The Robert Morris lawsuit is a major development for Gateway Church, one that surprisingly a number of outlets have not jumped on already. Nevertheless, I wanted to add some bonus commentary to go alongside the latest video/podcast.
The lawsuit is predicated on being able to enforce a unilateral contract, in that Gateway Church made promises based to those who accepted their offer that are valid. The key promise is the tithing money-back guarantee that Gateway Church and Robert Morris are famous for.
Another interesting fact is that the lawsuit cannot help but notice the (unbiblical) preference that Gateway Church has for Jewish ministries. The complaint did not specify whether these were some sort of Messianic Jewish ministries or not, but it is safe to assume that much of it was, including an in-house ministry that Gateway Church operates. The lawsuit explains Gateway’s preference in a footnote:
In Romans 1:16, the Apostle Paul wrote, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (emphasis added). Morris has often used this language as the basis of Gateway’s missions approach. The Church also holds a regular Shabbat service in honor of the Jewish Sabbath.
At the same time, Robert Morris et al, are accused of being some sort of Judas, siphoning money. The lawsuit is most concerned that the money did not make it to global missions as represented by the leadership of Gateway Church.
Defendants’ refusal to answer even the most basic of questions is the reason for this lawsuit. Plaintiffs seek transparency and an explanation what happened to the 15% of funds collected that Robert Morris, Tom Lane, and the other named Defendants promised would be used for global missions. If it turns out that Defendants have not used the money as represented, as is suggested by credible allegations, then the purpose behind this lawsuit is to redirect the money to a church or ministry of Plaintiffs’ choice that will actually spend it on global missions as represented by Defendants.
The lawsuit faces a couple of major challenges. Religious abstention is the biggest threat to this lawsuit. A court could decide it does not want to weigh in on what constitutes global mission expenditures or other ecclesiastical matters. The motion to dismiss will likely make this argument. The other challenge is standing, in which the contractual argument is needed to prevent the dismissal for lack thereof.
Regarding 1 Corinthians 6, this lawsuit brings credible allegations of fraud, which is perhaps criminal. Moreover, Gateway Church is not to be considered a legitimate church. So I’m not convinced this is a lawsuit between believers.
Powered by RedCircle
One Response
The problem is charity fraud is ubiquitous in political circles and so is protected. The Clinton Foundation by way of example (and old story form 2018 see Charles Ortel and The Clinton foundation in a search) was only ever legally allowed to raise funds for a library in Little Rock Arkansas. Yet they raised funds to fight AIDS in Africa, Tsunami relief in Asia and in Haiti Earthquake relief. No federal judge wants to set a precedent for clawing these funds back. No liberal who gave them money and was responsible on their own taxes through due diligence to make sure they were legal and legit for what they gave to, which they took deductions for, wants it either as they would be a party to fraud. I could be wrong but though there could even be a senate investigation into such and such, it never gets traction in court. So my thought would be: a court won’t go near this as it could have other legal implications. The other obstacle is: What is the limitations for time passed in a fraud investigation?