Posted on 10/12/2011 11:27:49 AM PDT by Dr. White
In yet another stunning attack on freedom of religion, President Barack Obama's Justice Department asked the Supreme Court last week to give the federal government the power to tell a church who its ministers will be.
The case involves a former teacher at Lutheran school, who along with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is pushing a claim that a Lutheran congregation should be forced to restore her ministry position.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State and American Atheists, Inc. have filed briefs siding with the Obama administration against the church.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, and the American Center for Law and Justice are among those who have filed briefs supporting the Lutherans.
In 1999, the Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School in Redford, Mich., hired Cheryl Perich to be a lay teacher on a one-year contract in its kindergarten.
The next year, Perich became a "called" teacher at the school after she became a commissioned minister in the church.
"To receive a call, a candidate must be selected by a local church congregation," said a brief the church submitted to the Supreme Court that was prepared by lawyers at the Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty and Douglas Laycock of the University of Virginia Law School.
"At Hosanna-Tabor, the school board typically presents a choice of candidates to the congregation, and after prayerfully considering the candidates, the congregation extends a call via congregational vote," the brief said. "Once the call has been accepted, the candidate is installed in office via the public rite of 'commissioning,' and is recognized as a 'Minister of Religion, Commissioned' -- also known as a 'commissioned minister.'"
As a minister in the school, Perich taught religious classes, led students in prayer and performed other religious tasks. She was also expected to integrate the teaching of the Lutheran faith into all so-called "secular" classes, including math, science, social studies and art.
In 2004, Perich was diagnosed with narcolepsy and was unable to teach the fall semester. In January 2005, when she could not return, the school hired another teacher to take her place during the spring.
Later that month, according to a brief filed by the Justice Department's Office of the Solicitor General, Perich informed the school's principal, Stacey Hoeft, via email that she would be able to return to work the following month.
The principal informed her they had already hired a replacement teacher for the rest of the year.
The congregation then voted to ask Perich for a "peaceful release from her call."
"'Peaceful release' is a religious act by which a congregation and a called minister agree to release one another from the mutual obligations of the call," says the brief submitted by the church. "Peaceful releases are common, and they leave the called minister in good standing and eligible for a new call."
Perich declined to be peacefully released. In late February, she showed up at the school and met with Principal Hoeft.
"Later that day, Perich told Hoeft that if she were not reinstated, she would sue the church," said the church's brief. "Hoeft immediately asked Perich if that were what she really meant, because a lawsuit would clearly violate the church's conflict resolution policy applicable to called employees. Perich repeated the threat."
The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod explained this teaching in its own brief: "St. Paul teaches in his first letter to the Corinthians that Christians should generally resolve their disputes internally without going to the secular courts for relief." For this reason, the church has developed procedures for settling internal disputes.
A few weeks after the meeting between Perich and Hoeft, the Hosanna-Tabor congregation voted to "rescind Perich's call" because she had threatened to sue the church contrary to the church's teaching.
"The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a complaint against the church under the Americans With Disabilities Act, alleging a single count of retaliation," says the church's brief. "Perich intervened, alleging the same retaliation claim and adding a retaliation claim under state law. Neither complaint alleges disability discrimination. Both complaints request an order reinstating Perich to her former position as a commissioned minister, together with back pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and injunctive relief ordering new 'policies, practices, and programs' at the church."
The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod told the court in its brief that its views on the ministry and the settlement of disputes may not be "widely shared" or "widely understood." "But," the church said, "they have been the views of orthodox Lutherans for centuries."
Acting Deputy Solicitor General Leondra Kruger told the court, during oral arguments, that the federal government should be able to trump the church on these decisions.
"Their submission is that the hiring and firing decisions with respect to parochial school teachers and with respect to priests is categorically off limits," said Kruger. "And we think that that is a rule that is insufficiently attentive to the relative public and private interests at stake, interests that this court has repeatedly recognized are important in determining freedom of association claims."
Kruger contended this did not mean the government could order the Catholic Church to ordain female priests. But, even then, according to her argument, it would be a matter of the government weighing "the relative public and private interests at stake."
