There's more songs at this link sung by Al Smith:
AndersonsInfo
JoinedPosts by AndersonsInfo
-
5
FORMER ELDER, Al Smith, performs his unique Rock and Soul in Times Square, New York, August 25, 13
by AndersonsInfo inal smith performs at ecofest in times square 8.25.13!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnapbhregu8 play videoal smith performs his unique brand of rock and soul at the 2013 ecofest at times square!
he gives an electrifying rock 'n soul treatment to the classics "what's going on?
-
-
-
5
FORMER ELDER, Al Smith, performs his unique Rock and Soul in Times Square, New York, August 25, 13
by AndersonsInfo inal smith performs at ecofest in times square 8.25.13!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnapbhregu8 play videoal smith performs his unique brand of rock and soul at the 2013 ecofest at times square!
he gives an electrifying rock 'n soul treatment to the classics "what's going on?
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Al Smith performs at Ecofest in Times Square 8.25.13! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNAPBHrEgU8
Play video Al Smith performs his unique brand of Rock and Soul at the 2013 Ecofest at Times Square! He gives an electrifying Rock 'n Soul treatment to the classics "What's Going On?" "Like a Rolling Stone" his… 00:07:50 Added on 9/20/13 301 views -
30
My Review for Terry's new book, "I Wept by the Rivers of Babylon, A Prisoner of Conscience in a Time of War"
by AndersonsInfo ingrappling with conscience .
a must read, i wept by the rivers of babylon,a prisoner of conscience in a time of war, is an important self-portrait of a naive young man, terry walstrom, who in 1967 thought he was obeying his conscience when he refused to take up arms and kill.
inasmuch as he was a conscientious objector, walstrom could have availed himself of noncombatant service in the military, but he was opposed to that arrangement.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Grappling with Conscience
A must read, I Wept by the Rivers of Babylon,A Prisoner of Conscience in a Time of War, is an important self-portrait of a naïve young man, Terry Walstrom, who in 1967 thought he was obeying his conscience when he refused to take up arms and kill. Inasmuch as he was a conscientious objector, Walstrom could have availed himself of noncombatant service in the military, but he was opposed to that arrangement. Under the circumstances, his Ft. Worth, Texas, draft board offered him alternative service to do “work of national importance under civilian direction” at Terrell State Hospital which he also refused.At no time was Walstrom’s choice, “Go to Viet Nam or go to prison.” Rather, it was, accept community service or go to prison. This choice is really the heart of Walstrom’s narrative. Why didn’t he take what was offered?
Walstrom was one of Jehovah’s Witnesses and to them any community service work was merely a substitute for military service, therefore unacceptable. Later, he was stunned to learn that he had endured imprisonment along with unspeakable abuse and humiliation for an arbitrary religious policy. As he grappled with the aftermath of examining the whys of his choices and after researching the history of the religion he chose when a youngster, Walstrom realized that all of Jehovah’s Witnesses religious policies are not, as claimed, an option of conscience for believers.
Walstrom’s narrative bursts with perceptive self-scrutiny and thoughtful reflection on the issues of war and conscience mixed with wry humor. When the unapprised reader walks through the door into Walstrom’s world of personal discovery, upon exiting, this complex tale will be a cause for reflection concerning the harm a seemingly harmless religion has caused to believers and non-believers alike since its founding in 1879.
Barbara Anderson
The above Review is one I want to post on Amazon.com. Terry is one of our favorite writers here on JWN and his book is one of those, "Can't put down the book" stories. Over the many years we were JWs, Joe and I met quite a number of JWs that went to prison rather than in anyway serve in the military, but very few of them wanted to share their personal account of what happened in prison.
Thank you, Terry, for telling us about what usually nobody wants to talk about.
-
65
1975 - The Killer WT quote
by tim hooper inone thing is absolutely certain, bible chronology reinforced with fulfilled bible prophecy shows that six thousand years of mans existence will soon be up, yes, within this generation!
(matt.
24:34) this is, therefore, no time to be indifferent and complacent.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
After the Governing Body elected Fred Franz to be the fourth president of the Watch Tower’s Pennsylvania Corporation following the death of Nathan H. Knorr in 1977, Harry Peloyan, Awake! editor, told me he went to Lloyd Barry’s office to make it known exactly how he felt about the appointment. His disgust knew no bounds because it was Fred Franz who developed the argument that the end of 6,000 years of man's existence would end in 1975. Harry laid the following paragraph squarely in Franz’s lap:
"The observation that 1975 may well mark the beginning of mankind's great Jubilee has intrigued many. According to the Bible timetable, man's history on earth has been nearly 6,000 years. Adam was created in 4026 B.C.E., which means that six thousand years of human history end about the fall of 1975 C.E. We are in the great 7,000-year rest day of God, starting at the time he rested after the creation of Adam and Eve. There are, therefore, a thousand years left to run. Without Satan and his demons to disturb mankind it will indeed be a restful time. It will be like a sabbath."
