Church dispute leads to breakup, jail time, and management shift 

By Jean Lachowicz 

Bethlehem Healing Temple Church at 12 S. Oakley Blvd. has been a place of worship and community service for more than a century. It has been known throughout the area for its community food programs, youth activities, and programs to assist the elderly.

            That legacy has been tarnished in recent years by infighting between two factions that caused legal proceedings and a painful split.

            According to a court opinion delivered by Justice Michael J. Gallagher, “Reminiscent of the Israelites’ flight from Egypt, this ongoing dispute over the leadership and control of the Bethlehem Healing Temple Church Inc….has followed an arduous and contorted path.”

            The conflict stemmed from a struggle for authority between church members and the pastor. When the litigation began, Bishop A.C. Richards served as Bethlehem’s pastor, having been elected in 1984. In June 2001, as Richards’s health was failing, several church members filed a complaint against him for an “emergency temporary injunction,” claiming Richards “failed and refused to account to the membership” for offerings and other funds contributed to Bethlehem and “resisted the legitimate efforts of the church members to institute policies of fiscal responsibility” and to determine Richards’s successor as pastor.

            A trial court froze Bethlehem’s bank accounts and limited distributions from them. This move triggered a firestorm of legal motions and appeals from pro- and anti-Richards factions over control of the church and its assets.

            Richards died Aug. 9, 2001, and his daughter, Marcenia J. Richards, succeeded him as pastor. Afterward, a group of disgruntled members left the church and started another church and organization. The group filed a lawsuit against Bethlehem Healing Temple Church Inc. and its board of directors to gain possession of Bethlehem’s property and access to church records and funds.

            The legitimacy of the church’s board of directors became a point of contention as well. Although the church’s articles of incorporation state that church members are to elect the board members, Bethlehem had not followed that practice. Instead, the pastor had appointed board members.

            The court ordered the church to hold a special board of directors election in September 2004. Each side submitted a list of church members who should be allowed to vote, with Richards maintaining the court had no authority to decide who is and who is not a member of the church. The court rejected her argument, noting “little overlap” occurred in the parties’ respective membership lists.

            According to Bethlehem’s co-pastor, Larry D. Martin, who came to the church four years ago, “Judge Thomas Quinn of the Circuit Court ordered an… election” that included former members, “some of whom left the church more than 20 years ago. Pastor Richards felt this order was unethical and chose to not participate in the court’s election.”

            Richards said, “Never in the history of our corporation have we elected our board of directors. Each of the plaintiffs themselves served on our board. It has been our church policy and practice for more than 70 years to appoint our board.”

            The anti-Richards/Martin faction won the election. Afterward, the court said Richards must relinquish her rights as Bethlehem pastor and president of the board of directors, along with “bank accounts, records, insurance policies, computers, vehicles, and the assets of the church to the newly elected court-ruled board of directors.” If not, she would face “possible sanctions, contempt, and jail time beginning Thursday, July 19, 2007.”

            Richards vowed to fight, stating, “Millions of those before me have been imprisoned while fighting for justice. I am not afraid of jail.”

            Martin actually was sent to jail over this issue. He was released recently after serving six weeks.

            The pastors’ fight was to no avail, however, as the group opposing Richards and Martin now controls the church, its property, and its name.

            “You try to live your life with convictions, and I don’t regret any of this,” Martin said. “Now it is time to move forward. As of Friday, Sept.14, they are in possession of the church property. We are out of the building and looking for another place to worship.

            “These things happen in churches,” he continued. “My belief is that bringing it to court is damaging. The Bible is very clear about the way to resolve church issues. This has been devastating to the church community because everyone worshipped together, sang in the choir together, and now everyone is divided. Even the children are at odds.”

            Richards, Martin, and their supporters are organizing a new church to be located elsewhere on the West Side.