What is at stake is the First Amendment and the religious freedom of all Americans.
I don’t think anyone, who is in charge of youngsters education and supervision of dah Youts, so as tah keep dem safe should be allowed to continue, in their capacity when they have clearly demonstrated over and over ...Uh gain, they sleep on duh yob and cannot, therfore, control duh youts and their environment to keep them safe.
The case should be dismissed with prejudice so the litigant can go home and get som sleep.
He would regard him as “bumfodder”..
I’ve worked with hundreds of different horse and buggy Mennonite and Amish, Messianic Jews, Charismatic, New Age, Interfaith, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, and yes, a few Islamic groups, and a few cults. This in addition to all the mainstream denominations. My specialty for many years was clergy & church related income tax laws. Traveled the USA teaching workshops and taught it at many universities and seminaries. I did several hundred clergy tax returns per year in my office and did training programs for church treasurers. Thus my exposure was quite diverse.
Now retired, but still stay somewhat current on the laws.
One of the most unusual was a group where women who were having their periods were considered unclean and were required to sit in the back, away from the congregation by themselves.
One example is the limitations placed upon education by the Amish & Old Order Mennonites. Rules for dating, dress requirements, subservience.
I hosted a presentation/workshop a few years ago by Adel Wilcox who wrote a book on suppression and abuse of women who were told by their pastoral counselor that it was their own fault as they were not subservient enough. She ran a retreat center in PA dealing with women who are mistreated by religious doctrines. She is a Methodist Minister.
What you say is true. There is however, much diversity of application on an individual basis even within the mainstream groups. I have worked with a Lutheran music director who called himself a music minister, obtained a housing allowance and elected out of Social Security.
Funny event... one fundamental Baptist minister client of mine claimed “birth control pills” as a housing allowance expenditure. When I asked him why it was on the list he proclaimed “without the birth control pills I would need to build a bigger house!”
Strict rules about dress and dating need not constitute mistreatment.
For example, the Duggars, presumably Southern Baptist, have strict rules about dress and dating and the wat they run their family isn't mistreatment.
Strict rules about dating includes the parents picking the child’s marriage partner. Yes, It still happens.
Honestly, I sometimes thing we should.
For the same reason a male German Shepard licks his balls.
Nice to see your knowledge is on par with the DOJ, albeit in different areas.
The Age of the Martyrs—especially for Orthodox Christians—never ended.
http://www.serfes.org/orthodox/memoryof.htm
Now it may be coming to America, with the increasingly tyrannical obama regime gaining the power to say who our Priests/Pastors/Bishops may be. We MUST resist, even to the point of martyrdom!!!!
Holy New Priest
Martyr Stefan of Kosovo,
Pray Unto GOD For Us!
Holy Saint Justin of Celije
Pray Unto GOD For Us!
http://orthodoxword.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/st-justin-popovich-of-celije/
The catacombs.
If this passes, there is few barriers to the state telling you that you have to marry gays. Or have an atheist pastor.
The issue before the Supreme Court isn't whether LCMS school teachers fall within the definition of minister for tax purposes, but whether there should be a court imposed exception for ministers grafted onto the various federal discrimination laws and, if so, whether a teacher fits within that exception.
In Knight v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 199, 205 (1989), the Tax Court considered whether a licentiate of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church (a status that was less than full ordination), who had not filed a timely exemption from self-employment tax, was a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister in the exercise of required duties who was thus liable for self-employment tax. The petitioner argued that he was not formally ordained as a minister and could not administer church sacraments or participate in church government. Thus, he could not be a minister subject to IRC § 1402(c). The court rejected this view, and looked at all the facts. In concluding that he was a licensed minister, it cited the facts that he was licensed by the church, he conducted worship services, and he was considered by the church to be a spiritual leader. The court also noted the petitioner preached, performed funerals, visited the sick, and ministered to the needy within the context of his duties for the church.