Watchtower 7/15/67 pg.446-7Peloyan told Lloyd Barry that he blamed Franz for the exodus of 500,000 disenchanted Witnesses after 1975 who, he said, would die at Armageddon. I remember hearing the forcefulness in Harry’s voice when he repeated to me what he told Lloyd, “And you reward this man for such travesty by making him president.”
-
22
See Kathleen (Candace's mother) Conti's appearance on CBS Sacramento TV this evening - (Program about Calif. Bill SB131) - JW abused her too
by AndersonsInfo in.
.
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/video/9288079-church-sex-abuse-victims-cheer-bill-heading-to-gov-browns-desk/ reporter's transcript: http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/09/09/church-sex-abuse-victims-cheer-bill-heading-to-gov-browns-desk/
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Many thanks to "Sol Reform" for starting a thread a while ago about a proposed law, SB 131. Sol's tracking of SB 131 in subsequent posts helped many of us keep up with how the bill was faring on it's way to Governor Brown's desk.
If Gov. Brown signs SB 131 into law, 2014 will be a year when the statute of limitations for reporting child abuse by victims over 26 will be removed just like back in 2003 when many JW victims in California contacted attorneys Love and Norris in Ft. Worth, Texas, who filed lawsuits in their behalf in California courts.
In 2007, WT settled out-of-court with sixteen (16) victims in nine (lawsuits). Seven (7) of those lawsuits were California cases that were filed during 2003 when California's statute of limitations was lifted for only that year. Hopefully, many JW victims over the age of 26 will come forward during 2014 to file lawsuits against the Watchtower if Gov. Brown signs SB 131 into law.
How about California XJWs calling Gov. Brown's office to encourage him?
Barbara
-
22
See Kathleen (Candace's mother) Conti's appearance on CBS Sacramento TV this evening - (Program about Calif. Bill SB131) - JW abused her too
by AndersonsInfo in.
.
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/video/9288079-church-sex-abuse-victims-cheer-bill-heading-to-gov-browns-desk/ reporter's transcript: http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/09/09/church-sex-abuse-victims-cheer-bill-heading-to-gov-browns-desk/
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Another link - this one to the CBS reporter's transcript of her interview with Kathleen Conti
STOCKTON (CBS13) — Victims of church sex abuse may get more time to sue religious organizations and those who abused them under a bill heading to the governor’s desk.
“It’s very exciting and we are very hopeful.”
Kathleen Conti is pleased the senate passed SB131. The Stockton woman says she was abused by a Jehovah’s Witness leader when she was a teenager, and a family member also became a victim.
“The only way you are going to stop pedophiles is to identify them and warn people—allow us as parents to know who they are within our congregations. Otherwise, how do we know? How can we protect other children.”
Lawmakers say the bill corrects a Supreme Court case that, because the statute of limitations had been reached, denied a narrow group of child sex-abuse victims the right sue religious organizations, private and nonprofit groups that employed their abusers.
“If we didn’t do it, the law would still be invalid and the people would waiting on the legislature to see if we wanted to correct the law,” said Sen. Jim Beall.
Under the proposed law, victims over the age of 26 in 2003 will have a chance to file lawsuits during a one-year period.
In a statement, the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, or SNAP, said, “Institutions should and must be held accountable when they know about abuse, do nothing to stop it, and allow abusers to move on and target other innocent children. The passage of SB 131 is the first step in a long civil rights battle for all victims of child sexual abuse.”
It’s not clear how the proposed bill would affect the Diocese of Stockton, which is considering bankruptcy after paying out millions of dollars to settle child sex-abuse lawsuits.
The bill passed the Senate on Friday and it’s on its way to Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk.
-
22
See Kathleen (Candace's mother) Conti's appearance on CBS Sacramento TV this evening - (Program about Calif. Bill SB131) - JW abused her too
by AndersonsInfo in.
.
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/video/9288079-church-sex-abuse-victims-cheer-bill-heading-to-gov-browns-desk/ reporter's transcript: http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/09/09/church-sex-abuse-victims-cheer-bill-heading-to-gov-browns-desk/
-
-
-
30
Newspaper Article: Press Telegram-JWS BRING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO LONG BEACH - (JW beliefs discussed including date setting)
by AndersonsInfo inhttp://www.presstelegram.com/social-affairs/20130829/jehovahs-witnesses-bring-millions-of-dollars-to-long-beach#comments.
go to the website to read the comments by xjws.. jehovahs witnesses bring millions of dollars to long beach.
jehovah's witnesses hold a series of regional conventions in long beach every summer, bringing some 150,000 witnesses from across the southland over the course of 15 weekends.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Go to the website to read the comments by XJWs.
