most of the issues First Assembly raises do not implicate ecclesiastical matters and can be resolved by resort to neutral principles of law and the plain reading of First Assembly’s governing documents. We nonetheless conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in issuing the seven mandates First Assembly challenges, and vacate those portions of the court's order and remand this matter to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Trial Court Abused Its Discretion In Scope of Relief In Church Dispute
First Assembly of God Christian Center of Pittsburg, California v. Bridgeway, (CA Ct. App., June 24, 2009) involves, in the court's words, "a secular dispute dressed as a schism." At issue is the validity of the election of a board of directors and of Tim Combs as senior pastor of the church, here challenged through a summary proceeding under the non-profit provisions of California Corporations Code Sec. 9418. The Church operated on two campuses, and Combs' supporters wanted to separate one of the campuses and operate it under Combs' leadership. According to the court, "Counsel for both sides agreed that First Assembly was a 'sovereign' church, but disagreed as to whether the Board or the church members were empowered to ultimately resolve their dispute." The trial court had ordered that a new membership meeting be held and had issued seven mandates to stabilize the situation at the church pending the outcome of the meeting-- to be presided over by a court-appointed special master. On appeal, the Court of Appeals, in a 54-page opinion, held that: