news-record.com

When Superior Court Judge Catherine Eagles upheld the suspension of the pastor of Shiloh Baptist Church for 90 days, she followed a 2007 state Supreme Court ruling that’s become precedent case law for fighting in churches.

Eagles cited Harris v. Matthews, where seven plaintiffs on the Council of Ministry at Charlotte’s St. Luke Missionary Baptist Church successfully sued the pastor and other church leaders for “breach of fiduciary duty” among other things.

The senior resident judge upheld a temporary restraining order putting the Rev. F. Willis Johnson out of the pulpit of the Eugene Street church until at least August. The church, once at the forefront of the civil rights movement, is also well-known for contentious battles with pastors. It has had three pastors since the membership split and followed the Rev. Gregory Headen to Genesis Baptist Church in 1996.

Like Shiloh, St. Luke’s bylaws gave broad authority to a group of members over the “business and affairs” of the church.

Eagles ruled based on Shiloh’s bylaws, which give the church council broad authority over how the church is run — and the pastor.

Some observers say the courtroom is increasingly becoming an option for churches.

“We are clearly in a time of transition in relations to the nature of church governance,” said Dean Bill Leonard of the Wake Forest University Divinity School. “As more churches turn toward congregational church government, the question of ministerial authority vs. congregational authority takes on legal implications — and because these churches have no connections to other systems, like bishops, for example, they turn to the secular courts.”

In a meeting of the church council April 20, the group suspended Johnson and asked for his church keys.

“They have a legalism that is structured in their agreement with the pastor, of which I spiritually and aggressively fought to change,” said the Rev. Anthony Cozart, a former pastor who left in 2005.

Cozart says the constitution limits the power of the pastor to a “figurehead” in the day-to-day running of the church.

“Pastors often think once they are on board, once they are in the system, they can negotiate the style of ministry they want, and in some places that’s possible,” Leonard said. “In other places, the congregation seems to sit there with a checklist and no minister can adequately meet everybody’s criteria.”

Johnson, who was suspended with pay, said a handful of people orchestrated the action. The membership did not initially vote, as was also required in the constitution, he said.

“My deacon board and the church proper did not participate in that decision-making,” Johnson said of why he continued his duties, prompting the group to seek the restraining order. “It was not recognized by much of the leadership and the body of the church.”

The church took a vote nearly a month later, on May 17, to uphold the church council’s suspension of Johnson.

“Nobody wants to fire Rev. Johnson,” said attorney Camille Payton, a church trustee, council member, and one of the plaintiffs. “The question is, and has always been, will he adhere to our church’s constitution?”

Johnson questions that.

“The reality is it’s very strategic,” Johnson said of the plaintiffs’ actions. “They’ve done the same thing with every pastor. If they can’t get them to resign or buckle them into submissions, the next thing to do is to terminate them.”

One big sticking point between Johnson and his detractors, it seems, is the construction of the proposed Otis L. Hairston Senior Family Life Enrichment Center, which Johnson says the church cannot afford to build.

Eagles noted in her ruling that the church council did not initially take a church vote on Johnson’s suspension as was also required in the bylaws and that a party “damaged by breach of an employment contract” could sue for money damages.

Members will decide by vote what to do before the end of Johnson’s suspension, which runs through Aug. 10.

Contact Nancy McLaughlin at 373-7049 or nancy.mclaughlin@news-record.com