Jehovah’s Witnesses bring millions of dollars to Long Beach
Jehovah's Witnesses hold a series of regional conventions in Long Beach every summer, bringing some 150,000 Witnesses from across the Southland over the course of 15 weekends. Jehovah's Witnesses Howard and Carrie Martinez invite the public to come and attend " God's Word Is Truth," a three day convention August 30 through September at the Long Beach Convention Center Arena. (Photo by Sean Hiller/ Staff Photographer)By Rebecca Kimitch, Long Beach Press Telegram
Posted: 08/29/13, 8:36 PM PDT |Fast cars bring a lot of cash to Long Beach. But religion brings even more.
Every year, 150,000 to 180,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses hold their conventions here, generating an estimated $64.5 million in economic impact, according to the Long Beach Convention and Visitors Bureau.
By comparison, the economic boon of the Toyota Grand Prix of Long Beach is a mere $40 million.
In fairness, the Jehovah’s Witness gathering isn’t a single weekend. Instead, a series of conventions are held over 15 weekends during the summer, including this weekend.
Each draws 10,000 to 12,000 Witnesses from throughout the Southland. And anyone who is downtown this weekend will be able to recognize them — well-dressed, sporting badges that read “God’s word is truth” and perhaps carrying their trademark Awake! and The Watchtower pamphlets.
“We have a great relationship with Long Beach. The city fathers have been just wonderful to us,” convention spokesman Howard Martinez said. “And we’ve been good to the city. We are very respectful. We hope to set an example on human living, and I think that has led to the fine reception we get in Long Beach.”
Local businesses say they see an uptick in business, though spread out over 15 weekends it doesn’t feel anything like the annual weekend packed with racing enthusiasts.
“We see a bump in revenue. It can be up to 15 percent when (the Witnesses) are in town, but it is not every time,” said Ken Stewart, general manager of Broadway Pizza and Grill.
“It’s noticeable but not substantial,” agreed Ernie Romo, general manager of King’s Fish House on Broadway. Romo said the restaurant gets a handful of additional tables in for early dinner when the Witnesses are in town.
Still, collectively the conventions are directly responsible for an estimated $335,000 in transient occupancy tax collected by the city every year, according to the visitors bureau.
Years ago, the Witnesses’ Los Angeles region had one large convention at Dodgers Stadium, but as it grew in popularity, in 1994 leaders moved the gathering to Long Beach and broke it into several smaller events.
While Jehovah’s Witnesses only make up 0.7 percent of U.S. population, according to a 2008 survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, the faith is thriving.
Long Beach alone has more than 2,500 Witnesses, and the organization boasts some 17 million participants internationally. Long Beach is just one of 105 cities in the U.S. to hold conventions this year. The next nearest is in San Diego. And similar events will be held all over the globe. All will have the same message, Martinez said.
“In Africa, Latin America, the content will be exactly the same: the need for husbands to be good husbands, wives to be good wives, for us all to be good in our communities – these are values that transcend borders,” he said.
The conventions feature short Bible-based talks on everything from being a better forgiver to “the dangers that lurk on the Internet,” Martinez said. They also feature skits and re-enactments by members showing how they have applied the Bible to their lives and two stage plays presenting events from the Bible. And new members will be baptized in an above-ground swimming pool set up inside the arena.
Each local convention is attended by Witnesses from different cities in the region. This weekend’s event is for members from Long Beach and a handful of other cities.
The public is invited to attend to learn more about the faith, which, Martinez says, is sometimes misunderstood.
“Some people think we don’t believe in Jesus ... or that we are anti-social, or that we are a cult. People think of cults as secret. We are not secret. We go door to door talking to people,” Martinez said, referring to the faith’s practice of knocking on doors to discuss the religion with potential new members.
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe the Bible is the word of God. But they are different from most Christians in several key ways. While they agree Jesus is the son of God, they do not believe in the Holy Trinity — in Jesus as God. And their interpretation of the Bible is sometimes more direct than other Christians: They don’t accept blood transfusions based on Bible passages and they don’t celebrate Christmas, Easter or many other holidays because they are not celebrated as holidays in the Bible. In addition, while they believe in heaven, it is not what awaits most of the faithful after death. Instead, heaven is reserved for 144,000 anointed ones. Most of the righteous — including some non-Jehovah’s Witnesses — will be rewarded with a sort of heaven on earth.
That earthly paradise will only come after the event Jehovah’s Witnesses are most known for: Armageddon.
Witnesses have prophesied Armageddon multiple times since 1914. But as those dates — 1916, 1925, 1975 — have come and gone with no activity, they now speak of Armageddon coming soon, absent a specific date.
