Pastor Chris Hodges, a co-founder of the Association of Related Churches (ARC) and senior pastor at Church of the Highlands, faces severe accusations in a lawsuit filed by former Celebration Church pastor Stovall Weems. The lawsuit claims that ARC’s leadership, including Hodges, acted inappropriately to seize control of Celebration Church, prioritizing financial interests over ethical considerations.
Weems alleges that ARC’s actions created a corporate-style church growth model that placed immense pressure on pastors, ultimately causing emotional and psychological harm. This legal dispute has sparked widespread discussion about church ethics, financial responsibility, and the potential consequences of a business-oriented approach within religious organizations. It also raises important questions about the role of religious organizations in the broader nonprofit sector and their accountability in financial dealings.
Understanding the Background of the Lawsuit
The lawsuit began in 2022 when Stovall Weems, former pastor of Celebration Church in Jacksonville, Florida, alleged that ARC leaders orchestrated his removal to gain control over the church’s operations and assets. The lawsuit names ARC, Hodges, and other key figures, including Dino Rizzo and John Siebeling, as defendants. According to Weems, this alleged takeover was part of a calculated strategy to protect ARC’s financial interests by suppressing dissent and controlling church operations. Weems’ departure from Celebration Church followed disputes with the church’s leadership board, which supported ARC’s involvement and growth-oriented model (Christian Post).
Weems claims that ARC’s model shifted the focus from pastoral missions to corporate expansion, creating tensions with his vision for Celebration Church. He argues that ARC’s influence became detrimental to his church’s spiritual mission, so he decided to distance Celebration Church from ARC’s requirements. This separation, he claims, triggered a chain of events leading to his forced departure. Weems also contends that ARC’s focus on financial control led to decisions that undermined the spiritual and ethical foundation of the church.
Read also: Camp Lejeune Colorectal Cancer Lawsuit: Everything You Need to Know
Central Allegations and ARC’s Role
The lawsuit’s allegations go beyond financial motives, accusing ARC and its leaders of unethical behavior, including psychological manipulation, extortion, and misrepresentation. According to the complaint, ARC pressured Weems and his wife to contribute a significant portion of Celebration Church’s income to ARC’s initiatives. ARC’s network churches typically contribute 10% of their tithes to ARC during their early years, with a 2% contribution even after repaying loans.
However, Celebration Church was not initially part of ARC’s network, and Weems claims he resisted ARC’s attempts to make Celebration Church a financial contributor.
Weems also alleges that ARC’s model demands rigid adherence to its corporate practices, sidelining pastors who resist the approach. He claims this system undermined his autonomy as a church leader and created an environment of fear and compliance, where dissenting opinions were not tolerated. He asserts that this pressure caused severe psychological strain on him and other pastors, emphasizing that ARC’s focus on financial gain compromised pastoral well-being and hindered meaningful spiritual missions.
Weems’ lawsuit accuses Hodges and other leaders of prioritizing financial growth and using ARC’s influence to manipulate church leadership for personal benefit. In addition, Weems claims that ARC leaders used their power to discredit pastors who questioned their methods, fostering a culture of silence and conformity.
Financial Misrepresentation and Church Growth Model
ARC’s church growth model emphasizes large congregational sizes, corporate management, and financial sustainability. Hodges has been vocal about ARC’s goal to expand its network of churches across North America, emphasizing attendance growth and revenue as success metrics.
Weems contends that ARC’s approach is overly business-focused, asserting that this model creates excessive financial expectations for pastors, leading to harmful consequences. The lawsuit highlights how ARC’s growth model allegedly exploits smaller churches, securing ongoing revenue through mandatory contributions while placing financial burdens on pastors (flare magazine).
Moreover, Weems argues that ARC’s revenue-generating practices prioritize financial outcomes over ethical pastoral care. According to the lawsuit, the pressure to comply with ARC’s growth strategies led Weems to reconsider his ministry approach. In 2018, he prioritized missionary work and redefined his vision for Celebration Church, seeking a simpler model focused on local engagement rather than expansion. This shift put him at odds with ARC’s vision, intensifying the conflict and eventually leading to his removal. Weems also asserts that ARC’s practices discouraged community-based church growth, which he believed was a more authentic and sustainable approach to ministry.
Allegations of Psychological and Financial Manipulation
The lawsuit claims ARC’s actions extended beyond financial demands, alleging instances of extortion and psychological manipulation. Weems alleges that ARC used its influence to ostracize him, pressuring him to comply with their financial requirements or risk losing his position. He claims that ARC leaders, including Hodges, engaged in a campaign to discredit him within the church community, leading to a breakdown in relationships and, eventually, his resignation.
One of the most striking allegations involves an “extortionate” email allegedly sent to Weems in January 2022 by Larry Stockstill, an ARC overseer and advisor to Hodges. According to Weems, the email demanded that he “repent” and realign his ministry to ARC’s standards, presenting compliance as the only way to “clear [his] name.” Weems argues that such actions reflect a pattern of intimidation to force him out of leadership, allowing ARC to take control of Celebration Church and its assets. Weems has described this as a “spiritual mafia,” where church leaders used threats and manipulation to consolidate power.
Ethical Implications and Broader Church Reactions
The lawsuit against Hodges and ARC has ignited broader conversations about ethics, accountability, and the role of corporate growth models in church management. Supporters of ARC emphasize its positive impact, noting that it has provided financial support and guidance to hundreds of churches. They argue that the financial model enables churches to sustain and grow, especially in challenging economic times.
However, critics argue that ARC’s model can pressure pastors to prioritize financial metrics over spiritual missions, potentially leading to burnout and disillusionment. The Weems lawsuit has become a focal point for these concerns, highlighting the potential ethical pitfalls of a business-oriented church structure.
The case also raises questions about church transparency and leadership accountability. Faith communities worldwide closely observe the lawsuit’s outcome as it may set a precedent for how church networks operate. Many congregants, pastors, and leaders wonder if focusing on expansion and financial growth is compatible with faith-centered pastoral care. This case could prompt more churches to reevaluate their reliance on corporate models and refocus on the spiritual needs of their congregations.
Conclusion: The Impact and Future Implications of the Lawsuit
The lawsuit involving Pastor Chris Hodges and ARC exemplifies modern church organizations’ complex challenges. It presents an ethical dilemma between financial sustainability and pastoral care, exploring whether a corporate model can align with spiritual missions. For many, the case highlights the risks of prioritizing growth and revenue over ministry, shedding light on potential exploitation and pressure within church networks.
The outcome of this lawsuit may influence the future operations of ARC and other similar organizations, shaping policies around church finances, ethics, and leadership accountability. The decision could also lead to more stringent regulations regarding financial transparency in religious organizations, ensuring that church leaders are held accountable for their actions. As the case unfolds, it will likely continue to fuel debates on church transparency, spiritual integrity, and the balance between faith and finances in religious communities.