sue church, sue!
30.Jul.08 | community, ecclesiology, missiology, politics |
In this weeks Leadership Weekly email put out by Christianity Today an interesting tactic is being employed by many churches in their communities that will certainly do nothing to create a sense of goodwill or bring about any sort of partnership between the church and the communities they’re trying to reach and be a part of. Here’s the story:
It’s become known as “The Bush Doctrine.” In order to prevent another devastating terrorist attack like 9/11, President Bush announced that the United States would launch a preemptive strike against any credible threat. It doesn’t exactly jive with Jesus’ command in the Sermon on the Mount to “turn the other cheek,” but then again the United States Government isn’t pretending to be a church.
So what happens when a church decides to employ the Bush Doctrine by preemptively suing their local government for a zoning code the city hadn’t yet violated? This week Collin Hansen reports about the escalating tensions between churches and cities over land use. Municipalities are less welcoming to churches buying and building in their communities, because it takes land off their tax rolls. As a result, many are changing their zoning codes to severely restrict where churches may locate.
Some churches are responding with aggressive legal maneuvers of their own—including filing lawsuits before the cities even reject their land use applications. Do these strongarm tactics work? Are they right? And what is the impact on the church’s mission in the community afterward?
Here’s a full-length article in Leadership Journal about the same issue.
I must say that this is a rather destructive tactic, and one that will certainly engender more and more animosity against the church in the community. This certainly can’t be the sort of message Jesus was asking the church to convey…

Chris Kirk |
31.Jul.08 @ 7:11 am
I agree. Churches should seek to find ways of cooperation and enhancing the community around them, rather than fighting for their space. I wonder if the city’s attitude would change if churches began doing more that benefits the community as a whole. When was the last time a church helped pay for a road or health care or police officers?
Adam Lehman |
31.Jul.08 @ 8:48 am
dude. house churches.
ha. but seriously, i think if, as the body of Christ, we start growing so used to the government and social tolerance of our faith, we’ll start complaining about these things.
why should our faith be tax exempt or tax deductible?
we’re so spoiled. may we appreciate our blessings.
monts |
31.Jul.08 @ 10:31 am
Pay for police? You mean that isn’t free? We aren’t entitled to those sorts of things?
I think part of the problem is the church as all of a sudden (or maybe it hasn’t been sudden but a long progression) gained an attitude of entitlement. That’s certainly not very healthy and really, really dangerous.
Jason |
1.Aug.08 @ 9:00 am
I was a part of a discussion a few months back about the idea the church should become a for profit organization. It actually was an interesting idea and in the few studies they did, it actually helped the church out financially in the end, and also made their relationship with their community all the more stronger.
monts |
2.Aug.08 @ 1:49 pm
Jason, what does that look like… a for-profit church? It sounds like there’d be some major drawbacks to that–especially in the generosity department, etc.
Dan |
6.Aug.08 @ 1:02 pm
Unfortunately, the first paragraph really has nothing to do with the second and third. Just another attempt by the liberal U.S. to bash Bush. This could have easily been written without the rediculous comparison to a great president. Simply rediculous.