“The understanding is not that prophecy has failed, but that ... more preparation is needed,” explained Jon Stone, a professor of religious studies at Cal State Long Beach.
After the last big prophecy in 1975, a lot of members left the religion, having finally lost faith, Stone said.
“(The leadership) response was to purge the movement, separating the wheat from the chaff. They got rid of dissenting elements and streamlined themselves,” Stone said.
Some of those former members have grown into a voice critical of the organization.
Downey resident Cynthia Hampton is among them. She was part of the exodus following the failed 1975 prophecy.
“There were lots of false prophecies. I knew there was something wrong with the organization,” she said.
Hampton now leads a support group in Downey for former Witnesses. She says such support is necessary because the organization condoned the physical abuse she suffered at the hands of her husband and told her mother, brother and other family members who remain Witnesses not to speak to her.
“I might as well be a ghost,” Hampton said. “They don’t look at me. They don’t talk to me. They turn their back.”
Such shunning of former members is common. Members of the faith are discouraged from speaking to anyone who was once a baptized Jehovah’s Witness but left, even if that person is a parent or a child. They broke their vow to God, Martinez explained.
Hampton and other Jehovah’s Witness critics reach out to communities where conventions are taking place to raise public awareness.
“For the most part they are good people, but they have some policies that must change,” said Richard Kelly, director of Advocates for Awareness of Watchtower Abuses, who grew up in Venice as a Witness. “We just want people to be aware of what is going on. I don’t think (Witness leaders) are going to change their policies unless the outside world says what you are doing is wrong. Right now they have a captive audience. They tell people that God calls for these policies. It’s about mind control,” Kelly said.
Martinez brushes off criticism.
“A lot of people may not be interested. They are busy. They have their own religion. But there are many people searching for help. They may be depressed. And they find a comforting, soothing message,” he said.
The Jehovah’s Witness convention will be held at the Long Beach Convention Center Arena today and Saturday from 9:20 a.m. to 4:50 p.m. and Sunday from 9:20 a.m. to 3:35 p.m. It is free.
Reach the author at [email protected]
-
29
800-why-1914 helpline, Marilyn Zweifel
by coffee_black infor many years, since the mid 80s, marilyn zweifel manned the help-line.
several months ago, the help-line stopped due to marilyn's serious health issues.
marilyn was hospitalized a few weeks ago.. she has serious health issues and has suffered from 2 serious falls... she is now in a nursing home.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Coffee_Black, you have a PM.
-
14
Article: Ten Legal Risks Facing Churches and Church Leaders, by Richard Hammar
by AndersonsInfo inhttp://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200401/200401_78_legalrisks.cfm.
ten legal risks facing churches and church leaders.
by richard r. hammar.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200401/200401_78_legalrisks.cfm
Ten Legal Risks Facing Churches And Church Leaders
Sidebars to the article Ten Legal Risks Facing Churches And Church Leaders In The 21st Century
Churches today exist in an increasingly litigious and regulated environment that makes an awareness of legal risks more important than ever before. The annual church litigation survey conducted by my Church Law & Tax Report newsletter shows an increase in church litigation over the past 7 years, even though litigation in general has leveled off over the same period. The litigation survey also shows that larger churches face the greatest risk. In a recent year, 7 percent of churches having attendance of 1,000 or more at their principal weekly worship service were sued.
What is the relevance of this information for pastors and lay church leaders? Pastors and church leaders must take affirmative steps to become informed about legal risk, and implement appropriate risk-management strategies. Such steps will not only reduce the risk of litigation, but more important, will help safeguard the congregation, especially its most vulnerable members. The responsibilities of a pastor demand no less.
This article will review 10 significant legal risks facing churches and church leaders today and in the foreseeable future. Where appropriate, risk-management strategies also will be reviewed.
NEGLIGENT SELECTION OF CHURCH WORKERS
One of the most significant legal risks facing churches today is negligent selection of workers. The term negligence means carelessness or a failure to exercise reasonable care. Negligent selection, then, means carelessness or a failure to exercise reasonable care in the selection of a worker. Negligent selection can occur in several contexts, including the selection of drivers and bookkeepers. But the most significant risk occurs in the selection of employees and volunteers who will be working with minors. Many churches have been sued on the basis of negligent selection because an inadequately screened worker sexually molested a child. (See sidebar "Understanding the Profile of Sex Offenders.") Remarkably, despite all the media publicity that has been devoted to this issue over the past several years, only one-third of churches do any screening of volunteers who work with children. This means a staggering number of churches are exposing innocent lives to a lifetime of traumatization, and the church itself to potentially astronomical jury verdicts that may not be fully covered by the church’s liability insurance policy.
There is good news, however. Church leaders can take relatively simple, yet effective, steps to significantly reduce the likelihood of such an incident occurring. Here are some precautions to consider:
1. A written application. At a minimum, the church should ask for the applicant’s name and address, the names of other youth-serving organizations in which the applicant has worked as an employee or volunteer, a full explanation of any prior criminal convictions, and the names of two or more references. (See sidebar "A Summary of 2,500 Church Job Applicants.")
2. Contact references. Contact each person and organization listed as a reference in the application, and request a reference addressing the suitability of the applicant to work with minors. The best references are those who have observed the applicant working with minors.
3. Criminal records checks. No court has found a church liable for a youth worker’s sexual misconduct on the ground that it failed to conduct a criminal records check, and so relatively few churches use them. But such checks will further reduce a church’s risk of being found liable for the negligent selection of youth workers, and should be considered.
Resource. The Web site www.screenchurchstaff.com describes all the materials I have published to assist churches in screening workers. It also contains helpful information on why churches should screen workers and allows churches to conduct criminal records checks online.
4. Interviews. Persons being considered for a church position should be interviewed. This provides the church with an opportunity to inquire into each applicant’s background and determine each person’s suitability for the position under consideration.
5. The 6-month rule. Adopt a policy restricting eligibility for any volunteer position involving the custody or supervision of minors to those persons who have been members in good standing of the church for a minimum period of time, such as 6 months. Such a policy gives the church additional opportunity to evaluate applicants, and will help repel persons seeking immediate access to potential victims.
6. Limit second chances. Church leaders often err on the side of mercy when making employment decisions. This attitude can contribute to a negligent selection claim if a church gives an applicant a second chance despite knowledge of prior sexual misconduct, and the conduct is repeated. What the church views as mercy may be viewed as negligence or even gross negligence by a jury.
Key point. The recent sex scandals involving Catholic priests have dramatically affected public opinion regarding screening and supervision of clergy. The public (and juries) will no longer tolerate excuses for failing to screen workers who later molest children.
NEGLIGENT RETENTION OF CHURCH STAFF
A church may use reasonable care in selecting youth workers and other church staff but still be responsible for their misconduct if it retained them after receiving information indicating that they posed a risk of harm to others.
To illustrate, a church employs a youth pastor without doing a background check. A few years later, church leaders learn that the pastor was dismissed by another congregation because of inappropriate sexual contact with a church member. The church takes no action regarding this allegation. A few months later, a church member informs church leaders that she has had a sexual relationship with the youth pastor for several months. She later sues the church, claiming that it is responsible for her injuries on the basis of negligent retention. That is, the church retained the pastor after receiving information suggesting that he represented a risk to others.
How can churches reduce the risk of liability based on negligent retention of a minister or lay worker who engages in inappropriate conduct with an adult or child? While churches cannot eliminate this risk, they can take steps to reduce it. Consider the following:
1. Investigate. Whenever a church leader receives credible information suggesting that a church employee or volunteer may represent a risk of harm to others, an immediate and thorough investigation should be initiated. Remember this: once such information is received, the church is "put on notice" of the risk. It may be legally responsible on the basis of negligent retention for future acts of misconduct by the same person if it does nothing to investigate or respond to the information.
2. Restrictions. If the church’s investigation results in credible evidence to support the victim’s allegations, then the church can reduce its risk of negligent retention by imposing appropriate restrictions on the alleged wrongdoer. The nature and extent of such restrictions will vary depending on a number of circumstances, including the nature and severity of the alleged wrongs and the strength of the evidence. If a church ignores credible evidence of wrongdoing and imposes no restrictions on the alleged wrongdoer, it is exposed to liability based on negligent retention from the time it learned of the allegations.
Key point. Churches that ignore allegations of wrongdoing by a pastor or lay worker face a number of risks in addition to negligent retention. These include (1) liability based on "ratification" of the minister’s actions; (2) punitive damages, that are not covered by insurance; and (3) possible personal liability for members of the church board.
NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION OF CHURCH STAFF AND ACTIVITIES
Churches can use reasonable care in selecting workers, but still be liable for injuries sustained during church activities on the basis of negligent supervision. Negligent supervision refers to a failure to exercise reasonable care in the supervision of church workers and church activities. Churches have been sued on the basis of negligent supervision in several contexts, including child molestation, injuries to children participating in church-sponsored events, and injuries to infants in a church nursery. Churches are not "guarantors" of the safety and well-being of those persons who participate in their programs and activities. Generally, they are responsible only for those injuries that result from their negligence.
There are a number of precautions that churches can take to reduce the risk of liability based on negligent supervision. To illustrate, here are some precautions that churches have used to reduce the risk of a negligent supervision claim involving an injury to a child:
1. Adopt a "two-adult" policy specifying that no minor is ever allowed to be alone with an adult during any church activity. This rule reduces the risk of child molestation, and also reduces the risk of false accusations of molestation.
