Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iowa Court Revives Suit Over Satan Remark
Las Vegas Sun ^ | June 11, 2003 | MIKE GLOVER

Posted on 06/11/2003 5:54:54 PM PDT by nickcarraway

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - The Iowa Supreme Court on Wednesday revived a defamation lawsuit brought by a woman who was offended when a church official wrote a letter warning that "the spirit of Satan" was at work in her congregation.

The seven-member court unanimously said that it was extremely reluctant to intervene in internal church disputes, but that in this case the letter had been circulated outside the congregation, and a trial is needed to resolve the matter.

A lower court had thrown out the case.

The case involves a Methodist church in Shell Rock and an internal dispute that drew the attention of church officials. The Rev. Jerrold Swinton, then a district supervisor for the Iowa Conference of the United Methodist Church, attended services at the church and heard comments about the dispute, which centered on differing views about the church pastor.

Court records said that Jane Kliebenstein, a church member, made comments to him during the visit that prompted a letter he sent to the congregation.

"Folks, when is enough, enough?" he wrote. "When will you stop the blaming, negative and unhappy persons among you from tearing down the spirit of Jesus Christ among you?"

His letter also called on members of the congregation to acknowledge that "the spirit of Satan" was at work in the church.

The letter did not specifically mention Ms. Kliebenstein, but she and her husband sued the church and the Iowa Conference, seeking unspecified damages.

The high court said that judges clearly cannot interfere in matters of faith and internal church discipline. But in this case, the court said, "The fact that Swinton's communication about Jane was published outside the congregation weakens the shield."

The church had also argued that issues of faith such as the existence of Satan are beyond the purview of the courts.

But the high court said: "Perusing a standard dictionary convinces us that the term used by church officials to describe Jane Kliebenstein has religious roots but also carries a common and largely unflattering secular meaning. We conclude from these definitions that the phrase `spirit of Satan' has meaning in a secular as well as sectarian context."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; US: Iowa
KEYWORDS: courts; defamation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 06/11/2003 5:54:54 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
...a defamation lawsuit brought by a woman who was offended when a church official wrote a letter warning that "the spirit of Satan" was at work in her congregation.

Just wait until they playback the tape of KKK Byrd using the 'N' word on national television. They're gonna be REALLY pissed.

(Say, shouldn't that be a hate crime?)

2 posted on 06/11/2003 6:00:15 PM PDT by Libloather (Proud member of the Vast Right Wing Fatwa...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
"Folks, when is enough, enough?" he wrote. "When will you stop the blaming, negative and unhappy persons among you from tearing down the spirit of Jesus Christ among you?"

His letter also called on members of the congregation to acknowledge that "the spirit of Satan" was at work in the church.

The fact that this woman is suing another member of the church is evidence "that the spirit of Satan" is indeed at work.

Paul admonishes believers not to take other believers to court....

3 posted on 06/11/2003 6:00:33 PM PDT by freebilly (I think they've misunderestimated us....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Well, ol' Nick, this opinion just makes my day. I have been decried from the pulpit by a minister who once claim that "some people in our midst" have done more damage to the church than Satan." I guess its that time of year.
4 posted on 06/11/2003 6:00:40 PM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
How did it circulate outside the congregation? To me, that's a very critical legal point.
5 posted on 06/11/2003 6:02:25 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freebilly

Nice catch..

6 posted on 06/11/2003 6:05:22 PM PDT by Jhoffa_ (Your Momma SO FAT, when she wear a "Malcom X" tee shirt, helecopters land on her back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Who's paying for all this insanity?

"Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors."

7 posted on 06/11/2003 6:11:50 PM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
Thank you--

Check out this thread about contemporary services. What's your opinion (backed by Scripture, of course)? ;O).

Click here

8 posted on 06/11/2003 6:14:43 PM PDT by freebilly (I think they've misunderestimated us....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Where are the Salem witches when you need them? I guess some God-fearing Christians will do.
9 posted on 06/11/2003 6:19:00 PM PDT by Russell Scott (Jesus will soon appear in persons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
Well, well, well! We're easily offended, aren't we? I don't like what the pastor said, so I'll reach for a lawyer who will get me all excited about stealing money from Jesus. What could prompt someone to get in a tizzy and sue their church? Could it be...
SATAN?!
10 posted on 06/11/2003 6:19:04 PM PDT by Wilhelm Tell (Lurking since 1997!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
I thought the UMC chapter of the NCC was a devil's den, after all hitleray and w both belong to the cult.
11 posted on 06/11/2003 6:22:45 PM PDT by dts32041 ("The avalanche has started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Does the Iowa Conference of the United Methodist Church preach against Satan? Kewl! I hope they don't get into trouble with the National Council of Churches.
12 posted on 06/11/2003 6:23:17 PM PDT by Wilhelm Tell (Lurking since 1997!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freebilly
I don't know if I really have an opinion that's based in scripture for this one. I haven't seen it and it's pretty subjective.

The Pro's: Well, he who isn't against me is with me. If this is truly beneficial, then I am all for it.

