Judicial interference. Now I haven't been watching this closely, so I'm glad World Mag has been. Some of you may have heard of the case in Fresno where a Lutheran church revoked the membership of some people and then those people sued to get their memberships back. This would have been amusing, if the judge hadn't sided with the deposed members!
Now, you can debate the Establishment clause all you want on issues like 10 commandment monoliths and public funding of faith-based organizations, but you cannot argue that the clause does not cover this circumstance, and that the judge is smoking something here.
Let me say that, after reading this article, that both sides do have some issues that need to be resolved and neither side is completely clear of blame. But the verses sited in the article are clear on what should be happening and what should not be. This should never have gone to a public arena. Biblically these things STAY in the church.
I agree with the deposed members that there is one part of Matt 18 that calls for the dispute to be taken before the body (usually considered the entire church) before excommunicating. The church didn't do that. But beyond that I don't see a problem in what they did. The deposed have, according to the article, not been very ready to sit down and discuss their gripes.