|
By Meghan Maddigan
A CASE decided earlier this year, Lutz v Faith Lutheran Church of Kelowna, provides
a good cautionary tale.
In early 2007, the church was a small
congregation of 110 members. They had recently hired a new pastor, Everley
Lutz. Their National Convention was in July of that year, and it was
announced that the denomination would hold a vote to decide whether to
bless same-sex unions.
Ultimately, a church dispute arose, primarily between
the pastor and certain members, over whether the pastor was required to
consult the church before she proceeded to vote.
Discipline
The pastor eventually formed a Discipline Committee, of
which she was a member, and the members in dispute were removed from
membership. The members petitioned the Courts to restore their membership.
The Court found that the pastor had appointed herself
both prosecutor and judge of a matter that concerned her personally,
noting, “It is a basic principle of natural justice that to avoid
bias, ‘no one should be judge in their own cause.’”
In addition, the Court found several instances of
non-compliance with the church’s own bylaws including the failure to
comply with Matthew 18:15-18, a scripture which the church had specifically
committed to follow. The Court ordered the church to restore the membership
of those it had removed.
This case presents an unfortunate example of the
pitfalls of church disputes. But it also identifies solutions.
This case highlights the need for churches to develop
their own dispute resolution policy. If you cannot address conflicts
within the church, the Court will have to step in and do it for you, at
great expense and public embarrassment.
Follow your own rules
It is not enough to have your own rules; you have to be
prepared to follow them. Faith Lutheran had bylaws concerning conflict
resolution but did not follow them. Furthermore, they specifically
committed to following Matthew 18 but failed to do so. It is a sad day when
the secular courts must instruct churches to follow their own scripture.
The principles of natural justice must be upheld. These
include the right for individuals to know why they are being expelled or
disciplined, have an opportunity to respond to those allegations and have
an unbiased tribunal decide the question. Churches must recognize that
legal principles bind them in these circumstances.
Continue article >>
|
One of the primary faults of Faith Lutheran Church was
that they allowed the pastor at the centre of the dispute to be intimately
involved in handling the dispute.
One interesting observation made by judge was the need
for special consideration to be given to the significance of the discipline
and expulsion.
He stated, “I infer that to be judged guilty of
conduct grossly unbecoming a member of the body of Christ is much more
significant to a Christian churchgoer than to be judged insufficiently
collegial or in breach of club rules by a golf club or other social club
formed to promote social interests.”
Pursuit of peace
Clearly, the pursuit of peace is a worthy undertaking.
It is the wisdom of angels and a favoured blessing of God, appearing
in 247 verses in the Bible.
Peace, however, does not mean the avoidance of conflict
at all costs. As Ronald Reagan said, “Peace is not absence of
conflict, it is the ability to handle conflict by peaceful means.”
The case ofLutz illustrates the need for churches everywhere to develop
peaceful means by which to resolve inevitable conflict with the knowledge
that if they do not find a way to solve it, courts will have to do it for
them.
Meghan Maddigan is a lawyer with Kuhn & Co. in
Vancouver.
May 2009
|