A work friend of my mothers has a church that rents buildings and moves about to keep things diverse. They are mostly confrence rooms and the like, but they say that the "church" is not a building at all. The building itself is completely unimportant.. And I agree with that pov.

It seems to work for them and as such, I am all for it. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. So, no problem.

The Cons: I don't want to see worship "commercialized" I really don't.

I am leary of a "Christian demographic" being sought for ventures like this and before I made a commitment I would want to be sure that there was good, scriptural educating happening here, as opposed to a lightshow and loud music.

I am concerned about "professional" ministers who's bottom line is written in green, as opposed to black and white.

Example: I mean, hey.. You want to actually hire a minister for your theater in San Fran, but the market doesn't appreciate God's position on homosexuality.. Then just tone down that part so we can make our comp sales goal for this quarter.

That kind of thing bothers me..

Also, as a personal preference.. I like a gathering of "good ole boys"

Country churches are my favorite. Small, white buildings on gravel roads in the middle of nowhere suit me fine.

13 posted on 06/11/2003 6:30:05 PM PDT by Jhoffa_ (Your Momma SO FAT, when she wear a "Malcom X" tee shirt, helecopters land on her back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Wilhelm Tell
Exactly..

There are rules of conduct, and in fact this very "lawsuit" scenario is warned against.

It's just not acceptable and these people should know this.

Freebilly caught it right off, I wish the parties involved were privy to his knowledge and would just stop this kind of nonsense.

If for no other reason than it makes us all look like fools by extention..

14 posted on 06/11/2003 6:33:45 PM PDT by Jhoffa_ (Your Momma SO FAT, when she wear a "Malcom X" tee shirt, helecopters land on her back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
...a church official wrote a letter warning that "the spirit of Satan" was at work in her congregation.

To win this suit the plaintiff must prove that the allegation made by the defendant is false.

So it's up to the woman to convince a jury that the spirit of Satan was not at work in her congregation. A tall order, given what is presently transpiring.

15 posted on 06/11/2003 6:49:19 PM PDT by StopGlobalWhining (Vote Bush '04 - Extend "assault weapons" ban - Support Open Borders - S517 US Kyoto - UN Global Gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
wait for those living in adultery or in sodomite lifestyles to be told that what they are doing is sin..and sue the pastor successfully....
And of course if they dont change their lifestyles then indeed the spriit of satan
does rule in their lives..and the pastor would be correct in his discernment...yet the courts wont care as activist judges (ruled by satan and their own flesh) seek to destroy the church (and the America of the founders)
If they take each other to court they are doing exactly what the Lord declared such things to be
Of the god of this present world.........satan
16 posted on 06/11/2003 7:16:00 PM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
"The letter did not specifically mention Ms. Kliebenstein, but she and her husband sued the church and the Iowa Conference, seeking unspecified damages."

M/M Kliebenstein want a free ride with "unspecified" damages. Satan is indeed working overtime.
17 posted on 06/11/2003 8:12:47 PM PDT by lilylangtree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lilylangtree
I just finished working on a lawsuit against a church and I feel this thread is missing the point. The question is one of the disintegration of the first amendment's guarantee of freedom of governmental intrusion into our freedom of worship. In my case, a teenage boy made an incredulous allegation against the church pastor. The deacons convened and asked him if the allegation was true. He stated it was not. They then asked him to repent in front of the church, as the scriptures suggest. This he did. Later, a couple of out of state shyster lawyers heard about these events through the boys foster mother (and beneficiary to any award) and had her declared his agent for the purposes of bringing suit and then brought suit for the original allegation against the pastor and then against the church for the deacon's meeting and for supposedly forcing the boy to recant in front of the congregation. Although the boy continued to recant throughout the entire trial preparation time of about five years, the plaintiff called experts to the effect that the recantations were evidence of the truth of the original allegation. Voodoo science.

To make a long story short, notwithstanding first amendment arguments, the trial court ruled that the church could not follow the scripture when dealing with its own members when that scripture may conflict with simple common law tort law in which the government has an interest in promoting. Such a ruling basically means that no longer can a church offer counseling, etc. unless it meets the same standards as secular counselors, which will never happen, since a church counselor relies upon belief in miracles, healings, and the resurrection of Christ in his counseling.

In my research for this case, I found that more and more jurisdictions are holding churches to the secular standards of care for counseling, demotion, promotion, defamation, discipline, etc., and ignoring the biblical precepts to which the church authorities are bound. In short, the government of the United States is taking over the church through the courts.

18 posted on 06/11/2003 8:34:37 PM PDT by stryker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
The letter did not specifically mention Ms. Kliebenstein, but she and her husband sued the church and the Iowa Conference, seeking unspecified damages.

Sounds like the Kliebensteins exposed themselves for what they are.

II Corinthians 11:13-15

13 For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore [it is] no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

I Peter 5:8 also comes to mind.

Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.

19 posted on 06/11/2003 8:56:00 PM PDT by PeaceBeWithYou (De Oppresso Liber!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stryker
the government of the United States is taking over the church through the courts.

Yes, and the sheeple are asleep.

We may yet in our lifetime see the need for an "underground church" in our beloved republic.

20 posted on 06/12/2003 1:53:40 AM PDT by happygrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson