R62.12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
President of Synod Request for Opinion on Lawsuits between Christians or Members and Institutions of Synod The Request of the Synod President In correspondence dated November 12, 2024, the President of Synod requested that the CTCR respond to the following questions: 1) Given what the CTCR has said in its 1991 document concerning Christian lawsuits [1 Corinthians 6:1-11: An Exegetical Study], is it biblically valid, and under what circumstances, for a Christian to file a lawsuit against another Christian? Or for a member or institution of Synod to file a lawsuit against another member or institution of Synod? 2) What guidance might the Lutheran Confessions give concerning this issue, particularly the role of good order in the church (Augsburg Confession 15) and the church’s participation in the left-hand, civil realm (Augsburg Confession 16)? In 1991, the CTCR published 1 Corinthians 6:1-11: An Exegetical Study in response to a 1990 request from the Praesidium to study “the whole matter of Christian brothers proceeding against one another in civil courts particularly in the light of 1 Corinthians 6 and other related passages.” The President of Synod has asked that the CTCR consider how that more narrowly focused exegetical study might apply in actual practice to lawsuits between individual Christians, members of Synod, and institutions of Synod (or any combination there of), as well as what the Lutheran Confessions might add to those considerations. The opinion of the Commission follows. The Response of the CTCR The CTCR’s 1991 document, 1 Corinthians 6:1-11: An Exegetical Study, focused primarily on the meaning of the passage in question, starting with the context of the Corinthian church, the context of 1 Corinthians 6 itself, and the exegetical and practical considerations of the passage. The summary position of that brief report was that lawsuits among Christians should be urged against and avoided whenever possible on the basis of the New Testament’s strong admonition. The concern of the passage is that Christians seeking legal recourse against another Christian through the secular legal system (rather than within the fellowship of the church) run the risk of overlooking the spiritual dimensions of the conflict, there by damaging the fellowship within the body of Christ. Disputes between Christians are always a concern for fellow Christians, who will do everything possible to resolve them and to restore broken or damaged relationships caused by them. Because of their unique position as members of the body of Christ, especially if members of the same church body, they have a responsibility to deal with these matters. In fact, when the church allows its members to run to the secular courts with problems between Christian brothers and sisters and imposes no check on such action, it is derelict in its duty. Every dispute which occurs among Christians, even the
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
smallest dispute, includes aspects that are spiritual in nature. The secular law and the secular court, which are established on the basis of the wisdom of the world, are not in a position to judge the fundamental spiritual issues which are always involved. (13) The study cautions against Christians taking legal action against other Christians because of the potential for spiritual harm done in the process, largely due to sinful motivating factors (e.g., greed, anger, revenge, self-seeking defense of “rights”) that may be at work and to the scandal it may cause both within the church and in the sight of the un believing world (see the guidelines at 16-17). Significantly, however, the report does not assert that Scripture absolutely or categorically prohibits the use of the legal system by Christians, even when suing other Christians. The Commission believes the reasons for the report’s conclusions and argumentation merit further attention and commentary in light of the present question. First, the lawsuits identified by 1 Corinthians 6 are between individual believers in a local congregation. According to the CTCR study, Paul is “speaking of the action of one Christian against (pros) a fellow Christian” (15). In the passage, the singular “brother” (adel ph os) is used to describe the parties to a dispute. “When one (singular) of you has a grievance against another (singular)” (1 Cor. 6:1). “Brother (singular) goes to law against brother (singular)” (1 Cor. 6:6). The CTCR adds: “The original context in which St. Paul addressed the Christians at Corinth involved disputes among members of the congregation and may well have been motivated, at least in part, by the scorn and ridicule cast by the non-Christians upon the body of believers who were apparently unable or unwilling to resolve their disputes among themselves” (15). These are individual Christians within a congregation who are at odds with one another and who are taking their grievances outside the fellowship of the church to be addressed by the courts, rather than seeking to resolve those disagreements within the church. The concern Paul expresses here is for the divisiveness such lawsuits may occasion within the congregation, as well as the damage it may cause to its witness in the community. What 1 Corinthians 6 does not seem to have in view are groups of Christians participating in lawsuits against other groups of Christians, let alone inside a broader denomination or church body, or between denominations or church bodies. However, this does not exempt corporate entities from the principles articulated in this passage that sternly caution Christians against entering into suit against other Christians. Second, Christians should seek to resolve potential legal conflicts with other Christians within the church. Since the passage has in mind individual Christians seeking legal recourse against other individual Christians, there should always be an attempt by representatives of the church to mediate the dispute. One would hope that reasonable Christians might be found to mediate between Christians, as St. Paul clearly has in mind in v. 5b (“Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle disputes between brothers?”). Again, the CTCR study states: Because of the spiritual insights which they have and are expected to exercise, Christians are uniquely qualified to assess problems among themselves and to resolve them. This does not mean that each Christian possesses unique natural abilities for dispute resolution or that others, including non-Christians, may not be in a position to provide assistance in such matters. However, Christians have the mind of Christ. This is their uniqueness, and the church should be able to identify persons best qualified to serve to assist in resolving
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
conflicts between fellow Christians. For this reason, it is “shameful” to take ecclesiastical matters to civil courts. (16) For instance, The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod has adopted bylaws that expressly govern dispute resolution within the Synod (2023 LCMS Handbook Bylaw 1.10). This process aims at reconciliation between parties and involves personal conversation, panels of reconcile rs to consider a dispute case, appeals of those decisions, and review panels, among other by law mandated processes. In most cases, especially those not of an allegedly criminal nature, every effort should be made to resolve disputes at the congregational or church body level. Members of the Synod agree to follow the processes spelled out in the synodical bylaws that endeavor to bring about reconciliation within our shared biblical, confessional, and ecclesiastical parameters. Third, 1 Corinthians 6 does not categorically preclude Christians from filing lawsuits in civil courts against other Christians, especially in cases of clear impropriety, illegality, or criminal behavior. Not only may this be justified, but actually preferred to simply ignoring a potential wrong or an injustice. As the Commission put it in the 1 Corinthians study, The legal system by which order is maintained is a gift of God not to be despised. It may be used properly for certain purposes. The statements in 1 Corinthians 6 are not to be understood as absolute prohibitions against the use of courts by Christians. When the legal system is used and when action is motivated by reasons other than those such as identified below, the use may not only be appropriate but may be of benefit to both Christian and non-Christian. In addition and more specifically, Christians may indeed have a responsibility, if not a duty, to pursue, on behalf of any fellow human being in need of help, legal action against others (whether or not they are Christian) (e.g., in Christians’ capacity as guardians, trustees, parents or other fiduciaries on behalf of their ward, beneficiary, child or charge). (16) That is, whether a civil case or a criminal case, it may be necessary for Christians to file lawsuits, even where the suit is brought against a fellow Christian. The 1991 study poses a number of potential scenarios: a Christian banker against a Christian property owner who defaults on a loan, a church worker unjustly denied service in the church, a falling out between joint Christian business owners, among others. However, there is also a sense in which simply participating in the legal system may mean one is at odds with another Christian. Can Christians not file lawsuits of any sort on the off chance that the suit may implicate another Christian? Can Christians fight traffic tickets if the ticketing officer is a Christian? Can they protest unjust civic action or city codes in court if the city manager or mayor or councilman are also Christians? Can Christians defend themselves in a court against criminal allegations if the district attorney is a Christian? That is to say nothing of court cases involving more nefarious and objective wrongs, such as sexual assault or domestic abuse. The simple fact is that 1 Corinthians does not have in mind the prohibition of any and all use of secular courts by Christians. There are innumerable occasions when the Christian may (and, in fact, should) responsibly and virtuously use secular courts, even against fellow Christians.
2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Fourth, Christians should not pursue legal action out of sinful motivation, which may come with great consequences for their own spiritual lives, the fellowship of the church, and their witness to the world. Though the use of the courts by Christians may be licit, whoever participates in the legal process—individually or corporately—should bear in mind the motivation for pursuing legal action. Just because Scripture does not prohibit an action expressly does not mean it should be done. In many even permissible cases, it may be in the best spiritual interests of the Christian not to sue. The 1991 study puts it this way: “The motive for taking legal action is more critical than the action itself. Action taken by one Christian against another, which has at its root motivations of greed, anger, revenge, the desire strictly to defend one’s own rights, or similar causes which are incompatible with the Christian faith, is always wrong” (16). Moreover, “Christians recognize that taking fellow Christians to court in a spirit of greed, revenge, etc., is a cause of offense and undermines the effect of the Christian witness to the world” (17). That is, there can be a positive use of the court and there can be a negative use of the court. A positive use, as noted above, may entail filing suit regarding something unjust, whether the party culpable for that injustice is a Christian or a non-Christian. A negative use, however, involves participating in any legal action that is cause or opportunity for sin, even against a non-Christian. It is not only the fellowship of the body that Scripture seeks to protect with moral injunctions like that of 1 Corinthians 6. It also warns against that which might inhibit the fruit of the Spirit or the exercise of Christian virtue. Christians should reflect upon their own personal motivations and the spiritual implications of appealing to the courts. It may be better to endure fiscal injury than to sully the witness of the church and to deny the selflessness compelled by our Lord when he calls us to carry our cross (Matthew 16:24). Though an action may be permissible does not necessarily mean it is right. As St. Paul reminds us elsewhere in First Corinthians, “All things are lawful, but not all things are helpful. All things are lawful, but not all things build up” (1 Cor. 10:23). This applies as readily to corporate entities as it does to individual Christians. Fifth, Christians may in certain cases neglect their left-hand responsibilities by not utilizing secular laws and legal courts to which they are subject as citizens of the left-hand, temporal realm. We ordinarily define the left-hand realm as that which relates to the protection or defense of life and property, which are governed by civil authorities such as the courts. Any number of aspects of the church’s life exist in this left-hand realm and are subject to civil laws and regulations. In its 1995 report on church and state, the CTCR described this consideration in detail: But the church is also a social organization—in the Missouri Synod, congregations, districts, and Synod. While it is tempting to assume that these groupings are synonymous with that church defined by Word and sacrament, they actually have one new characteristic: they are also institutions of the temporal kingdom. They usually incorporate, adopt constitutions and by-laws, and conduct business according to Robert’s Rules of Order. While the church of the Word is not subject to civil law, since even in totalitarian societies that Word can still be preached or read “underground” and cherished in faith even in the isolation of a prison cell, the church as an institution of society is subject to civil law. The church as institution can be created and abolished, it can sue and be sued [italics added], and it can address other legal entities, including government, regarding its institutional interests or concerns. (Render unto Caesar, 66).
3
4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
The left-hand, institutional dimension of the church will inevitably take different shapes in different societies. The institutional church will almost certainly have different rights and responsibilities under different governments and correspondingly act in different ways based upon those rights and responsibilities. But the church will always have a left-hand component, precisely because it lives in the world and is subject to governing authorities (cf. Romans 13; 1 Peter 2-3). This does not mean Christian churches and/or institutions simply abdicate all left-hand matters to the civil government. They actively participate in that left-hand realm, whether that means advocating for specific legal or political issues, involving itself as far as possible in the legal and political process, seeking certification for its higher education institutions, parochial schools and teachers, among many other such activities. That may mean filing suit over matters such as religious freedom. It may involve supporting other Christian institutions or entities in their own legal battles against injustice. It may also involve entering into suit against those who may be fellow Christians. As a matter of fact, the Commission believes, it frankly may be irresponsible and unethical for the church not to do so in certain egregious cases. Imagine a scenario where a Missouri Synod congregation knew of sexual abuse allegations against a pastor or member, yet instead of reporting those to the authorities, sought to oversee the case itself. Likewise, imagine a case of mental illness or domestic abuse that a congregation sought to adjudicate itself rather than referring the parties to appropriate healthcare or psychiatric professionals. The damage cases like this might bring upon the church legally, politically, and monetarily would be extensive, let alone to the reputation and witness of that church in the community. That is to say nothing of the real victims in such cases—victims who may have been protected physically and emotionally by duly instituted laws and law enforcement to which the church may have appealed for aid. Sixth, and finally, the Lutheran Confessions commend authorities and institutions of the civil realm, such as courts of law, as divine institutions which may be used profitably by the church. Augsburg Confession 16 says: Concerning public order and secular government it is taught that all political authority, orderly government, laws, and good order in the world are created and instituted by God and that Christians may without sin exercise political authority; be princes and judges; pass sentences and administer justice according to imperial and other existing laws; punish evildoers with the sword; wage just wars; serve as soldiers; buy and sell; take required oaths; possess property; be married.”1 The confessions repeat the fundamental legitimacy of civil institutions again in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: “It is permissible for Christians to use civil ordinances, just as they use the air, light, food, and drink. For as this universe and the fixed movements of the stars are truly orders of God and are preserved by God, so legitimate governments are truly orders of God and are preserved and defended by God against the devil” (Ap 8.49).2 Likewise, in its Robert Kolb and Timothy J.
