Is No Insurance

Obviously, there are some situations which already exist, where a lawsuit has been filed and there is no insurance. In that event, the case must be defended. It would be improper to simply allow a rebellious member to receive a default judgment and allow the church building to be auctioned on the Courthouse steps or the Sheriff take the contribution every Sunday in order to satisfy a judgment. Action must be taken.

One pitfall that must be avoided is the selection of counsel to represent the church who will not do an adequate job defending the case. There is probably no way that any of these cases may be settled. If we are doing God’s will by withdrawing fellowship from wayward members, then we cannot pay such a member any money simply to settle a lawsuit that is filed against the church. Although it is proper to take money from the church to defend a lawsuit in order to protect the Lord’s assets, there is no authority that would allow money to be taken out of the treasury to pay a sinner for a lawsuit. Therefore, since the case will not be settled, a well qualified attorney is critical.

Perhaps, a member of the local church is an attorney who will know whom to hire. Perhaps, a member of the local church because of unrelated matters knows of a good trial lawyer. On the other hand, if information is not available in regard to the employment of an attorney, it is recommended that an attorney who is a Christian be contacted even in another city or state so that information may be obtained to aid in the selection process. A bad lawyer is almost as bad as no lawyer.

Conclusion

The popularity of lawsuits against the church will probably pass with time, but in the interim action must be taken to prepare for the possibility of such a suit. It is hoped that the information set forth in this article will assist in making the necessary preparation. We cannot allow the affairs of the world to interfere with God’s plan to keep the church pure.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 6, pp. 163, 183
March 21, 1985

By Guthrie Dean

Surely, “to every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven. . . . a time of war, a time of peace” (Eccl. 3:1,8b). I was just wondering if there will ever be a time of peace again among the brethren. Back in the late 40s and during the 1950s, the gospel was going into the highways and hedges. Churches were growing, new congregations were springing up. Unity prevailed, and we seemed to have the devil and the denominations on the run. We were often spoken of “as the fastest growing religious communion in the United States..” Many did not agree with us, but there was a respect for the church of Christ in those days. And in some places there was even envy and fear at the phenomenal growth of the “Campbellites,” as our enemies used to call us.

Dr. Ben M. Bogard, the leader of the American Baptist Association, wrote a letter of warning to his fellow Baptists entitled, “The Campbellites Are Coming.” Churches of Christ in almost every hamlet were growing. In 1950 through 1954 the church at Judsonia, Arkansas, where I was preaching, moved up from 60 members to 215. The denominations were trembling at the thought of 32 such churches of Christ in White County Arkansas alone. We moved to Bald Knob, Arkansas, still in White County. The church grew in attendance from 65 to above 200. And even in the 1970s, the work in Fort Smith (at the Park Hill church) grew, as we worked together, from 135 to 200 in regular attendance, with the contribution growing about $200 per Sunday the last six months I worked there.

This was happening to many other churches everywhere. Brother Cecil Douthitt began preaching for the Southside church in Fort Smith (having retired from full-time preaching), and they grew to such an extent that on occasions chairs had to brought in to accommodate the audience. While Olin Kern was working with the South 46th Street church, also in Fort Smith, the work and attendance were flourishing. Brother Lloyd Nash was the preacher at No. 9th in Fort Smith. And the building was full every Sunday.

But today you can go into almost any congregation and see about as many empty pews as full ones. You see the saintly, gray-haired, old timers and some others of the faithful few at gospel meetings, or at any night service. The young people have left the church in droves. War, contention, fussing, fighting, taking sides, dividing, splitting-the-split, are the rule over the past decade among us. Shame, brethren. Shame on us. Oh, but the hard-nosed Pharisee will respond, “You know the Bible says we are not to say ‘Peace, peace; where there is no peace.’ See Jeremiah 6:14; 8: 11. And you know the Bible says, ‘many are called and few chosen . . . . and strait is the gate and narrow the way.'” Fiddle-sticks! What has that got to do with the jealous, hateful attitudes that we have acquired over the past few years? First we stopped fighting the denominations, and then started fighting among ourselves; then we started fighting among the “conservatives”; and finally some have to fight it out within local churches. I have never seen so many splits over matters of so little substance, as some congregations have experienced of late.

We need peace with God and peace from God (1 Cor. 7:15; Eph. 6:21; Phil. 4:9). We need peace among ourselves (1 Thess. 5:13; Jas. 3:18). And inasmuch as in us lieth, let us live peaceably with all men (Rom. 12:18; Heb. 12:14). No, not peace at any price, but “peace that passeth all understanding” (Phil. 4:7). “Let the peace of God rule in your hearts” (Col. 3:5). And let us discuss differences without anger, misrepresentation, or seeking to reap personal revenge upon those with whom we disagree. May we all seriously endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace Eph. 4:3). It’s high time that we started using all of these unity verses in the Bible on ourselves, and quit misapplying them to the denominations. God couldn’t care less that the denominations are divided.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 6, pp. 161, 184
March 21, 1985

By O.C. Birdwell

A sermon was preached in which sin, repentance, and forgiveness were discussed. The subject was the Corinthians, their sins, Paul’s rebuke of them, and their repentance. Some of the sins of these people were listed as follows: The “sins committed were numerous.” There was “factionalism,” “carnality,” and “unnecessary lawsuits.” They were “harboring an incestuous man.” They were “either deliberately or ignorantly violating the consciences of others. ” They were “not partaking of the Lord’s Supper, but conducting their own with over indulgences and excesses.” There was “failure to properly exercise spiritual gifts,” and “error regarding the resurrection” was taught.