2. Only release minors from church activities to the parent or legal guardian who brought them, or to a third person that the parent or guardian has authorized in writing to receive custody of the child.
3. If an incident of child molestation occurs on church premises, or in the course of a church activity off of church premises, the church’s duty of supervision increases. The church will be held to a higher standard of supervision because of such knowledge.
4. Installing video cameras in strategic locations can serve as a powerful deterrent to child molesters, and can reduce a church’s risk of negligent supervision.
5. Any activity involving minors should be staffed with an adequate number of qualified adults.
6. Be especially careful in planning off-site activities such as field trips and camping. These outings can be difficult to control. It is essential that an adequate number of adults are present. While on the trip, precautionary measures must be implemented to assure adequate supervision of the group. For example, some churches group children in pairs, always keep the entire group together, and have frequent roll calls.
7. Encourage parents of younger children to accompany their child to youth programs and activities.
8. Acts of child molestation on church premises often occur in remote, unsupervised rooms or areas. A church can reduce its risk of liability based on incidents of molestation occurring in such locations by restricting access to them. If possible, lock vacant rooms that are not being used, or exercise supervision over them.
9. Install windows in all doors to classrooms and other areas that are frequented by minors. This will reduce isolation and make it easier to supervise activities.
10. It is absolutely essential to familiarize youth workers with the church’s policies and to be sure these policies are followed.
Key point. It is often difficult for church leaders to know how many adults should be present during a church activity or outing involving children. Here is an idea that may help: contact other charities in your community, such as the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Red Cross, Salvation Army, or a public school. Ask them how many adults they would require for a similar event. Basing your decision on such input will help refute a charge of negligent supervision.
Key point. Here is an excellent question to ask when evaluating a church’s risk of negligence (in hiring, retention, or supervision): How would a jury view our actions? Would it conclude that our actions were reasonable? If such a conclusion is not certain, then the risk of negligence exists.
COUNSELING
Most churches offer some form of counseling services. The most common example would be counseling of church members by a minister. Many churches also offer lay-counseling services. Some limit these services to members of the congregation, while others target the general public and promote their counseling ministry in the local media and telephone directory. Some churches use counselors or psychologists who are licensed by the state, while others use unlicensed laypersons with little if any professional training.
Counseling ministries can provide an excellent and needed service, and represent a "point of contact" with the community. However, there are a number of important legal concerns that should be considered by any church that offers such services, or that is considering doing so in the future. Such concerns include negligent counseling, child abuse reporting responsibilities under state law, sexual misconduct, maintaining confidences, negligent selection, negligent supervision, and the unauthorized practice of psychology or counseling by unlicensed persons who are not serving as pastoral counselors.
Churches that offer counseling services can reduce these legal risks in various ways, including the following:
1. Adopt a policy prohibiting any male minister or counselor on staff from counseling privately with an unaccompanied female (i.e., opposite sex counseling) unless a third person is present. The third person may be the minister’s or counselor’s spouse, another minister on staff, or a mature and trusted church employee (preferably female). Some churches have limited such a policy to counseling that occurs off of church premises, or on church premises when no other church staff are present and visible.
2. Since the vast majority of cases of inappropriate sexual behavior involve male counselors and female counselees, churches can significantly reduce their risk by using women to counsel women.
3. Install a window in the pastor’s office making all counseling sessions clearly visible to office staff. Of course, such a precaution is effective only if other staff are present and visible throughout the counseling session. This means that the church should implement a policy limiting counseling sessions to office hours when other staff are present and visible.
4. Limit counseling sessions to 30–45 minutes.
5. Permit no more than five counseling sessions with the same person during a calendar year.
6. Churches that use unlicensed lay counselors should prepare a suitable brochure or statement clearly communicating the following to each counselee: the church considers counseling to be an essential aspect of its ministry, and that counselors are engaged solely in spiritual counseling based on their understanding of the Bible; they are not engaged in the practice of psychology, professional counseling, or psychotherapy.
7. Counselors should avoid any controversial counseling techniques that have been associated in recent years with staggering levels of liability (such as age regression therapy, "recovering" memories of child abuse, or multiple personality disorders).
8. Lay, unlicensed counselors should have a clear understanding of those cases that need to be referred to a professional counselor.
CHILD ABUSE REPORTING
Child abuse is of epidemic proportion in our country. Ministers often learn of incidents of abuse in the course of counseling or from reports they receive from nursery or youth workers. It is essential for ministers to understand clearly their responsibilities under state law to report known or reasonably suspected incidents of abuse. In many states, ministers are "mandatory reporters," meaning they can be criminally liable for failing to report. Several states now permit a minister who is a mandatory child abuse reporter under state law to be sued for money damages by a victim of child abuse who discovers that the minister was aware of the abuse but did not report it.
A number of courts have rejected the defense made by some ministers that they failed to report abuse because they wanted to deal with the problem within the church as a matter of discipline. Some states excuse ministers from the reporting obligation if they learn of child abuse in the course of a privileged communication. Check your state law at least a few times each year, since this is an area of law that changes often.
Resource. Every year I publish a summary of the child abuse reporting laws of all 50 states in the May–June issue of my Church Law & Tax Report newsletter. This annual article addresses the following key issues in every state: (1) the definition of reportable child abuse; (2) who are mandatory reporters; (3) where to report; and (4) does the clergy-penitent privilege exempt ministers from a duty to report? Because state child abuse laws are frequently amended, I publish this article every year.
SECURITIES LAW VIOLATIONS
Laws regulating the sale of securities have been enacted by the federal government and by all 50 states. The term security is defined very broadly by such laws. The Uniform Securities Act, which has been adopted by a majority of the 50 states, defines a security to include a wide range of instruments, including bonds, promissory notes, and many other instruments used in church fundraising campaigns.
Securities laws were enacted to protect the public against fraudulent and deceptive practices in the sale of securities and to provide full and fair disclosure to prospective investors. To achieve these purposes, most securities laws impose the following conditions on the sale of securities: (1) registration of proposed securities with the federal or state government in advance of sale; (2) filing of sales and advertising literature with the federal or state government; (3) registration of agents and broker-dealers who will be selling the securities; and (4) prohibition of fraudulent practices.
Although the federal government and most states exempt securities offered by any organization "organized and operated not for private profit but exclusively for a religious . . . purpose" from registration, it is important to note that some states do not exempt the securities of religious organizations from registration; others impose conditions on the exemption; many require that an application for exemption (or "notice" of exemption) be submitted and approved before a claim of exemption will be recognized; a few states require churches and religious denominations that "issue" their own securities to be registered as issuers or issuer-dealers; and all securities laws subject churches and other religious organizations to the antifraud requirements. Church leaders therefore must not assume that any securities issued by their church are automatically exempt from registration or regulation. Church securities always will be subject to some degree of regulation. The question in each case is how much. Churches that violate state securities laws face a variety of potential consequences under state and federal securities laws. These include investigations, hearings, subpoenas, injunctions, criminal actions, cancellation of sales, suits for monetary damages by aggrieved investors, monetary fines, and revocation of an exemption, or registration, of securities.
Church leaders should not consider securities as a means of raising funds without the counsel of a securities attorney.
Key point. A recent church litigation survey conducted by my Church Law & Tax Report newsletter discloses that securities law violations represent the second highest source of damages in civil litigation involving churches.
EMPLOYMENT LAW
Churches are exposed to liability for various employment practices. The risk increases with the number of employees. This risk must be taken seriously by church leaders, because it generally is not covered by a church’s liability insurance policy. This means that a church that is sued on the basis of an employment decision or practice will be responsible for retaining and compensating its own attorney and paying any judgment or settlement. These costs can be substantial.
One church employment practice that can result in liability is the "wrongful termination" of an employee. A church dismisses an employee who later sues the church, claiming that his or her termination was wrongful. In most states, employees who are hired for an indefinite period are considered "at will" employees. This means that the employment relationship may be terminated at will by either the employer or employee, with or without cause, and with or without notice. The courts and state legislatures have created several exceptions to the at will employment rule. These exceptions limit the right of an employer to terminate an at will employee. Employees who are hired for a specific term are not at will employees, and they may be terminated only if the employer has "good cause."
Churches also may face liability for violating state and federal discrimination laws that prohibit certain employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of several grounds, including race, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, and the off-duty use of lawful products such as tobacco and alcohol.
Church leaders should seek the assistance of an attorney when considering the termination or discipline of an employee, or any employment action that may violate a state or federal discrimination law. Remember, employment practices are not covered under most church insurance policies.
Key point. The courts have ruled that religious organizations may discriminate on the basis of religion in their employment decisions, but they must be consistent. A church that dismisses only female employees on the basis of adultery could not justify this practice as permissible religious discrimination.
Key point. A church should avoid dismissing an employee who is a member of a protected class under a federal or state civil rights law unless there is a legitimate, nondiscriminatory basis for the dismissal. For example, a church that is subject to a state or federal age discrimination law should avoid dismissing a 70-year-old employee unless there is clear and convincing evidence of incompetency, incapacity, insubordination, or some other nondiscriminatory basis for dismissal.
Key point. Dismissed employees often point to "performance reviews" as proof that their termination was discriminatory. To illustrate, assume that a church conducts annual performance reviews for all employees, and that a disabled employee consistently received excellent or above average scores. Within a few months of such a review, the employee is dismissed because of the "poor quality" of his work. The employee sues the church, claiming that it discriminated against him on the basis of his disability. The church insists that the disability had nothing to do with its decision, but the employee points to the annual performance reviews as proof that the church’s alleged basis for termination was a "pretext."
