Lawsuit does not mean pastor is guilty
I am appalled that the Maryland Independent considers the article of July 8 “Southern Maryland Baptist Preacher faces lawsuit” news, much less “breaking news” as indicated. Why is it when a preacher finds himself accused, the press wants to make something of it? A better question might be: why didn’t Mr. [Andrew] Richardson, the article’s author, give the name of the “Plaintiff?” I’m sure it was in the information slipped to the Indy either by the plaintiff or was simply a lawyers trick to grab the public’s attention to hopefully sway a judge. In my personal experience as a Charles County minister of 13 years, I know it doesn’t take much in this area for people to threaten or follow through with lawsuits on ministers, having personally been dragged into court or threatened to be by displeased or opportunistic parishioners. 1 Peter 3:16 warns us that people will accuse us falsely.
I’ve known Keith Corrick and his son Brian (also a former pastor in Charles County) for a number of years. Both of these men have an excellent reputation in the community, are loved by their churches and I have been personally blessed by the Rev. Keith Corrick numerous times. They are givers by reputation, not takers. I do not know the gentleman filing charges against the Corricks. He obviously prefers to remain in the shadows as the nameless “plaintiff.” What steps have been taken to resolve their differences? If nameless “plaintiff” is a Christian (as is implied by his being a member of Corrick’s former congregation), the Bible is clear: according to 1 Corinthians 6, we are not to take our brothers to court. The local church and her authorities are better equipped to deal with these issues.
Pastor Keith is a gracious man, a patient leader and a man of deep faith, as is his son Pastor Brian Corrick. May this “news” not place a black eye on a good family with an impeccable reputation, nor may it slight the church as a whole. Any good attorney will tell you that an accusation is not a sign of guilt — so if any assumptions are to be made, let us look first at the nameless Christian plaintiff who is not following the scripture he claims to believe in.