Every once in a while, a judge will write an opinion demonstrating the vital importance of religious freedom. The Honorable William C. Lee in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Indiana did just that in a July 15, 2010 ruling where he rejected a former employee’s request that the court meddle in the affairs of Indiana Wesleyan University.

Adams was a social work professor whose responsibilities included integrating the doctrines of the Wesleyan Church into the curriculum. She also led devotions in her class, was a spiritual leader of her students, and a very influential in the spiritual lives of many of them. Adams resigned over a spat with her secretary, rejecting the administration’s attempt at biblical reconciliation according to Matthew 18. She then sued for race discrimination.

Because the University is controlled by the Wesleyan Church, the court found the school has complete authority to make decisions about employing those who act as ministers. Under the ministerial exception, courts have no jurisdiction over the employment decisions a church makes in this area. Judge Lee explained:

The ministerial exception to federal court jurisdiction is a crucially important legal doctrine, designed to prevent the federal courts from becoming entangled in the internal affairs of a church.

Importantly, employees like Adams can’t circumvent this fundamental doctrine by alleging discrimination based on something other than religion. And the exception doesn’t just apply to traditional pastors, but, as Judge Lee determined, also governs teachers in church run schools.

Unlike the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in a recent decision regarding the Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran school I blogged about several weeks ago, this court understands that religious schools don’t just teach doctrine in Bible class. Their biblical views permeate every aspect of the curriculum – as we demonstrate in a Brief Explaining Church Autonomy in Hiring Decisions on our resource page. Indiana Wesleyan’s lawyers did a good job of proving up that important fact. Congratulations to the judge for understanding the law in this vital area for religious freedom.

Please leave a comment below to share your thoughts or follow us on Facebook to join the conversation. http://www.facebook.com/SpeakUpChurch

On March 16, 2010, the Ninth Circuit held courts have no jurisdiction to tell churches how much they should be paying their ministers. Courts have long held that the First Amendment creates a ministerial exception for churches. The exception recognizes that government has no business interfering with the relationship between a church and its pastors – whether that be determining whom to hire, the terms of employment, or when they should be fired.
A candidate for the priesthood, Jesus Alcazar, argued this principle shouldn’t apply to him because he wasn’t a priest yet, but was still in training. He reasoned that his job duties not only included assisting with mass, but also janitorial responsibilities at the church.

But the Ninth Circuit correctly rejected this argument in Alcazar v. Corporation of the Archbishop of Seattle, holding a church can require its candidates for the priesthood to spend a year cleaning sinks if it wants to. Only a church can determine whether a seemingly secular activity will be a beneficial part of helping a pastor minister. When government officials entangle themselves in that determination, they violate churchs’ Constitutional right to freedom of religion.

A church school in Redford, Michigan was dealt a blow to its independence from government control by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on March 9, 2010.  Hosanna-Tabor is affiliated with the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, and operates a church and school.  All the school teachers lead weekly chapel services, teach a 30 minute religion class four days per week, lead prayer three times per day, and teach a morning devotional.  In fact, most of the teachers are commissioned as ministers.

Courts have long recognized the “ministerial exception,” which prohibits courts from getting involved in the relationship between a religious organization and its ministers.  This independence (often referred to as “church autonomy”) from government control is considered vital because ministers are recognized by the law as the lifeblood of the church.

While the Sixth Circuit upheld this principle in EEOC v. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church, it failed to apply it because it found the teacher in question was not really a minister.  At bottom, the court said she wasn’t a minister because she spent 6 hours a day teaching secular subjects like math, social studies, and music.  Only an hour or so was spent on exclusively religious instruction.

The court failed to recognize something even Christians struggle with – our biblical worldview and Christian principles affect all aspects of our lives.  That certainly includes how we teach our children to interpret music, and interact socially.  It even applies to math, as demonstrated by the great mathematician, Sir Isaac Newton (even though his Christian views certainly were not orthodox).

Apparently, Hossana-Tabor should have been clearer about how its teachers communicate the church’s theology in all subjects.  Hopefully it can do so at trial, since the case has been sent back down to the lower court.