UNDUE INFLUENCE
Over the next several years, more wealth will be transferred intergenerationally in this country than at any time in human history. There has never been a greater opportunity for churches to benefit from this wealth by emphasizing stewardship. Church leaders should recognize, however, that a sizable gift to a church may be challenged by the donor’s relatives if they believe the church exerted undue influence on the donor. There are several factors the courts will consider in deciding whether or not undue influence occurred, including the age and mental health of the donor, the donor’s prior giving practices, and the presence of independent legal advice.
Many wills leaving substantial portions of estates to churches and other charities have been challenged by "disinherited heirs" on the basis of undue influence. Persons bringing such lawsuits often recognize they have a weak case, but they sue anyway, hoping that the church will quickly settle with them to avoid the potential adverse publicity associated with such lawsuits. After all, what church wants to be accused publicly of coercing elderly members into making gifts to the church?
Churches that receive a gift under a will that is challenged on the basis of undue influence should keep in mind a couple of considerations. First, undue influence usually is very difficult to prove, particularly when the donor was in reasonably good mental and physical health at the time the will was executed.
Second, in many states, undue influence must be proven by "clear and convincing evidence"—a more difficult burden of proof than the ordinary "preponderance of the evidence" standard. A church that becomes aware that an elderly or infirm person is considering leaving a portion of his or her estate to the church can reduce the possibility of undue influence even further by ensuring that the person obtains the independent counsel of an attorney in drafting the will or trust. Ideally, the attorney should not be a member of the same church.
Third, church leaders should recognize that they have a moral obligation to assist in implementing the estate plans of deceased members so long as they are satisfied that no improper influence was exercised. If a former member in fact intended that a portion of his or her estate be distributed to the church, and church leaders too quickly succumb to threats of attorneys hired by disgruntled family members, then they have violated a sacred trust.
PERSONAL LIABILITY OF CHURCH BOARD MEMBERS
Traditionally, the officers and directors of nonprofit corporations performed their duties with little if any risk of personal legal liability. In recent years, a number of lawsuits have attempted to impose personal liability on such officers and directors. In some cases, directors are sued because of statutes that provide limited legal immunity to churches. Church officers and directors have been sued personally on the basis of several grounds, including the following: (1) tort liability for such actions as negligent operation of a church vehicle, negligent supervision of church workers and activities, copyright infringement, and wrongful termination of employees; (2) contract liability for executing a contract without authorization; (3) violating one of the "fiduciary duties" that every officer or director owes to a corporation, including the duties of due care and loyalty to the corporation; (4) selling securities without registering as an agent, or engaging in fraudulent activities in the offer or sale of church securities; (5) willfully failing to withhold or pay over federal payroll taxes to the government; and (6) approving a loan to an officer or director.
A number of states have adopted statutes limiting the liability of uncompensated directors of nonprofit corporations for their ordinary negligence. These laws do not protect officers and directors who are compensated for their duties, or who engage in gross negligence or intentional misconduct.
Key point. Directors and officers insurance provides coverage for various acts committed by board members in the course of their official duties. Such insurance may provide coverage for claims that are excluded under a church’s general liability policy. It also may cover acts not protected by the federal and state charitable immunity laws.
PUNITIVE DAMAGES
Courts can award "punitive damages" for conduct that amounts to "gross negligence." Punitive damages are damages awarded by a jury "in addition to compensation for a loss sustained, in order to punish, and make an example of, the wrongdoer." They are awarded when a person’s conduct is particularly reprehensible and outrageous. This does not necessarily mean intentional misconduct. Punitive damages often are associated with reckless conduct or conduct creating a high risk of harm. To illustrate, in one case a punitive damage award was based on the fact church officials repeatedly and knowingly placed a pastor in situations where he could sexually abuse children and then failed to supervise him and disclose his sexual problem. Clearly, church officials did not intend for the pastor to molest anyone. But under the circumstances, the jury concluded that the church’s actions were sufficiently reckless to justify an award of punitive damages.
Church leaders must understand that reckless inattention to risks can lead to punitive damages, and that such damages are not covered by the church’s liability insurance policy. This means that a jury award of punitive damages represents an uninsured risk. Accordingly, it is critical for church leaders to understand the basis for punitive damages, and to avoid behavior that might be viewed as grossly negligent.
Richard R. Hammar, J.D., LL.M., CPA, is an attorney and CPA. Heserves as legal counsel to the Assemblies of God, and is editor ofthe Church Law & Tax Report newsletter. He has written over 50 books on church legal and tax issues, including the newly released third edition to Pastor, Church & Law.
