Key point 9-07. The First Amendment allows civil courts to resolve internal church disputes so long as they can do so without interpreting doctrine or polity.
* An Alabama court rejected a request by church members to compel a church board to call a general membership meeting for the purpose of taking a vote of confidence on the pastor. Several church members began expressing dissatisfaction with their senior pastor’s effectiveness. Many concerns were shared with members of the church board. The board investigated the complaints, counseled with the pastor about the concerns, and formulated plans to resolve the matter. The board then held a meeting at which it passed a vote of confidence in the pastor. Some of the members of the church were unhappy with the board’s decision and filed a lawsuit seeking a court order compelling the board to call a meeting of the members to allow the church to consider the retention of the pastor. A trial court granted the requested relief, and ordered a membership meeting on a specified date. The pastor and board appealed, arguing that the dispute was ecclesiastical in nature and not within the jurisdiction of a civil court. The dissenting members insisted that the dispute arose from differing constructions of the church’s articles of incorporation and bylaws and not from an ecclesiastical dispute.
A state appeals court began its opinion by observing that “the courts will not assume jurisdiction, in fact has none, to resolve disputes regarding [a church’s] spiritual or ecclesiastical affairs. However, there is jurisdiction to resolve questions of civil or property rights.” The court concluded: “The board’s decision not to call a meeting to discuss the issues [the dissenting members] seek to raise because the board did not think that the spiritual health of the church would be advanced by such a meeting is an ecclesiastical decision of the church government and cannot be overridden by a civil court. In other words, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to entertain this lawsuit insofar as it requested that the board be compelled to call a general membership meeting. Accordingly, this appeal from the trial court’s order requiring that a general meeting be called to deal with the dissident members’ grievance is dismissed.” McGlathery v. Richardson, 2006 WL 1529701 (Ala. App. 2006).
