Posted on 08/14/2012 9:02:10 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
CHICAGO (CN) - A group of Baptists lack standing to sue Chicago over preaching restrictions at a summer festival hosted by a nearby Catholic church, the 7th Circuit ruled.
The three-judge panel ruled that the city has no official policy threatening the group's First Amendment right to preach at the annual summer event.
The St. Symphorosa Catholic Church hosts a multiday public festival each year, during which it obtains a city permit to close portions of two public streets to traffic.
In 2008 Frank Teesdale, pastor of the Garfield Baptist Church a few blocks away, attended the festival with members of his church as part of a street ministry. The Baptists carried a bullhorn, signs and banners, and handed out gospel tracts to attendees.
One of St. Symphorosa's private security guards, an off-duty Chicago police officer named Ray Kolasinski, told Teesdale that he could preach at the festival, but could not use the bullhorn or distribute unapproved literature.
When Teesdale refused to cooperate, Kolasinski handcuffed him and brought him to the police station. Teesdale was arrested on trespass charges, which were eventually dismissed, and the pastor was released on bond later that evening.
Almost a year later, the church, its pastor and four congregants sued the city, claiming it violated their First Amendment rights and Teesdale's Fourth Amendment rights.
Three days before the 2009 festival, the Baptist church sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to safeguard their right to preach at the upcoming festival.
The city filed a rushed response, arguing that St. Symphorosa could exclude the Baptists, and that the city had a "significant interest" in siding with the Catholic church.
At the district court's urging, the two groups came to a temporary agreement allowing the Baptists to attend the festival and preach without a bullhorn or large signs.
Meanwhile, the case proceeded in federal court, and in March 2010 U.S. District Judge William Hart dismissed the First Amendment claims, ruling that the city had no official policy violating the plaintiffs' rights.
The Fourth Amendment claims continued to discovery, and last May, Hart ruled in part for the city. He said officers had probable cause to arrest Teesdale for disorderly conduct, but he sided with the Baptists on their claim that the city's official policy jeopardizing their First Amendment rights at future festivals.
Judge Daniel Manion of the 7th Circuit said Hart's decision "was based on the city counsel's misguided legal argument" that the Baptists "did not have an unlimited First Amendment right to preach at the festival and that St. Symphorosa could exclude the plaintiffs in order to preserve its message."
Hart had inferred from the parties' temporary agreements - the 2009 and 2010 standby orders - that the city "continues to contend it can lawfully stop plaintiffs' proposed expression."
During oral argument, the city conceded that its underlying legal argument was faulty and that the city has no official policy barring the Baptists from preaching at upcoming festivals. Though the city's about-face essentially rendered the case moot, the 7th Circuit had to decide if the city's earlier position could be construed as an official policy.
"We hold that it does not," Manion wrote. "A mere legal position, without anything more, is insufficient to constitute an official policy."
The 7th Circuit vacated and remanded with instructions to dismiss.
They have very little publicity, but there are a few knock-off churches around the country, mostly in very obscure places/, that I would consider to be “Westboro-satellites”. I know of a group in southern Indiana that hold protests in a square of a small town and they are largely in the same vein as Phelpsism.
>> PBs... No snake handling. No exorcism. A great deal of Bible, though
Yes, and around here they’re into foot washing, but no snakes. I think foot washing is about as “strange” as it gets. (Except for those who believe that taking the word of God literally is strange.)
Of course, washing *my* feet might be a tad more dangerous than handling a rattlesnake. Wear a mask. :-)
Theologically, I’m a lot more “Baptist” than I am “Catholic”.
But if the Baptists want to preach with a megaphone and hang big signs and pass out literature, why don’t they get their OWN permit from the city to close the streets, and knock themselves out?
So I tend to side with the Catholics on this one.
If the courts allowed these Baptists into the religious festival to spread their message, the atheists wouldn’t be far behind?
As stated in the Tribune article from a year ago (linked above), the issue was not that they were there. It was not that they were trying to spread their version of the Gospel. The issue was not that they were handing out tracts. The issue was the volume level. The signs. The bullhorn.
This was an appeal that this group lost. But even in the original case, that the city appealed, the judge in that case said they had the right to be there, but not with the signs and not with the bullhorn. From the Tribune article: Hart (the district court judge) set ground rules, limiting the amount of signage and silencing the bullhorn.
Public festivals are a big part of traditional Catholic life. They occur on days commemorating the lives of saints and other key dates throughout the year. Those festivals are sponsored or encouraged by the Church as a part of inculcating the Faith into the day to day lives of people. From living over in Europe and having attended these types of things on a regular basis, you can believe me when I say that not everybody that attends those festivals is a regular Sunday Mass Catholic. Not even close. And that is not an issue.
But what Teesdale and his group were doing with the bullhorns and the placards was not "free speech." It was more akin to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. An activity that has never been permitted.
That's true if you reject actual history.
No, it's false only if you rewrite history.
Srsly: (check my tag line) How do you defrock a Baptist minister? Who has the authority?
I do think we’ve forgotten that our polity not only depends on the our being a religious and moral people but also on courtesy. “Politeness” and “civility” are both words which, at their root, suggest something about the arts of living in community.
I think boatbums is on the money. I could see, for example, Dominican friars in their habits strolling through a festival organized by Baptists, but I would deplore their taking a bullhorn and making general addresses as much as I would deplore a Muslim coming to a mint-julep party and turning the conversation to the evils of drink.
Oh yes, forgot about the footwashing. Definitely a challenge. :)
The Parks & Rec security people were going to make them leave but my colleague Pastor Pete intevened and said they could stay if they remained on the perimeter sidewalk (a bit away from where most of us were) and if they refrained from chanting.
So they stayed and trudged 'round and 'round with their signs til they got good and redfaced (it was a hot day.) Then some Christian moms went ove and offered them popsicles, which 6 out of 7 gratefully accepted. Removed masks. Had a few decent conversations with us. Left when they finished their popsicles.
I think we ended up with a more accurate assessment of each other. They saw we weren't hostile spitting right wing nuts. We saw they were just young fools whose bravado wilted under the hot sky, and whose anarchist resistance yielded to strawberry ice.
Doofuses. Kids.
Amen.
Basic common sense, decency and manners would inform the Baptists that it is a CATHOLIC festival and they are guests at the festival.
If the Baptists want a Baptist festival, have one! If the city disallows it, sue them.
Christians act like socially retarded, amoral humanist radicals now.
Well,“If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for Texas”! /s
Reminiscent of Ma and Pa Ferguson..
0;^)
Obviously Teesdale has overstepped his authority in this situation. Baptist Churches tend to be more local in their ecclesiology, but I haven’t been able to find a copy of their Covenant amongst their Church members on the web, but I did find 2 different postings of who their Pastor is for Garfield Ridge Baptist Church in Chicago. One associated with Teesdale has the same phone number as another pastor from 2008 for the same church name.
Also the lawsuit was filed by Teesdale, not the Church, so IMHO, its a stretch, even for an individual to claim their 1st amendment rights are violated when they are speaking in public with a bullhorn but no permit.
God is not a God of confusion. Refusing to not speak with the bullhorn in that environment when requested by local authority doesn’t appear to be compliant with the rule of law. Worse, it violates the order of other believers who established the forum.
Don't you mean some Christians act like socially retarded, amoral humanist radicals now? I would even say that "some" is a very small minority. Genuine, spirit-filled, Christ-centered believers would know the proper way to act and would act properly.
Colossians 4:6 Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.
Can’t be a whole Christian without the whole counsel of God.
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.