In contrast, the Tax Court held in Lawrence v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 494, 499-500 (1968), that a “minister of education” in a Baptist church was not a “duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed” minister for purposes of IRC § 107. The petitioner held a Master’s Degree in Religious Education from a Baptist Theological Seminary, but was not ordained. Although his church “commissioned” him after he assumed the position, the court interpreted the commissioning to be for tax purposes, as it did not result in any change in duties. Most significant, however, was the court’s analysis of petitioner’s duties or rather, the duties he did not perform. He did not officiate at Baptisms or the Lord’s Supper, two Ordinances that closely resembled sacraments, nor did he preside over or preach at worship services. The court concluded that the evidence did not establish that the prescribed duties of a minister of education were equivalent to the duties of a Baptist minister.
“China decides who the official Bishop of the Chinese Catholic church will be...”
How can they be official bishop’s of the Catholic Church when the Pope says they aren’t?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/17/world/asia/17vatican.html
The chinese gubberment has a pretend church. Just like some of our states have “gay marriage.” It isn’t the real thing, it will never be the real thing just because they say so.
Freegards
The problem with the hapless Baptist gentleman in the Lawrence case was that his commisioning was an obvious ruse which served no purpose other than to take advantage of the tax code; his duties were no different than those of teachers who were not commissioned.
The exact duties performed are not as important as the duties they are able to perform. It is not necessary that they actually perform them, only that they are eligible and qualified to perform them.
Sounds like the guy had bad counsel.
I had a case where a lay pastor who never attended seminary qualified as clergy for sec 107 as the lay pastor had actually given sermons, communion, and most of the functions of the senior pastor.
I’ve been away from this for quite a few years, but welcomed your points as I am in the process of starting a church and needed to refresh. I just pulled out the IRS clergy audit guide and was doing a refresher. I performed one sermon per month prior to relocating and held weekly study sessions. Now I travel doing evangelism work.
The substance vs. form issue goes a lot deeper than just the tax laws. In some states, the definition also determines who is eligible to perform marriages. In Pennsylvania, there are restrictions. Rather than file for divorce, some parties are asking for annulment as the marriage was not legal due to the pastor not being eligible to perform the marriage service. Pa. did away with the common law marriage about ten years ago.
May God bless your ministry.
Thank you, It’s taking off like wildfire. Send me the atheists, agnostics, and skeptics. I’ll walk them to “knowing” rather than just believing in the Bible. The pathway to knowing and experiencing Jesus is both scientific and logical. A miracle is merely science that we don’t understand yet.
I do not discount one word of scripture. I explain and demonstrate how Jesus did his work and why He taught what he did. At the same time, I teach people how mind control manipulation works so they need not fall prey to it.
My demonstrations freak out the MD’s and neuroscientists as they say I can’t do what I am doing. But at the same time they see it done with their own eyes. It’s not about me or what I can do. I do these demonstrations only to give validity to my Father’s teachings.
For some reason unknown to me, and in spite of me, I am able to read people’s souls in detail. I do not judge them, but help them to become like children by assisting them in cleansing any anchors that hold them back spiritually. If you have a minute, visit my web site at: http://www.thescienceofthesoul.com/ The latest blog post to a neuroscientist on the topic of neurotheology explains much of what I do.
The hardest part of this is getting people to do the work on their own rather than surrendering their power to me. In that sense, I am anti church as I believe that there should be no hierarchy as God likes a flat organizational chart. Everyone should have their own direct connection to the boss and not through someone else.
We are in interesting times. However, if we step back and see the bigger picture, we are in the springtime of soul growth. The absolutely best time to be alive here on earth.
When we see the bigger picture, fear will not cause us to self destruct in this period of diminishing self, but will guide us to go within and realize that their is a higher power guiding us through these birthing pains.
I recently posed a question to a group of psychiatrists at the med school, “Are we denying our patients the opportunity to go through the dark night of the soul and come out the other side by prescribing antidepressants?” Don’t misunderstand what I am saying; “antidepressants do save lives.” The question is, “Are we using them correctly?” I’m absolutely convinced that the greatest epigenetic effect on the human body is consciousness. I do not discount molecular genetics or neurobiology, but seek to find and explain the exact mechanisms of interaction.
Blessings,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.