Starting a new church is no easy task.
You need to put together a launch team, fundraise, and advertise. You have paperwork to fill out and bylaws to draft. And then, of course, you need to find a place to worship.
Unfortunately, finding a temporary home proved to be a bit more difficult than one new church bargained for. And that’s what led Redeemer Fellowship of Edisto Island in South Carolina to file a lawsuit.
Let’s take a deeper look at this church, its case, and how it got here.
Who: Redeemer Fellowship of Edisto Island
The lead pastor of Redeemer Fellowship of Edisto Island has long been involved in the community.
For example, he served as president of the local pastor’s alliance, as well as the director of the community choir. In the aftermath of Hurricane Matthew, which devastated the community in 2016, the lead pastor was instrumental in facilitating relief teams and setting up a foodbank. At the town’s request, he even led a community worship service at the Town of Edisto Beach Civic Center in Hurricane Matthew’s aftermath.
So when he launched Redeemer Fellowship at the beginning of 2018 and needed a place to meet, the civic center was an obvious choice. After the new church rented space there in April and May of 2018, it seemed like a natural fit for their worship services moving forward.
But when the church proposed another rental agreement with the civic center, town officials denied the request. Not only that, but in May, the town council changed the civic center rules to ban worship services altogether.
What could have changed the town’s mind so suddenly?
It turns out that the town attorney claimed that entering into a rental agreement with Redeemer Fellowship might violate the Constitution’s prohibition on government making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”
But allowing a church to rent the civic center on the same grounds as everyone else is not an establishment of religion – it’s just fair.
After all, the town welcomes a variety of groups to rent space at the civic center, including “civic, political, business, social groups, and others.” But town officials made it clear that “others” does not include Christians looking for a place to worship.
That’s why Alliance Defending Freedom filed a lawsuit on behalf of Redeemer Fellowship.
Just because the town lets a church rent space at the civic center on the same terms as everyone else does not mean the government is “establishing a religion.” Redeemer Fellowship never asked to be the only church allowed to rent the civic center. It never asked for free advertising urging citizens to attend services. All it asked for is the ability to rent some space on the same terms as everyone else.
That shouldn’t be too much to ask.
When: August 2018 – August 2019
ADF filed a lawsuit against the town of Edisto Beach in August 2018. In November 2018, a federal district court heard the case.
The U.S. Department of Justice also filed a statement of interest supporting Redeemer Fellowship. As the DOJ’s statement explains, “the Town’s reading of the First Amendment is exactly backwards: the Town seeks to permit the content and viewpoint discrimination against religious worship that the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses prohibit and to prohibit the equal access for religious expression that the Establishment Clause permits.”
In December 2018, the Town voluntarily changed its policy to reverse the worship ban. Now churches can rent the civic center on the same terms as every other member of the community. In light of that, both parties filed their agreement to end the lawsuit on August 19, 2019.
Where: Edisto Beach, South Carolina
Redeemer Fellowship of Edisto Island is located in Edisto Beach, South Carolina.
Why: The government cannot treat churches and religious groups worse than everyone else.
By refusing to rent civic center space to Redeemer Fellowship, Edisto Beach officials violated the Constitution on two different counts – denying the church its right to free speech and free exercise of religion.
The U.S. Supreme Court has already made it clear that the government cannot treat religious people and organizations worse than everyone else when it ruled 7-2 in favor of Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia. In that case, the State of Missouri had blocked Trinity Lutheran from receiving a grant to resurface its playground. The grant program was open to nonprofits in the state of Missouri. Yet, because the playground is operated by a church, the state denied them the grant.
The government should never be permitted to treat people of faith as second-class citizens – barring them from benefits that others receive simply because they are religious.
The Bottom Line
Churches should have the same access to public facilities as any other group. Anything less is a clear violation of the Constitution.
Religious FreedomBilly Graham’s Granddaughter Highlights the Unfair Treatment of Churches During COVID-19
Government officials may protect health and public safety. But they can never suspend the First Amendment.
Religious FreedomCan Churches Be Treated Worse Than Casinos? We Asked the Supreme Court to Weigh In
While hundreds of thousands of people streamed into casinos, Nevada churches were prohibited from holding worship services with more than 50 people—under threat of criminal and civil penalties.
Religious FreedomCasinos Are Open, But Churches Are Closed?
Last week, hundreds of people poured through the doors of Nevada casinos. Meanwhile, it is illegal for churches in the state to meet with more than 50 people.