The Corinthians “became arrogant” and “had not mourned.” It was affirmed that Paul’s letter “produced godly sorrow in them.” The letter was designed “to change their thinking.” They then “approved themselves to be pure.” Quite clearly this was after their sin, Paul’s first letter, and their repentance (2 Cor. 7: 11). It was shown that this case illustrates “genuine repentance.” It was also stated that “repentance is not genuine until the offense is stopped” and “there can be no forgiveness without repentance.”

This all sounds good and is scriptural, but the sermon was not over. The preacher went on to affirm that Paul’s letter was designed to change their thinking and keep them in the way of “being saved, ” and that “the lesson we must learn from this is what the Corinthians did in order to stay in the way that leads to ultimate salvation.” It was clearly inferred that while they were committing all the sins listed, at the same time, they stood before God in a saved relationship. It was affirmed that “true repentance removes any regrets and causes one to say, ‘I stopped it because it is, wrong and would eventually result in my eternal misery.”‘

I have no problem with the statement, “We are all in the process of being saved,’ 1 if by that it is meant that we are in the process of trying to go to heaven. The question I insist on being answered is, “Were those people, who were guilty of the above sins, standing before God in a saved relationship before their repentance? If they had died before their repentance, would they go to heaven?”

My Bible indicates that the guilty Corinthians, who were children of God, stood before God in a lost condition because of their sins. Those who were guilty of “factionalism” and “carnality” committed the sins of “envy, strife, and division” (1 Cor. 3:3) – sins listed by Paul in the works of the flesh in Galatians 5:19-21 which keep a Christian out of the kingdom of heaven. To those who were defiling the temple of God by division, Paul said, “If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy” (1 Cor. 3:16). To those involved in lawsuits, Paul said, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10). Those who cause a weak brother to stumble, “sin” against their brethren and “sin against Christ” (1 Cor. 8:12). The misuse of one’s liberties was still under discussion when Paul said, “But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway” (1 Cor. 9:27) and “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10: 12).

Regarding those who denied the resurrection, Paul had considerable to say. He identified the resurrection as fundamental to the doctrine of Christ (1 Cor. 15:12-19). Those who deny the bodily resurrection, also denied Christ’s resurrection by implication. Their false doctrines were dangerous, even to those who followed them with a good conscience. Paul warned, “Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor. 15:33). Those who did not keep the resurrection as part of their faith did not stay saved (1 Cor. 15:1-3). This is not a problem peculiar to the first century. There are brethren today who deny that there is a future second coming of Jesus and bodily resurrection. Are these false teachers in the “process of being saved”? Surely a gospel preacher could not describe those who deny the resurrection as being in the “process of being saved”!

Our Baptist friends have argued “once in grace, always in grace” for years. When one asks them about a person who was saved becoming involved in a sin, they sometimes reply, “He never was saved to start with.” Some of our brethren are not much different. They argue that a child of God who becomes involved in sin remains in the “process of being saved” in spite of his sins. If one raises the question of what would happen to this man if he is confronted with his sin and chooses to remain in it, these preachers begin to answer like our Baptist friends. If this man in the “process of being saved” commits a sin, they say he remains in a saved relationship with God. When you confront him and he decides to continue in his sin, he becomes lost. Hence, why should I tell him about his sin? My confronting him with his sin might cause him to become lost! There response is this: “If he chooses to stay in his sin, he never was saved to start with” (i.e., he never was good, honest, and sincere). The differences in these two positions are too small for me to distinguish.

If one will tell us plainly where the child of God stands before God, after he sins and before he repents, I believe the discussion on this subject will be over. Gospel preachers have fallen on hard times when they can’t tell a person who is guilty of carnality, factionalism, harboring an incestuous man, denying the resurrection of the body, and going to law with a brother whether or not they stand justified before God!

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 6, pp. 166-167
March 21, 1985

By Mike Willis

Each of the synoptic gospels relates the miracle which Jesus performed when He calmed the sea of Galilee (Matt. 8:23-28; Mk. 4:35-41; Lk. 8:22-25). This is one of the most impressive miracles which Jesus performed.

Jesus had taught the people by parables (Mk. 4:35). He planned to cross the Sea of Galilee to go the country of the Gadarene demoniac, whom He healed later that day. Luke’s account reads as follows:

Now it came to pass on a certain day, that he went into a ship with his disciples: and he said unto them, Let us go over unto the other side of the lake. And they launched forth. But as they sailed he fell asleep: and there came down a storm of wind on the lake; and they were filled with water, and were in jeopardy. And they came to him, and awoke him, saying, Master, master, we perish. Then he arose, and rebuked the wind and the raging of the water: and they ceased, and there was a calm. And he said unto them, Where is your faith? And they being afraid wondered, saying one to another, What manner of man is this? For he commandeth even the winds and water, and they obey him.

