By Dr. Barry Denton
In recent years, high-profile calls to “defund the police” and growing anti-law-enforcement sentiment — combined with persistent recruitment shortfalls — have produced an unprecedented shortage of sworn officers nationwide. Nowhere is this felt more acutely than in houses of worship, where rising threats of violence have created urgent demand for on-site security. Yet far fewer uniformed personnel are available to volunteer their time and expertise or to work in an off-duty paid capacity.
The turn to volunteer congregational teams
To fill the void left by absent law enforcement volunteers, many congregations have begun recruiting civilian members of their flocks to serve on safety and security teams. Some churches seek individuals with prior military experience or concealed-carry authorizations; others accept anyone willing to step forward. While well-intentioned, this approach dramatically increases legal exposure for both the institution and the volunteers themselves.
Liability risks of civilian security
Ordinary citizens — even those with firearms permits — often lack the statutory protections afforded to sworn officers acting under color of law. When an untrained volunteer intervenes in a disturbance, the house of worship may be held vicariously liable for any injury or rights violation that occurs. Consider this scenario:
- A congregant experiencing a mental health crisis begins screaming obscenities and walking toward the pulpit during service.
- A volunteer safety team member attempts to physically restrain the individual but uses excessive force.
- The person is injured and requires emergency hospitalization.
- A lawsuit is promptly filed naming the church, the team leader and the volunteer as defendants.
In such a case, the volunteer could face personal liability for assault or negligence; the team leader could be held accountable for negligent hiring and supervision; and the church itself could be sued for negligent oversight of its security program.
Distinction when law enforcement officers serve
When security teams are composed of on-duty or properly contracted off-duty sworn law enforcement officers, churches benefit from statutory immunities and departmental safeguards not available to civilian volunteers. Under most state peace officer statutes and municipal codes, commissioned officers acting within the scope of their official duties enjoy qualified immunity, which shields them — and by extension, the institution that retains them — from civil suits alleging negligence or excessive use of force.
These officers also operate under rigorous departmental policies governing use-of-force continuum, arrest procedures, reporting requirements and duty-to-intervene protocols. In practical terms, any decision to detain, search or employ force is treated as a law enforcement action rather than a private citizen’s intervention, significantly reducing the church’s vicarious liability. Officers are also subject to their agency’s internal affairs review and professional standards division, creating a recognized framework for accountability and documentation that courts and insurers consider mitigating factors in liability assessments.
Yet despite these advantages, the national recruitment crisis has eroded the availability of off-duty details for houses of worship. Many agencies now impose stricter limits on secondary employment — citing overtime budgets, union agreements and concerns over officer fatigue or conflicts of interest — which drives up the cost and complexity of securing off-duty contracts. Smaller congregations often lack the financial resources to underwrite these fees, and competition for officer hours is fierce among civic events, private businesses and other faith communities.
As a result, most churches can no longer rely on a steady cadre of sworn personnel to safeguard services. This shortage has compelled many institutions to explore alternatives such as partnering with licensed private security firms, establishing memoranda of understanding with local police departments or investing in state-certified church security training programs to approximate the legal and operational benefits once provided by off-duty officers.
Mitigating risk: Best practices for congregational security
Faced with this security dilemma, religious institutions should carefully weigh the following measures:
- Firearm policy: Decide whether team members may carry weapons on premises — and if so, establish clear guidelines governing storage, access and use.
- Selection and vetting: Implement a rigorous application process, including criminal background checks, character references and screening for relevant experience.
- Comprehensive training: Require regular, certified instruction in de-escalation techniques, use-of-force protocols, first aid and the legal boundaries of citizen’s arrest statutes.
- Operational communication: Standardize radio procedures and incident reporting systems to ensure accurate, auditable records while protecting volunteer and institutional liability.
- Insurance coverage: Maintain adequate general liability and umbrella policies for the church; verify that individual volunteers carry personal liability coverage appropriate to their duties.
- Legal compliance: Stay abreast of state and local statutes governing private security activities, concealed carry and citizen’s arrest authority to prevent inadvertent legal violations.
Case study: Park City Church, Virginia
In early 2024, Park City Church in suburban Richmond became the target of an alarming social media campaign when an individual posted graphic images and explicit threats, warning that “blood will be on their hands” should services proceed as scheduled.
Church leadership immediately activated its incident response protocol: security team volunteers monitored video feeds and entry points, while one vigilant team member — stationed near the main entrance — spotted a man matching the online description. Rather than confronting him directly, the volunteer quietly contacted an off-duty Richmond police sergeant who was contracted to provide morning-service security.
Within moments, the sergeant and the volunteer approached the suspect together, confirmed his identity and took him into custody without discharging a weapon or using physical force. This seamless handoff underscored the value of a clear chain of command and of leveraging sworn officer authority to manage high-risk incidents in a worship setting.
Had a civilian volunteer attempted to detain the assailant alone, the situation could have escalated catastrophically. Without the legal protections afforded to commissioned officers, such engagement would have exposed both the individual and the church to potential criminal liability for unlawful restraint or assault, as well as to civil lawsuits alleging negligence or intentional infliction of harm. Questions would likely arise over whether the volunteer acted within the scope of any training, whether the church’s vetting and oversight procedures were sufficient and whether clear policies existed for escalating suspicious contacts to professional law enforcement.
By contrast, the Park City Church example shows that coordinated action — rooted in predefined roles, strong communication and immediate involvement of sworn officers — is essential to neutralize threats while minimizing both harm and legal exposure.
A call for structured, professional security
As shootings and targeted threats against houses of worship become alarmingly common, congregations cannot afford ad hoc security arrangements based solely on goodwill. Proper vetting, ongoing training, judicious use of sworn officer resources and robust insurance protections form the foundation of a defensible safety program. Without these, churches risk catastrophic liability — and, more importantly, endanger their congregants.
In this unsettled landscape, religious leaders must balance their pastoral mission with pragmatic risk management. By adopting formalized security protocols and forging partnerships with local law enforcement, houses of worship can fulfill both their spiritual calling and their duty of care to all who enter their doors.
Ultimately, safeguarding houses of worship demands more than reactive measures — it requires an ongoing, collaborative commitment among faith leaders, security professionals and local law enforcement. By continually assessing emerging threats, sharing best practices across denominations and investing in both human and technological resources, congregations can foster environments that are both secure and spiritually nourishing. In doing so, they reaffirm their role as steadfast havens of faith, fellowship and hope.
Three practical steps to improve church security
Click each step below to learn what law enforcement can do to support local church security.
About the author
Dr. Barry D. Denton is a seasoned law enforcement executive and criminal justice educator. He currently serves as a senior lecturer at the University of Louisville and trains church safety teams. Dr. Denton has written several widely used textbooks — including Practical Recruitment for Law Enforcement (2009), Crime and Justice: Past and Present (2020), Case Studies in Terrorism (2020) and Policing in the 21st Century (2020) — that support both academic curricula and agency training.
