Surprised I didn't see a thread for this

[Luther073082]

Surprised no thread on TCL talking about the Supreme Court's 9 - 0 decision that allowed an LCMS church to hire and fire its ministers without governmental interference.

Good news obviously for churchs everywhere.

 

[Studeclunker]

Didn't see the article. Mind posting a link? Is this the case about the fired schoolteacher?

 

[Resha Caner]

Good news obviously for churchs everywhere.

Yep. Do you suppose that is a result of Bush appointees?

 

[Luther073082]

Didn't see the article. Mind posting a link? Is this the case about the fired schoolteacher?

Yeah, the Supreme Court ruled 9 - 0 in favor of the church.

Yep. Do you suppose that is a result of Bush appointees?

Nope, it was a unanimous decision. Obama's appointee voted in favor of the church like everyone else.

 

[Resha Caner]

Nope, it was a unanimous decision. Obama's appointee voted in favor of the church like everyone else.

Both Sotomayor and Kagan? Interesting. I heard the verdict but didn't check the vote. I wouldn't have thought that. Does that mean the details were pretty open/shut on this? Or did I misjudge the views of those 2 justices.

 

[Luther073082]

Both Sotomayor and Kagan? Interesting. I heard the verdict but didn't check the vote. I wouldn't have thought that. Does that mean the details were pretty open/shut on this? Or did I misjudge the views of those 2 justices.

The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - Unanimous Supreme Court ruling supports Hosanna-Tabor

The details where pretty open and shut. There where two concurring opinions that basically disagreed on the specifics of how a minister is defined.

Robert's wrote the opinion of the Court. Which defined a minister based on religious training and receiving a call and a commissioning. (To which this teacher falls)

Alito and Kaegan joined in a concurring opinion (Who would have thought we'd see that?) saying that a minister is someone who passes on the teachings of the church or performs sacred rites or rituals. To which this teacher falls as she her students elements of the Lutheran faith.

Thomas also filed his own concurring opinion saying that a minister is someone that the church in good faith considers a minister.

 

[Studeclunker]

Actually, it was a long shot for a school teacher to be defined as a Called Minister. Nonetheless, the decision being unaminous is not surprising at all. The Constitution is crystal clear here; no interferrance with the Church by the State. ie: The Supreme Court left the Church to decide whom they define as a Called Minister. The Court had no other choice. For once, there wasn't any gerrymandering with the law and Constitution.

 

[DaRev]

Actually, it was a long shot for a school teacher to be defined as a Called Minister.

Teachers that go through the system are rostered as Ministers of Religion-Commissioned and are called positions.

 

[Studeclunker]

Teachers that go through the system are rostered as Ministers of Religion-Commissioned and are called positions.

I understand how the system works, thank you though. What I disagree with is why it works that way. Then again, this is a good way to keep unbelievers out of the system. So the whole process has it's virtues.

My point Revrand, was that these people are school-teachers, not 'Ministers of Religion.' For the most part, these Teachers are instructing the students in the achedemic subjects. Yes, the cirrculum is oriented to the LCMS' view of the universe, per se. All the same, I would still contend, regardless of how the LCMS (WELS, etc...) organizes the whole thing, these Teachers are not really 'Ministers of Religion' in anything but name.

Nonetheless, the whole issue is achemedic. The system works quite well and I see no reason in the least to change it.

 

[Resha Caner]

My point Revrand, was that these people are school-teachers, not 'Ministers of Religion.' For the most part, these Teachers are instructing the students in the achedemic subjects.

I see why you think this, but I think you underestimate the impact a teacher can have. There is much more to teaching than the 3Rs. My kids go to a parochial school, and we've had both synodically trained teachers and teachers with just a colloquy. Though both can be very good at teaching a subject, one can tell the difference.

When teaching reading, what stories are used? When teaching science, how are subjects like evolution approached? When a student is troubled by something, how does the teacher counsel, who do they recommend for counseling? When casual conversation turns to "what did you do last weekend?", does the teacher mention going to church and what they learned in the sermon? When the teacher overhears students talking about those taboo subjects like sex, do they reinforce good moral standards?

Of course any teacher could do those things, but some of those topics are very difficult in the public schools - even job-threatening. In a parochial school, I want to know the teacher is going to give the Lutheran answer.

And there are even more subtle things. My dad is a retired highschool math teacher. It is interesting the things he emphasized in his math classes - like how all math and science begins with an assumption, which means there is always an alternative. As such, all "proof" depends upon what one assumes - what one brings to the problem. That is a definite difference from certain secular voices that tout science as absolute, indisputable fact.

Teachers are called.

 

[Luther073082]

I understand how the system works, thank you though. What I disagree with is why it works that way. Then again, this is a good way to keep unbelievers out of the system. So the whole process has it's virtues.

My point Revrand, was that these people are school-teachers, not 'Ministers of Religion.' For the most part, these Teachers are instructing the students in the achedemic subjects. Yes, the cirrculum is oriented to the LCMS' view of the universe, per se. All the same, I would still contend, regardless of how the LCMS (WELS, etc...) organizes the whole thing, these Teachers are not really 'Ministers of Religion' in anything but name.

Nonetheless, the whole issue is achemedic. The system works quite well and I see no reason in the least to change it.

If you read the opinion of the court, the court does not view a person as a "minister of religion as only the "pastor" type or the leader of a congregation.

Instead the court looks at if she went through training, if she was formally commissioned by the church, and if she was passing on the beliefs of the church.

I personally think #3 is the most important. If you have someone, ANYONE, paid or unpaid that is passing on or teaching the beliefs of the church in ANY role, the church has to have complete and total authority over their hiring and firing and can do so for any reason they see fit.

Now the court would probably not apply the same standard to say the school's janitor. But someone who teaches the faith, the morals of that faith, and the values it entails, thats important.