Pastor sues former church member for $500K for bad review

Post Reply New Topic

Paul's idea was that within a litigious society Christians, who ought to live lives unified in purpose and above conflict with each other, should get fellow Christians to intervene to resolve disputes. Christians should govern themselves in that regard, whereas going to a secular body to press charges would threaten to disrupt any sense of unity they might have.

This does not mean, however, that a Christian could bring public charges against a non-believer, though. Nowhere is it ever said that Christians are not allowed at all to ask for justice, not even in Matthew 5. What Matthew 5 refers to is Hebrew law. A strict interpretation of Hebrew law might imply that someone OUGHT to seek justice when they are wronged. But I think Jesus was just trying to put it back into proper perspective for the Jewish audience--you don't HAVE to sue someone who wrongs you, and you might do better to try to work things out WITHOUT taking it to court. "Love your enemies" was clearly designed to have an impact on the Roman occupiers. It also is a reminder of various instances in the OT when the Israelites "loved their enemies" and were blessed for it--for example, Joseph having been sold into slavery by his brothers and later imprisoned on false testimony. Joseph didn't hate Pharaoh's cup-bearer for forgetting about him but instead chose to help Pharaoh. Esther offered no words of condemnation to the king after he signed a death order against her people but rather "loved her enemies." Boaz did not despise Ruth despite her heritage as an enemy of Israel, but chose to love her. Ezra and Nehemiah did not despise their foreign Persian rulers but worked WITH them to help bring a remnant of Jews back to Jerusalem. By seeking to work peacefully with those they may not necessarily have been in agreement with they showed themselves to possess a high level of ethical character and strength. And someone seeking the source of that strength should be pointed to God by the behavior of the believer. I think that's what Jesus was getting at in Matthew 5, not an all-out prohibition on seeking justice.

Back to the point...I wouldn't say that the preacher is necessarily prohibited from Christian teaching on legal action to sue the lady. But I would say that the way he's going about it is terribly mean-spirited. I disagree on the grounds on which you're calling it unChristian behavior, but I would definitely say that it is an unChristian thing to do. Sure, the pastor has a duty to protect his church. But the plain fact is that there will always be people attacking every single church congregation out there, whether it's legit or because someone didn't like that their favorite granddaughter or niece didn't get picked to sing a solo on one particular Sunday, or maybe the church congregation split because nobody would eat Gramma's blackberry cobbler at the pot-luck. I mean, the congregation shunned the lady. What real good do they think suing her is going to do?

How is Paul saying anything different concerning making peace with the brethren and not holding grudges?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Paul's idea was that within a litigious society Christians, who ought to live lives unified in purpose and above conflict with each other, should get fellow Christians to intervene to resolve disputes. Christians should govern themselves in that regard, whereas going to a secular body to press charges would threaten to disrupt any sense of unity they might have.

This does not mean, however, that a Christian could bring public charges against a non-believer, though. Nowhere is it ever said that Christians are not allowed at all to ask for justice, not even in Matthew 5. What Matthew 5 refers to is Hebrew law. A strict interpretation of Hebrew law might imply that someone OUGHT to seek justice when they are wronged. But I think Jesus was just trying to put it back into proper perspective for the Jewish audience--you don't HAVE to sue someone who wrongs you, and you might do better to try to work things out WITHOUT taking it to court. "Love your enemies" was clearly designed to have an impact on the Roman occupiers. It also is a reminder of various instances in the OT when the Israelites "loved their enemies" and were blessed for it--for example, Joseph having been sold into slavery by his brothers and later imprisoned on false testimony. Joseph didn't hate Pharaoh's cup-bearer for forgetting about him but instead chose to help Pharaoh. Esther offered no words of condemnation to the king after he signed a death order against her people but rather "loved her enemies." Boaz did not despise Ruth despite her heritage as an enemy of Israel, but chose to love her. Ezra and Nehemiah did not despise their foreign Persian rulers but worked WITH them to help bring a remnant of Jews back to Jerusalem. By seeking to work peacefully with those they may not necessarily have been in agreement with they showed themselves to possess a high level of ethical character and strength. And someone seeking the source of that strength should be pointed to God by the behavior of the believer. I think that's what Jesus was getting at in Matthew 5, not an all-out prohibition on seeking justice.

Back to the point...I wouldn't say that the preacher is necessarily prohibited from Christian teaching on legal action to sue the lady. But I would say that the way he's going about it is terribly mean-spirited. I disagree on the grounds on which you're calling it unChristian behavior, but I would definitely say that it is an unChristian thing to do. Sure, the pastor has a duty to protect his church. But the plain fact is that there will always be people attacking every single church congregation out there, whether it's legit or because someone didn't like that their favorite granddaughter or niece didn't get picked to sing a solo on one particular Sunday, or maybe the church congregation split because nobody would eat Gramma's blackberry cobbler at the pot-luck. I mean, the congregation shunned the lady. What real good do they think suing her is going to do?

Actually, if Paul's theology is examined in full, you'll find human fate is in God's hands, earned for us by Christ, through grace, of which faith is a part of. Works and love follow if that faith is real.
Then again, that's the Lutheran interpretation I was raised with. Other denominations have a different take on what he was saying.
And yes, Paul himself described himself as asexual. No getting around that.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I think you seriously need to get laid, my friend, and get rid of your pent up frustration.
And by the way, I have never heard any Antisemitic crap coming from the mouths of any mainline American Lutherans, save for that tiny 1% that exists in every group.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Including your Founder who cursed Jews and wished them burned on his deathbed. I do not forgive such things.

The sins of evil Founders or borne by those who willing follow them. Shame on the followers who ought to know better.

Martin Luether was an evil crazy man who founded a church that happened to last. Joseph Smith was a scoundrel and liar who founded a church that lasted. L. Ron Hubbard was a crazy man who founded a church that lasted. Do you know why these churches lasted? It is the followers.

If Jesus is still around I wonder what he thinks of all those bigots and crackpots who pretend to speak in his name.

ruveyn