Basic HTML Version
PASTOR GENERAL'S REPORT, June 13, 1980
Page 5
EDITORIAL SPELLS OUT THE REAL DANGER
Seldom do the members of the media look into our case and perceive the
real nature of the lawsuit and its threat to religious freedom. But below
is an editorial from the June 5th Orange County Register which very simply
cuts through the mishmash of facts and allegations and spells out the
wrongheaded position the State of California is taking.
An Unwarranted Intrusion Into
Churches
Earlier this week the United States Supreme
Court decided to permit the California attor
ney general to proceed with an investigation
into the Worldwide Church of God. Whereas
some of the practices of the church are indeed
questionable, the questions should be asked by
the members of the church and not by the
government. The Supreme Court's decision
further blurs the separation of church and
state and, consequently. is a step away from
freedom of religion.
The Worldwide Church of God was founded
by Herbert W. Armstrong in 1934. Its member
ship has grown to more than 70.000and has an
annual income near $70 million. The church
has been wracked by internal upheavals for
several years. In January of last year the state
filed a lawsuit charging church officials with
misuse of funds and demanding the right to see
all of the church's financial records. Further.
the state tried, and still is trying. to put the
church in receivership.
What seems to have motivated the state's
legal attack were charges that church officials
syphoned church funds for personal use.
Church money going for expensive gifts to
world leaders and colossal expense accounts
are often cited as examples of the alleged
misuse of funds.
But who is to judge what is the proper use oi
church funds? The state's action is nothing
less than a claim that it· has the right to
determine the propriety of the financial deci-
PROGRESS REPORT ON THE PETRIS BILL
sions of religious institutions. If a church per
mits its officers to take too much in salary or
other benefits, this should be determined by
the members of the church. No one is forcedto
donate to a church. In this case, there is ample
ev i dence t ha t many members of the
Worldwide Church of God are aware of the
seemingly excessive expense accounts and are
undisturbed by them.
But the state claims that it has as much right
as members to be concerned with certain
financial decisions of the church. The state's
lawsuit is based on the concept that churches
are little different than charitable trusts and
that government can examine a church's re
cords just as it does the records of any charity.
The state's position. not surprisingly, has
met the opposition of a wide variety of reli
gious organizations. They rightfully perceive
that.
if successfuJ. the state's case against the
Worldwide Church of God will alter the rela
tionship between church and state - an altera
tion which will further erode religious freedom
in the United States.
There is ample reason for concern. The use
of church funds is a volatile issue in many
congregations: state involvement can do noth
ing but complicate and aggravate an already
touchy situation. The government should keep
its nose out of the collection plate and leave the
financial affairs of the church to those who
voluntarily contribute to religious institutions.
As reported in a recent Pastor General's Report, there is a bill going
through legislative channels in Sacramento which would, if enacted into
law, restrain the California Attorney General from intruding into churches
as he did in the Worldwide Church of God.
Wednesday, June 11, the bill was passed by the Assembly Judiciary Com
mittee by a vote of 9-1! It has, you will recall, already passed through
senate committees and the state Senate itself by a vote of 21 to 1 before