I am working on a case at church. A member of the congragation helped a person in the churches ministry by opening a checking account for the one being ministered (a permant resident alien- legal). The church wanted someone else to do it, an told the person who was helping that they could not aid in this way. The one being ministered did not want any one else but the person who opened it to do it for them, and refused help from anyone else. The church is now punishing the one who helped the other person, by denying them the right to pray over anyone in the church within any church function.
What scriptures can I offer in defence of the person who helped?
2007-10-19 00:58:37 · 11 answers · asked by Gwynn T 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I have to agree that the case is lacking some information. However, based on what you've provided you'll not find any scriptures since there's no scripture that says a church has the right to dictate to a person who they can and can't help.The fact that a church tried to do this shows me there's a serious problem with their understanding of Christianity.
The defense I'd offer that person would be to find another church. The church in this case smacks of legalism.
2007-10-19 01:36:19 · answer #1 · answered by Machaira 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Your question does not make it clear whether the checking account they opened contained any money donated by the church or not. If there were church funds involved, then there are very strict laws about who can do it. For someone who is not a official of the church to give church funds could be a crime, and could land not only the person who did it in prison, but also the church officials for permitting it.
It could be considered a misappropriation of funds.
If your friend was specifically told not to do what he did, then the leadership of the church is probably right to remove them from a position of authority. His actions may will have compromised the legal status of the church.
A more appropriate way for your friend to have handled this would have been to ask permission to accompany whoever assisted the person. That way the person gets the comforts of dealing with someone they know (your friend) and the church is still able to keep everything legal.
Without more details, I would say that your friend was probably in the wrong to do things the way he did. He should have worked with, rather than against, the church leadership. He needs to apologize, take his punishment (which will probably only be for a short period), and then work within the system in the future.
2007-10-19 08:26:37 · answer #2 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
While I think the reaction by the church is a little extreme, I can see the pastor's point. This person was disobedient, and therefore the pastor feels this person can no longer be trusted, so he (she?) doesn't want them to have any position of authority. I can understand why you want to defend this person, but I'd be willing to bet there's more to it than you know. For one thing, if a person really needed help that badly, why wouldn't they let anyone help them? Perhaps the pastor knows something dubious in this person's past that he didn't feel comfortable revealing to the person who wanted to help. There is something strange when a person who needs help only wants it from one specific person. The pastor may have simply wanted to police the situation for some reason. After all, it's not like the church wouldn't help. they just wanted to do it on their terms.
A request by a person to have a church open a checking account for them is a very strange one indeed (and ridiculous, IMO), and one I think most churches wouldn't grant under any circumstances. This person who needed the checking account should have felt blessed to even have been offered such extensive help, and the church leaders are to be commended for being willing to go to that extent to help to begin with.
My advice: Keep your mouth shut. I am almost 100% positive you don't know the whole story. The person who helped should have done what they were told to begin with, and if the person needing the help chose not to let anyone else do it..so be it.
2007-10-19 08:29:35 · answer #3 · answered by frenzy-CIB- Jim's with Jesus 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well why are you asking Jews, I've read on here hundreds of times that the 'O.T" is no longer valid and we're all wrong...
It seems to me this church is a bit too into someone else's checking account. That's a legal and ethical issue regardless of scripture.
And the punishment, what is that about??? Wierd church...
2007-10-19 08:07:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No scripture can help this person know that this would be a crappy thing for that church to do to them.
Not let someone help someone else when that person wants that person to help. What a great church that is.
2007-10-19 08:07:17 · answer #5 · answered by LadyCatherine 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think it's really quite ridiculous to say that as punishment,you can no longer pray over someone.Do the leaders of the church think they have a monopoly on prayer?
2007-10-19 08:15:46 · answer #6 · answered by Serena 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I'd say that Matthew 15:7-9 is appropriate: Jesus speaking to the Pharisees about their rules vs. God's rules.
"Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, his people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."
2007-10-19 08:12:07 · answer #7 · answered by marbledog 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If this is a "Christian" church, then I'd advise BOTH parties to skedaddle outta there. I see NO evidence of Christianity in their "church's" decision.
2007-10-19 08:23:43 · answer #8 · answered by Granny Annie 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What does this have to do with Judaism? We don't "pray over" anyone. I'm not even sure what that means.
2007-10-19 08:09:51 · answer #9 · answered by Cathy 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
lol. this sounds like 6th graders squabbling over who gets the kickball
2007-10-19 08:11:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