Basic HTML Version
PASTOR'S REPORT, July 30, 1979
Page 9
Now, if the state hadn't attacked the Church, then the issues would have
been different. Mr. Armstrong and I have said from the very outset, "You
have no business (this is addressing ourselves to the state) attacking the
Church, you have no right to be here. Get your feet off our property, get
your dirty hands off of our property. If you have something to complain
about concerning Mr. Armstrong, or Mr. Rader, or Mr. Helge, or anybody for
that matter, there's a proper forum for that type of matter. And although
no one likes to be accused of activity that even sounds like criminal
activity, we'd still be very happy to defend ourselves in that forum at
the right time and in the right place."
And we would not have been able to raise the First Amendment and we never
would have thought of raising the First Amendment. Maybe Mr. Armstrong
would be required from time to time to raise a clergyman-penitent privilege.
Maybe on occasion Mr. Helge would have to raise the question of attorney
client privilege, and maybe on occasion I would have had to do the same,
but we certainly could not have raised the First Amendment. But the moment
that the state of California intruded upon Church affairs, we had a duty,
an absolute du!Y_, to raise the First Amendment--not only a duty to our
selves, but to all other people for whom the freedom of religion is impor
tant.
So, we have had to assert our First Amendment rights for ourselves as well
as for others. And as some of you may have seen recently, the National
Council of Churches has come out very vigorously in our defense. It really
has attacked the government for interfering with our rights. And the
Seventh Day Adventists, through their LIBERTY magazine, have done the same.
Gradually, more.and more people are coming to the fore and are letting us
know in one way or another that they are watching what is going on; they
are very concerned about it--about what's happening, and what has happened
--and that when they can be of the most help, they will be there.
(We're
still at a very low procedural leveY-of activity because we are resisting
on constitutional grounds step by step.)
Not literally do we refuse to answer our name when we are asked, but for
all practical purposes we are not going to answer any question until the
Supreme Court of the United States tells us in very plain language that
we must. And once the Supreme Court of the United States tells us that we
must, then in our opinion and the opinion of many others now, there will
be no more religious freedom in the United States� It will be a thing of
the}?as� But once we've crossed that bridge and the Supreme Court of the
United States has said, you must do this, you must do that, you must refrain
from this, you must refrain from that, then we will answer the questions.
Knew We Would Lead the Fight for Religious Freedom
I told Mr. Armstrong (and he remembers this very, very clearly) the very
first day I met him back in 1956, when he told me how big the Church would
ultimately grow and how great the Work would be and what its impact would
be--he told me that we would suffer persecution, meaning he would suffer
persecution, but he used the word "we." I said, "Mr. Armstrong, if what
you say is true, and if it comes to pass, and I have no reason to believe
that it will not, I want to remind you that you will then be in the van-
guard of all those at that time fighting for the freedom of religion___
because you have had a free ride so far."