Pair fights church on sharing confessions
Exclusive: Watermark says telling others of sins is in bylaws
09:53 PM CDT on Thursday, May 25, 2006
By MICHAEL GRABELL and JEFFREY WEISS / The Dallas Morning News
Does a church have the right to publicly reveal a person's private sins? A Dallas court is being asked to decide whether Watermark Community Church can do exactly that to a man and a woman identified in court records as "John Doe" and "Jane Roe."
Their attorney says that the pair thought they had revealed their sins to Watermark's pastor confidentially and that their behavior should not be made public.
Church officials say they are only following a process of church discipline outlined in the Gospel of Matthew and written into the church's bylaws.
"Basically, we're being sued because we're seeking to love 'John Doe' in accordance with the principles outlined by God's word," said the pastor, the Rev. Todd Wagner.
Neither church officials nor the pair's attorney would specify the behavior involved.
Leaders of the northeast Dallas church said they recently became aware that "John Doe," who joined the church more than a year ago, was "having some struggles in his walk with Christ," Mr. Wagner said.
Church elders began the process of "care and correction" described in Matthew: Confront the person one to one, then with several others, then "tell it to the church." At every step, the person is asked to stop the offending behavior.
In this case, the man refused the private interventions and said he was quitting the church, church officials said. But Watermark's bylaws say a member "may not resign from membership in an attempt to avoid such care and correction."
Watermark's next step would have been to send more than a dozen letters to people who know "John Doe" – half to Watermark members and half to members of other churches who know and have worked with him.
That's when the lawsuit was filed.
"The basis of the lawsuit was the church wanted to go outside of the church and the community at large, including potentially even their employers," said Jeff Tillotson, attorney for the man and woman.
They obtained a temporary restraining order April 28, preventing the church from releasing information about them.
But the order was dismissed May 5 by Associate Judge Sheryl McFarlin after Watermark's lawyers argued that it violated the church's right to freely exercise its religion.
The case is winding its way through appeals.
Mr. Tillotson said the case holds major implications for church members in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
"The typical notion of a Dallasite is that if you don't like a church, you can just leave, and that's that is apparently not shared by some of these churches," he said. "And then when you say I want to get off this merry-go-round, their response is you can't quit to avoid discipline."
E-mail jweiss@dallasnews.com and mgrabell@dallasnews.com
BY THE BOOK
Watermark Community church says it relies on this New Testament passage to justify its policy of disciplining members:
"If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector."
Matthew 18:15-17
_______________________________________
Response from Watermark:
As a result of the interest and confusion generated by recent media accounts of a lawsuit filed by a Watermark member against the church, it is our desire to clearly summarize pertinent facts. Our purpose in sharing these facts is to allow those wanting to understand our actions the opportunity to deal with truths and not be forced to speculate.
“Mr. Doe and Mrs. Doe” are married and are members of Watermark.
“Mrs. Doe” came forward asking for help related to challenges in her marital relationship.
“Mr. Doe or Ms. Roe” did not reveal information or participate in a “private confessional” with any Watermark staff that resulted in this process.
As part of the process, “Mr. Doe and Mrs. Doe” included other people, both members at Watermark and others outside Watermark, in the discussions regarding the marital struggle. There was never a one on one confessional between Mr. Doe and Todd Wagner, or Mr. Doe and any other staff or church member that initiated the Matthew 18 process, as has been reported in the news. As “Mrs. Doe” sought help to repair the marriage, she approached the church and as a result the church continued to reach out to “Mr. Doe” and later “Ms. Roe” in accordance with Matthew 18:15-17.
The final step in the Matthew 18 process was to close the communications with those that were personally involved with “Mr. and Mrs. Doe and Ms. Roe” and to clarify the church’s need to separate from “Mr. Doe’s” continued behavior. The lawsuit was filed in April by “Mr. Doe” and “Ms. Roe” to prevent this letter from being sent to those people already involved with “Mr. Doe and Ms. Roe.” There was never a planned letter to the entire congregation -- indeed, close to 100% of the membership knew nothing of “Mr. and Mrs. Doe and Ms. Roe” until the lawsuit was filed.
A temporary restraining order was entered without Watermark being present to challenge any representations made at the hearing. After a hearing with all present, the Court dismissed the case. The dismissal was upheld by a district judge days later. With the case now twice dismissed, “Mr. Doe and Ms. Roe” filed an appeal with the Dallas Court of Appeals, which is currently pending.
As in any similar case, we encourage all followers of Christ in relationship with such individuals, to continue in prayer for them, while calling them to a true knowledge of the Lord, repentance in their sin and reconciliation to: God, their spouse, and other damaged relationships – including the church (Watermark and universal body of Christ). We eagerly await the day that “Mr. Doe” chooses to reconcile. We long to “forgive and comfort him, [that he may not] be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow” and we may “reaffirm our love for him” (2 Corinthians 2:7-8). We ask that you continue to love “Mr. Doe” along with us in accordance with scripture, urging him to seek restoration in all his relationships.
