State Court Victory for Church

By 

Jay Sekulow

|
June 21, 2011

2 min read

Religious Liberty

A

A

 

Increasingly across the country, lawsuits have been filed by disgruntled members and former members of churches.  We have been involved in cases in Alabama, Florida and Tennessee.  The integrity of the Churchs witness for Christ is put in jeopardy and churches often split and fracture over these unnecessary lawsuits. 

 

Recently, we went to court on behalf of a church in Tennessee.  The position that we advocated is that the courts have no business interfering with the internal workings of a church.  As the court in Tennessee held:

 

The remainder of the lawsuit cannot be adjudicated even under the Tennessee Non-Profit Corporation Act cited in the amended complaint, because resolving the lawsuit would pull the Court into decision-making regarding retention of the Pastor, how the Pastors time should be used, how the Church funds should be spent, and whether the Pastor and other officials should be removed from their positions.

 

The court went on to note that [m]atters touching [the relationship between a church and its ministers] must necessarily be recognized as of prime ecclesiastical concern.   Therefore, the court could not and should not exercise jurisdiction over these lawsuits.

 

The ability of churches to define their own doctrine, determine their own leadership and set their own mission policies should be free of government interference.  The court was correct to note, as the Supreme Court has held, that decisions by the governing bodies of religious organizations on matters related to doctrine, faith, or church governance and discipline are not reviewable by civil courts.  This area of law is known as the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine and it prohibits secular courts from redetermining the correctness of a decision by a religious tribunal on issues of canon law, religious doctrine, or church governance.  The trial court noted that:

 

The Constitution forbids secular courts from deciding whether religious doctrine or ecclesiastical law supports a particular decision made by church authorities, noting that religious bodies must be free to decide for themselves, free from state interference, matters which pertain to church government, faith, and doctrine. 

 

This was an important victory.  Courts should not be in the business of policing church members, election of its leaders and determining the church mission and programs.  We believe that this victory in Tennessee will establish precedent throughout the country.  To read the courts decision in its entirety, click here.