Beaverton Grace Bible Church Sues Oregon Family For Defamation After Bad Reviews, Critical Blog (VIDEO)

Officials at Beaverton Grace Bible Church weren't too thrilled to learn that a former member had written negative online reviews of the service and congregation, so they filed a lawsuit against an Oregon mother and her family.

Julie Anne Smith, her daughter and three other commenters are facing a $500,000 defamation claim after Pastor Charles O'Neal indicated their reviews included harmful descriptors such as "cult," "creepy," and "spiritual abuse," KATU reports.

Smith attended the church a few years ago, but after leaving the congregation, she took to the Internet to express her feelings.

"We do it with restaurants and hotels and whatnot, and I thought, why not do it with this church?" Smith told the station, referring to the online reviews.

But after churchgoers began adding their own positive remarks, Smith created a blog titled "Beaverton Grace Bible Church Survivors" to share her thoughts.

In her introduction, Smith states she received the lawsuit just days after the blog went live in February. Since then, she has used the platform to chronicle her journey in dealing with the lawsuit and the church.

The blog also contains scanned images of the original complaint, which include phrases from Smith's reviews that allegedly troubled Pastor O'Neal.

According to the complaint, Smith wrote the following statements about the church on the Internet:

Sept. 29, 2011:

"You will be fine at this church if you never question the elders or the pastor."

Jan. 5, 2012:

"What we had was indoctrination... That is how cult leaders work. Don't waste your precious lives and relationships by being held emotionally/spiritually captive at this so-called church."

Jan. 9, 2012:

"How can she forget that her own beloved pastor knew about a sex offender in the church who had access to the nursery and children on a weekly basis and did not have any safeguards in place."

Smith's attorney, Linda Williams, told KGW News she doesn't think O'Neal has a strong case.

"It would be extremely difficult to determine that wording or posting caused that tremendous $500,000 worth of damage... It just didn't," Williams said.

A motion to dismiss the lawsuit is scheduled for May 21, KGW reports. The church has not commented on the story.

Visit KATU to read more on the story.

Comments

[marksrig]

11:06 AM on 06/04/2012

Shame on you pastor!

[dbrett480]

05:55 PM on 05/21/2012

The church should win if it can be proven the paster didn't know about the sex offender. Everything else is just her opinion.

[MissIndependentLady]

01:08 AM on 05/20/2012

This is what's wrong with a lot of religious people. When you say anything negative about someone's religion, they will cry all day long about their "religious freedoms" being taken away, but when they start disparaging others, and you complain, they say, "Well, I have God on my side, so I don't have to listen to you". Religion is all about groupthink.

[AprilMoon92]

12:02 AM on 05/20/2012

... And now this whole thing backfired on them and they have hundreds of bad reviews on google. At least Julie Smith's family will hopefully be getting some money from the church due to them trying to sue her for no real reason.

[amarilloindy]

09:41 PM on 05/17/2012

I think the church will find the First Amendment will protect the legitimate expression of the blogger's opinion.

[seikena]

06:47 PM on 05/17/2012

Now, if I write a comment approving of the lady giving her
opinion of this so called "church" and then these humble Christians
and their good pastor win their suit, would I be technically guilty of aiding
and abetting a church defamer? Could I in turn be sued?

To avoid any appearance of legal involvement in this matter, I will refrain from
commenting on this ridiculous suit

[Anthony Barnes]

06:18 PM on 05/17/2012

1 Corinthians 6:1-8 KJV

Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT NEITHER PARTY HERE MAY SEE THE OTHER AS CHRISTIANS OR BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN CHRIST. THEREFORE, THEY MAY NOT NEED TO TREAT EACH OTHER AS. SUCH. FURTHERMORE, BECAUSE THE PARTIES ARE NOT IN THE SAME CHURCH AND THERE ARE NO CHRISTIAN AUTHORITIES TO JUDGE THEIR DISPUTE, THERE IS NO RECOURSE OTHER THAN TO SETTLE THEIR DIFFERENCES IN A WORLDLY OR SECULAR COURT.

[FaeKnight]

12:41 PM on 06/01/2012

After I re-arrange my hair after all that shouting, let me address the two parts of your comment:

Regarding the 'not seeing each other as Christians' (which indicates it is therefore OK to sue). Since Julie Anne Smith is not counter-suing, only defending herself in court, then if anyone is not seeing the other as 'not Christian', it is the pastor, Chuck O'Neal that does not see Ms. Smith as a Christian since he is the one that brought suit.

