The Lawsuit According to the Others

[Part 2 of a series entitled, "The Perversity and Inconvenience of Lawsuits against Christians Us"]


Oh my bleeding ears! Oh my aching belly! Oh my incontinence! (Literally – the house reeks). Listen to what the Other side is saying:

I get it. I understand. Christians are not supposed to sue Christians over trivial matters. Christians are not supposed to sue the church. We are supposed to go to the church to seek redress of grievances. To settle issues. Christians are supposed to act with fairness and equity while the world acts for selfishness and in sin. I understand all that, and in normal situations by all means we should avoid the civil courts whenever possible between believers in the same church.

Yes! Exactly! What is so difficult about this? Christians… do… not… sue… Christians. Why do you think de Witt and Wingate and the other Commissioners were so sure there would not be a lawsuit? Because Christians do not sue Christians! They spoke at Erskine a few weeks back and said, under no uncertain terms, that Christians do not sue Christians! Why on earth do you think we were unconcerned as we fired the board members? Because Christians do not sue Christians! What a glorious passage for Christians with ambition diligence!

The Other side continues:

Sadly, the problem here is the Church itself. We cannot recourse to the Church because it is the Church that is in error. We cannot recourse to the Church because it is the Church that has "wronged" the fired Trustees. We cannot recourse to the Church because it is the Church that broken the bylaws of Erskine, acted in haste without Christian piety and consideration, slandered people's character and reputation, promoted their own interests, and damaged the reputation of a college that had done nothing to deserve it based on half-truths and misrepresentations of Erskine and its professors.

Oh you silly goose! If you cannot trust the Church, who can you trust? Sure, Synod made this decision and started the uproar. Sure, you disagree. Well ask them to fix it. If they don’t fix it, maybe you’re wrong! Yes, you feel slighted. Yes, you feel laws have been broken. No problem – Synod will consider your opinions and make the right decision (which, naturally, will be to uphold their previous ruling!).

But it is the Church that has wronged us, and it makes no sense to appeal to your attacker. Were this a war, you would not plead with the invader. Were this a game, you would not ask the other team to kick the ball towards your net. Were this a competition you would not ask the other player to run slower or jump shorter or figure skate less brilliantly. It makes no sense to ask the Church that has wronged you for a "redo." We need a third party. We need somebody impartial. Sadly, the impartial body is supposed to be the Church – surely that is what God intends. Synod isn't.

Oh the travesty of your opinions! Of course Synod is impartial! The Commission proved their impartiality! Think of all the people they interviewed – all the professors who spoke up for Erskine, all the administrators who said things were “A-OK.” And the Commission remained impartial to them all. Think of the students who said Erskine was a wonderful school with a great Christian liberal arts education. We remained impartial! They tried to bias us and twist our thoughts, but we stood strong in the knowledge that Erskine needs us. Sixty current students signed a petition pleading for our help – and we will listen!

When is it legitimate to sue the Church? When is their misdeed great enough to warrant civil action? What is the dividing line between “sue” and “bite your tongue?” Our lawsuit sounds preposterous to the other side because in their minds they have done the right thing. Their actions were extreme and possibly illegal, but they believe it was right. So why sue the Church when the Church is right? Yet were it the Commission members who were wronged, were it the students of SAFE who felt the pain of a law broken against them, I have little doubt they would do all they could to right the wrong. If the courts are all that stood open to them – as indeed they are the only impartial recourse for us today – then I have no doubt they would appeal to the courts.

No. Never. Never sue the Church. The only reason to sue the church is if they have turned away from God. You know, as in if the Church was supporting the wayward professors at Erskine. Then we’d sue to fix the problem.

Think we want to sue? Of course not. Lawsuits cost money. They cost us time. They cost denominational unity. And clearly they cost us the respect of some of you. But maybe you squandered unity when the Fourteen were fired without just cause, and maybe we had lost your respect already for supporting a college that really has been very good to us. If a lawsuit is the only way to keep your grubby hands from firing Board members who don't agree with you - including our Alumni representation, no less - then I say sue on.

I don’t have anything further to say. What is it you want? Christians are supposed to appeal to the church. If you had appealed to the church, nothing would have changed but you would have felt better about yourself.

End this lawsuit, we all beg you. Repeal the act. Reappoint the Fired Fourteen. But until you do so, we will ask the courts to do it for us. Curse us all you like and write of God's wrath being turned on us until you're blue in the face and broke from legal fees. I really couldn't care less. But obey the laws of our Erskine, the laws of the land, and the laws of Christian morality in the future, or we’ll sue again.

Thank goodness we still control excommunication...