Questions about Law, Government Power, and the Church
Posted on May 22nd, 2012
The sad story of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod’s Minnesota South District [MNS] selling University Lutheran Chapel [ULC] and planned eviction of the congregation there took another turn, with MNS supposedly serving eviction papers on ULC (reference here, but no documentation). There is a substantial discussion about the propriety of ULC suing MNS between Pastor David Kind and Pastor Mark Surburg, which you can read here.
Here is my question: Do those who allege that ULC is wrong to sue MNS (on the grounds of 1 Cor. 6, which instructs Christians not to take each other to court) also believe it is wrong for MNS to use the courts and temporal powers to force the congregation out of its church? Isn’t that the same problem, with Christians using temporal power against each other instead of resolving the dispute outside of the secular courts and powers of the sheriff? My question is a sincere one. How are the anti-lawsuit clergy reacting to the MNS using the power of the government to compel the eviction? (Or is it a matter of MNS handing papers to Doran, with Doran asking law enforcement to carry out the eviction?)
Another question: At what point is civil disobedience here appropriate? Are there any plans for an “Occupy ULC” movement?
Christopher,
I presumed that it goes without saying that the action of the Minnesota South District runs counter to Paul’s directions in 1 Cor 6:1-11. In the midst of all the terrible un-Christian things they have done it is easy for the the action of involving the courts (which as I understand it, they did first) to become almost an afterthought. Nonetheless, it should be noted that this act, no less than that by ULC, does not reflect Paul’s instruction. My own focus has been on the action by ULC because the MSD was already so clearly in the wrong. I found it deeply disappointing that ULC chose to respond in kind with a lawsuit. I and many others believe that instead of bearing the cross, this decision simply made them part of this sordid affair. My own comments on Facebook have been extremely critical and condemning of all that the MSD has done.
The action by the MSD is indefensible, and in the circles that I move no one has any doubt about this. As I have written, my critique of the ULC action arose out of two concerns. The first was that Pastor Kind sought to justify in public his action on the basis of a seriously flawed exegesis of 1 Cor 6:1-11. The second was that the act of filing a lawsuit was being hailed as a great and wonderful thing. This attitude stands in direct contradiction to the way Paul views such an event. It is clear to me that many have allowed theologizing (e.g. distinctions between vengeance and redress for the good of the neighbor) to blunt the clear thrust of the text. That is never a good thing for the Church.
I continue to keep ULC and Pastor Kind in my daily prayers.
In Christ,
Mark Surburg