Are You A Church Or An Ekklesia?
The word "church" has come down to us in the English language from the Greek word ekklesia. As we speak our native tongue, we create mental pictures so we are constnatly converting words into picture scenes. So when we say the word church, imagery is created of chapels, bricks, stone, steeples and perhaps bells ringing on the Sabbath day.
However, our Lord said in the New Testament, "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them". Matthew 20:18. Most established churches jealously guard their particular exclusiveness to our Lord, principally because of the doctrinal pronouncements of their ecclesiastical beliefs, therefore, much division and endless disputes continue among the Christian world.
If each church organization has a singular and proprietary right to Christ, or of there is one singularlity in this category, the words of our Savior do not make sense. The truth of the matter is that families and groups of families make up an 'ekklesia' as long as they gather out, in and for Christ. An Ekklesia is translated from the Greek word meaning "those who are gathered in Christ". Quite a contrast to the present understanding of the modern church. Does this mean that organized religion, as we know it today is wrong? Of course not, as long as it is not promised as "the only means of acceptable worship".
A church then is simply a religious establishment consisting of two or more individuals. The church can be an artificial entity or what might be called a legal fiction, which anyone including you may create or establish. The church may or may not have buildings, ceremonies, a creed, robes, and/or vestments. You "do not have to reveal to anyone" the sum total or substance of the religion, and/or church, that you establish. (See Words and Phrases, at your local law library for the legal definition and the scope of the following words: Church, minister, clergy, ordination, religion, etc.)
In the U.S. Supreme Court decision considering the case of Everson vs. Board of Education, 330U5 203. 91 , LED2, 711, the Court held that:
"The establishment of religion" of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither the State nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can they pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can they force nor influence a person to tgo to or to remain away from a church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attemdance or non attendance."
In Title 26 of the United States Code and Income Tax Regulations June 26, 1977, edition published by Commerce Clearing House, it states in Section 1.511-2(u) vol. 1, page 33, 471.42; and in The Law of Tax Exempt Organizations by Bruce Hopkins, published by Lerner Law Book Co., 1977 (page 107), it states the following:
The term "church" includes a religious order, to a religious organization, if such order or organization is:
(a) an integral part of the church;
(b) is engaged in carrying out the functions of a church, whether as a civil law corporation or otherwise. (Note: "or otherwise" means that its not necessary to incorporate a church and thus become a creature of the state)
However, the option does remain for the church to incorporate if it desires. There are both advantages and disadvantages to both sides of this isue. One item of interest in the position taken by the State on the rights of incorporated entities. Official IRS Audit Guide in Section 242.31, addressing corporation books and records states:
The privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment does not apply to corporations.
The theory for this is that the State, having created the corporation has reserved the power to inquire into its activities. Now if we truly subscribe to the docrine of "separation of church and state", we should give this matter our full attention. If we incorporate, we give up the "right", and become controlled at least to a degree by the State. If we remain unincorporated, we retain all of our rights under The Bill of Rights (i.e. the first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America). The final resolution of this matter should be taken up jointly with competant legal advisors. We, the compilers of this information, elect to remain unincorporated.
In summary, under the previous stated regulation (1.511-2 (ii), a "church" is an organization the "duties" of which include the ministration of sacerdotal, (i.e. priestly) functionsand the practices of a particular religious body. A Church may also include a religious order or other organization, which is an "integral part" of a church and is engaged in carrying out functions of a church.
The 8th US District Court said in a decision in 1974:
"Neither this Court, nor any branch of this Government, wil consider the merits of fallacies of a religion, nor will the Court compare the beliefs, dogmas, and practices of a newly organized religion with those of an older, more established religion, nor will the Court praise or condemn a religion, however excellent or fanatical or preposterous it may seem. Were the Court to do so, it would impinge upon guarantees of the First Amenment."
Universal Life Church vs. United States, 372 Supp. 770.776 ED. Cal 1974
From the above information, we can at least say this:
Under the Constitution of the United States, we as citizens enjoy the right of freedom from religion, that is, freedom from a "state defined religion".
Abington School District vs. Schempp 374 U.S. 2031963
From these decisions we may conclude that any claim to church status cannot be subjected to evaluative criteria or government standards, as such action would tend to prescribe the form and content of religious beliefs and practices. Also, whatsoever rights, privileges and exemptions or immunities are granted to any church, and/or religion, are also and must, on the same basis and to the same extent, be granted to all churches and/or religions.
Religious Freedom - A Natural Right
The First Amemdment of the United States Constitution reads as follows:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; of the right of the people to peacebly assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of greivance."
In Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, it reads as follows:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce a law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protections of the laws."
As has been stated previously, we have the natural right to freedom "from religion". No law for, against or otherwise can ever be made with regard to the church, as it exists under the Supreme Law of the land, within a legal null. There is no law at respecting an establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof.
Note 1. (See "Law of Tax and Exempt Organizations" by Bruce Hopkins, published by Learner Book Co., 1977, page 110, in your local law library)
Thr rights spoken of here in the First Amendment and the following nine amemdments, known as The Bill of Rights, are personal rights that have been fought and paid for by the sacrifice of human life by our forefathers. These law-rights as well as the entire Constitution for the United States of America are, in fact, the Supreme Law of the land. The Supreme Court of the United States (contrasted by writing it more correctly - the supreme Court of the united States has addressed itself to this fact, and holds the following opinions:
"Any law opposed to the Constitution of the United States is as it were NO LAW AT ALL."
This doctrine is so important that we have reprinted the fullness of the text that states the following:
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality NO LAW, but is wholly void, and ineffective (f)or any purpose, since constitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it. A contract, which rests on an unconstitutional statute, creates no obligation to be impaired by subsequent legislation. A void act cannot be legally inconsistent with a valid one and an unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Inded, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamentsl law of the land, it is superseded thereby. SInce an unconstitutional statute can repeal or in any way effect an existing one, if a repealed statuted is unstitutional, the statute in which it attempts to repeal, remains in full force,and effect..The general principles stated upply apply to the constitutions and lseveral states insofar as they are repugnant to the constitutionsabd Laws of the United States. Moreover, a constitution will nullify it aff effectually as if it had, in express terms been enacted in conflict therein."
16AM.Jr. 2nd, page 177
The Gates of Zion
5045 Valley Crest Drive Unit #199
Concord, California 94521
(925) 429-3115
Privacy Policy