Colossians 4:2-6,
The Elders of Watermark Community Church
Exclusive: Watermark says telling others of sins is in bylaws
09:53 PM CDT on Thursday, May 25, 2006
By MICHAEL GRABELL and JEFFREY WEISS / The Dallas Morning News
Does a church have the right to publicly reveal a person's private sins? A Dallas court is being asked to decide whether Watermark Community Church can do exactly that to a man and a woman identified in court records as "John Doe" and "Jane Roe."
Their attorney says that the pair thought they had revealed their sins to Watermark's pastor confidentially and that their behavior should not be made public.
Church officials say they are only following a process of church discipline outlined in the Gospel of Matthew and written into the church's bylaws.
"Basically, we're being sued because we're seeking to love 'John Doe' in accordance with the principles outlined by God's word," said the pastor, the Rev. Todd Wagner.
Neither church officials nor the pair's attorney would specify the behavior involved.
Leaders of the northeast Dallas church said they recently became aware that "John Doe," who joined the church more than a year ago, was "having some struggles in his walk with Christ," Mr. Wagner said.
Church elders began the process of "care and correction" described in Matthew: Confront the person one to one, then with several others, then "tell it to the church." At every step, the person is asked to stop the offending behavior.
In this case, the man refused the private interventions and said he was quitting the church, church officials said. But Watermark's bylaws say a member "may not resign from membership in an attempt to avoid such care and correction."
Watermark's next step would have been to send more than a dozen letters to people who know "John Doe" – half to Watermark members and half to members of other churches who know and have worked with him.
That's when the lawsuit was filed.
"The basis of the lawsuit was the church wanted to go outside of the church and the community at large, including potentially even their employers," said Jeff Tillotson, attorney for the man and woman.
They obtained a temporary restraining order April 28, preventing the church from releasing information about them.
But the order was dismissed May 5 by Associate Judge Sheryl McFarlin after Watermark's lawyers argued that it violated the church's right to freely exercise its religion.
The case is winding its way through appeals.
Mr. Tillotson said the case holds major implications for church members in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
"The typical notion of a Dallasite is that if you don't like a church, you can just leave, and that's that is apparently not shared by some of these churches," he said. "And then when you say I want to get off this merry-go-round, their response is you can't quit to avoid discipline."
E-mail jweiss@dallasnews.com and mgrabell@dallasnews.com
BY THE BOOK
Watermark Community church says it relies on this New Testament passage to justify its policy of disciplining members:
"If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector."
Matthew 18:15-17
_______________________________________
Response from Watermark:
As a result of the interest and confusion generated by recent media accounts of a lawsuit filed by a Watermark member against the church, it is our desire to clearly summarize pertinent facts. Our purpose in sharing these facts is to allow those wanting to understand our actions the opportunity to deal with truths and not be forced to speculate.
“Mr. Doe and Mrs. Doe” are married and are members of Watermark.
“Mrs. Doe” came forward asking for help related to challenges in her marital relationship.
“Mr. Doe or Ms. Roe” did not reveal information or participate in a “private confessional” with any Watermark staff that resulted in this process.
As part of the process, “Mr. Doe and Mrs. Doe” included other people, both members at Watermark and others outside Watermark, in the discussions regarding the marital struggle. There was never a one on one confessional between Mr. Doe and Todd Wagner, or Mr. Doe and any other staff or church member that initiated the Matthew 18 process, as has been reported in the news. As “Mrs. Doe” sought help to repair the marriage, she approached the church and as a result the church continued to reach out to “Mr. Doe” and later “Ms. Roe” in accordance with Matthew 18:15-17.
The final step in the Matthew 18 process was to close the communications with those that were personally involved with “Mr. and Mrs. Doe and Ms. Roe” and to clarify the church’s need to separate from “Mr. Doe’s” continued behavior. The lawsuit was filed in April by “Mr. Doe” and “Ms. Roe” to prevent this letter from being sent to those people already involved with “Mr. Doe and Ms. Roe.” There was never a planned letter to the entire congregation -- indeed, close to 100% of the membership knew nothing of “Mr. and Mrs. Doe and Ms. Roe” until the lawsuit was filed.
A temporary restraining order was entered without Watermark being present to challenge any representations made at the hearing. After a hearing with all present, the Court dismissed the case. The dismissal was upheld by a district judge days later. With the case now twice dismissed, “Mr. Doe and Ms. Roe” filed an appeal with the Dallas Court of Appeals, which is currently pending.
As in any similar case, we encourage all followers of Christ in relationship with such individuals, to continue in prayer for them, while calling them to a true knowledge of the Lord, repentance in their sin and reconciliation to: God, their spouse, and other damaged relationships – including the church (Watermark and universal body of Christ). We eagerly await the day that “Mr. Doe” chooses to reconcile. We long to “forgive and comfort him, [that he may not] be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow” and we may “reaffirm our love for him” (2 Corinthians 2:7-8). We ask that you continue to love “Mr. Doe” along with us in accordance with scripture, urging him to seek restoration in all his relationships.
Colossians 4:2-6,
The Elders of Watermark Community Church