The second issue about not being in the same church, they were prior to all of this. The whole flap came about because Ms Smith merely questioned the pastor Chuck O'Neal. This resulted in her being 'put out' of the church by O'Neal. Several attempts were made for mediation (with some pastors of other churches offering to be the mediator). In all instances O'Neal refused!!!

I encourage you to read Ms. Smith's blog.

[Slayer503]

06:02 PM on 05/17/2012

I thought the imaginary guy in the sky was the judge? I live in Oregon, on average we don't attend church, but I know for a fact god is not a licensed judge in Oregon, so this is another waste of tax payer money, by the tax exempt hate mongers...

[chicnstu49]

05:06 PM on 05/17/2012

Whatever happened to turn the other cheek? Does it only apply when its convienant?

[Anthony Barnes]

06:22 PM on 05/17/2012

It would be one thing if this was a one time thing. However, these former members are continually attacking that church. To me, the church has no choice but to settle the matter in a secular court since both parties do not recognize a single Christian authority that could settle their dispute. From the looks of things, I am not even sure both parties are Christians.

[nate george]

01:07 AM on 05/20/2012

the church has another option. pray about it. what that doesnt work? dont the believe in the power of the holy spirit??? the only non christian one looks like the church!

[joshua vanlandingham]

03:55 PM on 05/17/2012

I can't believe people actually go to church.

[Anthony Barnes]

05:40 PM on 05/17/2012

Well, then you have a problem because a lot do.

[Slayer503]

06:04 PM on 05/17/2012

He has a problem huh? That sounds very loving and forgiving...

[M4dwoman]

03:43 PM on 05/17/2012

Sounds like she may have hit a nerve.
Counter sue for stalking, harassment, and civil rights violations.
That'll learn 'em.

[Anthony Barnes]

05:43 PM on 05/17/2012

Not really. If someone lied on you, damaging your reputation, would you not sue? The church may be guilty of wrongdoing or may be innocent. Who knows?

[PrunellaC]

03:14 PM on 05/17/2012

Hey Grace Bibble Church -- you SUCK! Big slimy, hairy ones. Don't like it? Sue me.

*shrug*

[Anthony Barnes]

05:43 PM on 05/17/2012

So not the same thing.

[Hrover]

02:32 PM on 05/17/2012

May god be with you and not the church.

[Anthony Barnes]

05:44 PM on 05/17/2012

So, you know for sure, that the church is guilty of wrongdoing?

[Hrover]

01:44 PM on 05/18/2012

It's a church. Yes.

[pal3803]

12:55 PM on 05/17/2012

My church is in my heart, and God and I are good with that, the Golden Rule is all you need...Down with all controlling churches and their lame rules.

[Anthony Barnes]

05:45 PM on 05/17/2012

All? Sounds like you are prejudiced against churches. Not good.

[ttaz4dqm]

12:47 PM on 05/17/2012

"You will be fine at this church if you never question the elders or the pastor." - Unfortunately, she is correct: To question religious authority is THE CARDINAL SIN, amongst the pious.

[Anthony Barnes]

05:51 PM on 05/17/2012

No, it is not. The pastor or other religious leaders might get offended but it is not like they will kick you out of the church. Some pastors and religious are even humble enough to listen to you and if you are right agree with you or receive correction. It all depends on how Godly they really are. Unfortunately, many are more arrogant and self righteous than Godly. Many, but not all. Most will listen to you if you talk to them privately, voicing your concerns. Just don't try to front them in front of others. Nobody appreciates that and no one should have to put up with that kind of behavior. Not even devout Christians.

[ttaz4dqm]

11:40 PM on 05/17/2012

Hey, whatever you say, Your Holiness ;)

[FaeKnight]

12:53 PM on 06/01/2012

"The pastor or other religious leaders might get offended but it is not like they will kick you out of the church."

Not in this case (nor in mine). When Ms Smith questioned O'Neal over the firing of a church employee, she was "put out" of the church, and much later found out that she was being shunned, which resulted in her learning that she was on 'discipline'.

This is spiritual abuse. I encourage you to read her blog, and the comments. You will find others relating their experiences with spiritual abuse. She is not alone.