Wengert, The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2000), 48. 2 Kolb-Wengert, 183.
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
condemnation of the errors of the Anabaptists, the Formula of Concord defends the Christian appeal to civil government for the enforcement of secular laws. It identifies as intolerable the opinion “that a Christian may not make use of the functions of government against the wicked in appropriate situations, nor may the subjects of the government call upon it to use the power it possesses and has been given by God for protection and defense” (FC Epitome 12.14).3 Elsewhere the Apology forbids “private redress,” or taking matters into one’s own hand in order to exact revenge. Yet it accords a positive place to “public redress”: “Public redress, which is made through the office of the judge, is not forbidden but is commanded and is a work of God according to Paul in Romans 13. Now the different kinds of public redress include judicial decisions, punishment, wars, and military service.” (Ap 16.7) 4 The sixteenth-century reformers were presented with any number of legal, political, and military challenges to their view of the gospel and their reform of churches—Luther’s excommunication and the imperial edict against Luther’s writings and teachings in 1521, the emperor’s rejection of the Augsburg Confession in 1530, the Schmalkaldic War of the 1540s—mostly in conflict with fellow baptized Christians. Likewise, St. Paul himself appealed to his status as a Roman citizen (Acts 16: 37-39; Acts 22:2529) as a means to protect himself against unlawful prosecution. The reformers, with Paul, believed Christians could make use of these legitimate civil institutions, including the judges and laws of the first-century Roman Empire or the sixteenth-century Holy Roman Empire, to protest unjust measures, to defend life and property, and to provide free course for the proclamation of the gospel. Summary In light of what has been said regarding the focus and purpose of 1 Corinthians 6, as well as its relationship to the legal context in which we live, it is the opinion of the Commission that 1 Corinthians 6 does not categorically prohibit the Christian use of the legal system or the Christian filing of lawsuits against fellow believers. 1 Corinthians 6 strongly opposes lawsuits between individual believers or groups of believers that could otherwise be resolved through mediation of the congregation or larger church. This counsel should be followed, not the least through the church’s own processes for resolving disputes. However, Christians may avail themselves of secular courts in cases against other Christians, ideally after all other congregational and ecclesiastical options have been exhausted. This is all the more pertinent and applicable for institutions and agencies of the church, which are left-hand expressions of the church and are subject to left-hand laws and regulations (fiscal, political, legal, etc). Ultimately, the Commission does not categorically endorse or encourage Christian participation in lawsuits against other Christians, nor does it wish to ignore the clear warnings of St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 6. However, we do acknowledge that, like many instruments of the civil, left-hand realm that are capitulations to sin—war, divorce, the criminal justice system, civil government itself—the use of the courts by Christians and against Christians is a sad reality, yet a reality nonetheless that must be used at times, with all due self-examination and restraint. Adopted by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations February 28, 2025 3 4
Kolb-Wengert, 521. Kolb-Wengert, 232.
6