A Christian Lawyer Silenced... The Court Worships at the Secular Altar

 

It has finally happened. In Pennsylvania, the practice of law is governed by The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. They promulgate the Rules of Professional Conduct which are enforced by its Disciplinary Board. 

On June 8, 2020, the Court amended Rule 8.4 (related to misconduct) to include a new subsection: 

It is professional misconduct for a lawyer in the practice of law, by words or conduct, knowingly manifest bias or prejudice, or engage in harassment or discrimination, as those terms are defined in applicable federal, state or local statutes or ordinances, including but not limited to bias, prejudice, harassment or discrimination based upon race, sex, gender identity or expression, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, or socioeconomic status. This paragraph does not limit the ability of a lawyer to accept, decline or withdraw from a representation in accordance with Rule 1.16. This paragraph does not preclude advice or advocacy consistent with these Rules. (The Rules of Professional Conduct, 8.4(g)). 

I am going to be in deep trouble. I am an unabashed believer in God. I believe that The Holy Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of God. I believed that we a conceived in total depravity. I believe that God directs us according to His perfect will and that Jesus died for the sins of those people chosen by God. I believe that those not among the elect are condemned to Hell. I believe that there is nothing we can do to resist God’s grace, and that once we have been saved by grace, there is nothing we can do to lose God’s grace. If that sounds a lot like Calvinism- yes, I believe in classical Reformed teaching. 

So, how can a Christian who believes that sin is sin continue to practice law? I am the Legal Advisor to the board of a non-profit organization (which will go un-named unless I obtain permission) that believes, as I do, in the inerrancy of scripture. If I affirm their beliefs, I will have committed misconduct. If someone objects to my choice of art or literature in my office, I will have committed misconduct. If someone at church asks me my legal opinion regarding an issue as it relates to the secular world, I am likely to have committed misconduct. To live my faith, I may lose my career. 

Of course, Jesus warned all of us about that in the Bible. “…and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake.” (Matthew 9:22; ESV). 

Maybe you think I am being a little dramatic.  You may be saying, “Rule 1.16 gives you an out. You don’t have to accept someone as a client.” 

Guess again. I do have latitude to determine the clients I choose to represent.  According to 8.4(g), I would not be able to ask the questions to find out if my representation could expose me to misconduct. Furthermore, I would not be able to terminate my attorney/client relationship if there is some conceivable way that my termination might relate to a protected class.

 Maybe you think that I’m still being too dramatic. You may be saying, “Surely they won’t go after you- that isn’t what this rule is about.” 

I hope you are right, but I don’t place much hope in that.  Just ask Barronelle Stutzman, the owner of Arlene’s Flowers. A same-sex couple asked the 75 year old florist to provide flowers for their wedding. Ms. Stutzman declined based upon her religious beliefs. The Washington State Supreme Court ruled against Stutzman. If the Washington courts were willing to rule against a florist, there is no doubt in my mind that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, who promulgated the rule, would discipline me. 

Where does that leave me? The answer is simple and stated by Martin Luther in 1521 at the Diet of Worms, “Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason, … my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. So help me God. Amen.”