Lessons From the Miracle

1. The nature of Jesus. Both the humanity and the deity of Jesus are observed in this incident. The humanity of Jesus is seen in the reference to Him sleeping, for of God it is said, “Behold, he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.” The deity of Jesus is manifested by His ability to calm the stormy sea.

2. Jesus was calm in the midst of the storm. While the storm beat down upon the lake, Jesus lay in the back of the boat asleep. He was at peace with Himself and His Father. “In Him we behold here the exact reverse of Jonah (Jon. i. 5, 6); the fugitive prophet asleep in the midst of a like danger out of a dead conscience, the Savior out of a pure conscience – Jonah by his presence making the danger, Jesus yielding a pledge and assurance of deliverance from it” (R.C. Trench, Notes on the Miracles of Our Lord, p. 89).

In contrast to His calmness and peace, we see the agitation in the hearts of the disciples. After calming the storm, Jesus asked, “Where is your faith?” His question demonstrates that their agitation was an evidence of an absence of faith.

None of the disciples of Christ are exempt from trials and life threatening circumstances. God has never promised us that our lives would be without storms and troubles. In these troubles, sometimes the disciples of Christ die. Jesus never promised us that the troubles of life would not cause some of us to die. Nevertheless, He expressed that their agitation and turmoil were a result of an absence or deficiency in faith.

This kind of agitation is similar to that mentioned in Matthew 6 in which a man worries about food, clothing, and shelter. Both cases manifest a man who is not trusting the providence of God and His provisions for us. If, in the providence of God, I must face the storm and even if that storm causes my death, my God is stiff providing for me and taking care of me. I must learn to trust God amid the storms of life. Job manifested this kind of trust when he said, “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him” (Job. 13:15).

3. The fisherman turned to the Carpenter. Peter, James, and John were in the boat with Jesus. These men were fishermen by trade, experienced in handling a boat. If one were going to experience bad weather in a boat on the Sea of Galilee, Peter, James and John would be the kind of men who would be best prepared to handle a boat in the storm. Nevertheless, when the storm hit and their boating experience was unable to cope with the storm, these experienced boaters turned to Jesus, the carpenter from Nazareth for help. Why would fishermen turn to a carpenter for help in managing a boat in the midst of a storm?

Obviously, the disciples recognized that Jesus was able to do something to help them which they could not do for themselves. Although they were surprised by what He did, their turning in desperation to Jesus for help manifested a degree of faith in Jesus.

4. Jesus controlled the winds and the waves. Jesus was able to speak a word and calm the elements of nature. The omnipotence of God enables Him to control the seas. “Thou rulest the raging of the sea: when the waves thereof arise, thou stillest them” (Psa. 89:9). An ordinary man cannot control the waves of the sea. This miracle by Jesus demonstrates His omnipotence and control over nature. The deity of Christ is proven by miracles such as this.

There has never been a modern miracle worker attempt to do what Jesus did. He may try to heal a man who is partially blind so that he can see better, to enable a man partially deaf to hear better, to have someone cough up a tumor, and some other “miracle” which one can never verify. However, there is no modem miracle worker who could dare stand before tho blowing winds and raging sea and demonstrate his ability to perform a miracle by saying, “Peace, be still.”

Conclusion

May this miracle of Jesus impress us once more with His divine care for us, His ability to help us in any desperate circumstance, and our need to trust in God. Him whom we serve is indeed able to come to our help and meet our most desperate need. In closing, I quote the words of the familiar hymn “Master, The Tempest Is Raging.”

Master, the tempest is raging!
The billows are tossing high!
The sky is o’er-shadowed with blackness,
No shelter or help is nigh,
Carest Thou not that we perish?
How canst Thou lie asleep,
When each moment so madly is threatening
A grave in the angry deep?

Master, with anguish of spirit
I bow in my grief today,
The depths of my sad heart are troubled –
O waken and save, I pray;
Torrents of sin and of anguish
Sweep o’er my sinking soul;
And I perish! I perish! dear Master
O hasten and take control;

Master, the terror is over,
The elements sweetly rest,
Earth’s sun in the calm lake is mirrored,
And heaven’s within my breast,
Linger, O blessed Redeemer!
Leave me alone no more,
And with joy I shall make the best harbor,
And rest on the blissful shore.

The winds and the waves shall obey Thy will,
Peace, be still! Peace, be still!
Whether the wrath of the storm tossed sea,
Or demons or men, or whatever it be,
No waters can swallow the ship where lies
The Master of ocean, and earth, and skies,
They all shall sweetly obey thy will,
Peace, be still! Peace, be still!
They all shall sweetly obey Thy will
Peace, peace, be still!

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 6, pp. 162, 181
March 21, 1985