Basic HTML Version
PASTOR GENERAL'S REPORT, May 6, 1980
Page 4
Thus we follc� the Biblical �eaching that we all must speak che s�me
thing, avoiding disharmony a11d d�vision. Some who have been SELF-willed,
controversial, causing division in the Church have been excommunicated.
That was true of the malcontent ex-members who brought the false allega
tions--and the Attorney General's office acted on their false allegations
without a shred of evidence!
The investigators were fully satisfied.
GOD'S CHURCH FOLLOWS GOD'S WAY!
Our GOD will vindicate His name and His Church before the world!
RECENT U.S. SUPREME COURT ACTION EXPLAINED AT EMPLOYEE FORUM
Monday morning, June 2, the nation's highest court announced its denial of
the Church's request for a hearing concerning our legal battle with the
State of California. That same afternoon,Mr. Rader conducted a press con
ference in his office in the Hall of Administration to inform the media of
the court's action and what it means to the Church. Reporters and camera
men from six Los Angeles television stations and several radio stations
were present, along with representatives of the print media.
On the following day Mr. Rader covered basically the same points in an
employee meeting and answered questions about the court's refusal to act.
Following is a summary of the key points he discussed and excerpts from
the press conference and employee forum.
(Mr. Rader's Pastor General's
Hotline tape of June 2 also contained basically the same news and an
analysis of the high court's refusal to intervene at this time.)
What Does the High Court's Decision Mean?
Mr. Rader explained that the decision was disappointing but not really sur
prising and should be viewed in context:
"All the Supreme Court decided
to do is nothing. So it didn't rule for us, it didn't rule against us.
It didn't say we should do something, it didn't say we should not do some
thing. It didn't give the state any greater powers and it didn't impose
upon us any more onerous burdens."
Mr. Rader continued, "We requested an appointment with a very august body
...." He said that the Supreme Court receives 4000 to 5000 requests like
ours every year. These are called "writs of certiorari" and are requests
that the high court review matters that are in the hands of lower courts
to see if there have been any irregularities. Yet, as Mr. Rader explained,
90% of these requests are not granted for any one of a variety of reasons.
People think that one has an automatic right to go to that court. But
this simply isn't true. This lofty institution doesn't have to hear cases
that it doesn't want to hear. It makes its decision, without explanation
to the public, upon criteria including such considerations as the "exhaus
tion of other remedies."