BY BILL KNOTT

HIS BROW FURROWS AS HE stares out the conference room window at the clouds pilingup in the blue Maryland sky.

"Whenever the church leadership concludes that we have to use the legal system to defend the good name of the church, we get a lot of mail," he says slowly. "Not only is there a cultural distrust of the court system in America, but Adventists have even greater reasons for being wary of litigation.

"Our serious approach to Scripture, particularly Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 6, means that we will always have reservations about using the court system under even the most clear-cut circumstances."

For Walter Carson, a lawyer working in the Office of General Counsel at church headquarters, the issues that swirl around the uses and misuses of the name of the Seventh-day Adventist Church are weighty and troubling.

"We receive letters that inform us that by applying for and receiving trademark protection for the name of the church, we have fulfilled prophecies from the book of Revelation," he adds. "In the thinking of these sincere members, we have applied for protection to 'the beast' and have formed an image to it. Trying to protect the good name of the church through the legal system from those who would abuse it is just another evidence to these members of how the church has corrupted itself."

Carson has worked in the General Conference Office of General Counsel for 21 years and is the department's "go-to" person on issues of trademark protection and intellectual property rights. Along with other members of the six-member staff, he has been involved in several pivotal cases that have affected the opportunity of dissident groups to use the name "Seventh-day Adventist" to describe themselves. A February 1996 decision by the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office confirmed the church's trademark registration of the name "Seventh-day Adventist" and allows the church exclusive use of the name "Adventist" as well ["Adventist" is in question].

"The perspective that my colleagues and I share along with church leadership is that these are really matters of stewardship," says Carson. "When the name 'Seventh-day Adventist' was taken by Sabbathkeeping Adventists as their official name, there were a host of implications for the future, some of which were comprehended by those who voted the action.

"To that point, title to property had only been held by individuals: beginning in 1863, it could be held by a legal corporation functioning as an arm of the church. Without a formal organization or an officially-approved ministerial force, disaffected or self-appointed preachers could represent themselves as being fully Adventist.

"Both of those issues are still with us, as some of the litigation we are involved in will show," he adds. "Can a dissident group or breakaway pastors legitimately use the name'Seventh-day Adventist' to describe a ministry when they have removed themselves from the worldwide fellowship of the church that bears that name? We think not."

At issue in the U.S. District Court of New York at present is a case involving an unincorporated group that separated itself from the Immanuel [Emmanuel] Seventh-day Adventist Church in Brooklyn [the Bronx]. Taking the name "Emmanuel [Emanuel] Seventh-day [Seventh Day] Adventist Church," the group has also filed a suit to claim tithes and offerings belonging to the established Adventist congregation organized with the Greater New York Conference. Conference leaders are responding to the civil case in a state court, while the General Conference has filed suit on the trademark infringement issue in Federal court.

"Some Adventists might feel that we would do well to ignore these abuses," Carson says. "They are content to say, 'Let God work out the problems.' But there is a moral and even monetary value to the name of the church, as suits like this one show. A name may not be tangible, but it has a distinct value in the marketplace of ideas. The damaging publicity that attended the Waco tragedy some years ago, in which the Koresh group was incorrectly linked with the Seventh-day Adventist Church, created great confusion in the public mind.

"A name, particularly the name of a faith community, identifies it and its value system as distinct from all others. Those who could co-opt that name or trade on its potential for goodwill are acting unethically and illegally. They confuse the public, the media, and at times, even our own members."

Carson expresses mild amusement at the contradictory attitudes that some Adventists have toward their denomination's involvement in litigation.

"When the church files a lawsuit to protect the rights of an Adventist employee who has been discriminated against or fired for Sabbathkeeping, there is little except applause. Similarly,when this office has filed amicus (friend of the court) briefs in high-profile legal cases that affect the constitutional rights of Adventists and other religious adherents, this is perceived as a legitimate activity by most, if not all, Adventists.

"But protecting the good name of the church through litigation troubles many Adventists," he says, noting that an average of nearly 10 situations arise each year that require some response from his office. "Our first response is to attempt a brotherly approach to those who are no longer acting brotherly. We ask them to discontinue their use of a name that they no longer bear as a result of their choices. Most of the time, the only response we receive to our request is 'We'll do what we want.'

"Both Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 6 address the negative influence of adversarial, brother versus brother lawsuits," Carson notes (see "Courting Trouble," page 8, for a fuller discussion). "But both also imply a time when the dissenting brother is no longer acting like a brother who recognizes the authority of the church to resolve issues, and is a candidate for a different kind of response from the church.

"These decisions are made carefully and, I would add, prayerfully, with full counsel from the General Conference leadership. Our goal is consistent with the biblical counsel to resolve all differences at the lowest level possible and thus preserve the opportunity for improved relationships in the future."

Carson anticipates more cases involving the name of the church to emerge in the months ahead. "The explosion of information and business represented by the growth of the Internet will bring many complex issues to the fore," he says. "We aren't yet clear on how the laws protecting the use of the church's name will apply to electronic media or to the various websites that describe themselves as Adventist. Our goal is to faithfully apply the principles of our work so that the name Seventh-day Adventist continues to have a clear, unambiguous meaning to the public and in the minds of all who hold this church dear."

Adventist Review, June 25, 1998