Part I: Evaluating Church Polity

Despite being supposedly places of peace and unity, churches and other religious bodies often experience division and conflict. Sometimes these ecclesiastical conflicts can escalate into litigation. Lawsuits commonly arise from various scenarios among the litigious faithful. Here are just a few examples:

• Members argue about who has voting rights in a congregation;
• Leaders dispute who has authority to make certain decisions for the church;
• Churches fight about joining or separating from a denomination;
• A terminated minister sues for breach of contract or wrongful termination;
• A former church member who was subjected to discipline for immoral conduct sues church leaders for defamation;

These are just examples of litigation that arise from within the church. This does not include the claims that can arise from outside the church. Internal church disputes can raise several crucial legal questions:

• What group of persons now controls the church and has decision-making power?
• Who owns the property? The congregation, the denomination, or someone else?
• Is this dispute something that a court of law can even resolve?

In this series, we will address the common sources of internal church disputes and discuss how churches, ministers, denominations, and other players can identify potential areas of controversy, prevent litigation, and help ensure favorable outcomes if litigation does arise. In this first installment, we will discuss the concept of church polity. Because issues of church polity and governance often drive internal legal disputes in churches, we discuss them first.

Prelates, Presbyteries, and Parishioners: Understanding Church Polity

Churches and denominations are not just spiritual bodies. They are also corporate entities whose existence is recognized by law. Virtually all religious bodies have some kind of organization, order, hierarchy, or governance. This is known as polity.

In Christianity, there are three distinct forms of polity among churches and denominations, as well as variations of these three. These are episcopal polity, presbyterian polity, and congregational polity. While these terms derive from the Christian tradition, they can also describe the polity of other religious traditions.

Top-Down: Episcopal Polity

The term “episcopal” comes from the Greek word “episkopos,” which has traditionally been translated as the word “bishop.” Episcopal polity has a diocesan hierarchy. The diocese, typically headed by a bishop or archbishop who oversees several congregations, is usually the record owner of the properties used by its parishes or churches. The diocese is also usually the employer of the priests, ministers, and other employees who work in and for its churches and ministries. The bishop or archbishop is typically the final authority in each diocese for making decisions that affect parishioners, employees, property, and transactions. This means that the diocese as a legal entity is often named as a party in lawsuits that arise from internal church disputes, even if the controversy involves a single church.

Examples of churches that have episcopal polity include Episcopalians, Anglicans, Orthodox, and Roman Catholics. Some Evangelical and Pentecostal denominations have a form of episcopal polity and may use alternative terms such as “district” and “superintendent” instead of “diocese” and “bishop.”

Grass Roots: Congregational Polity

Unlike the top-down hierarchy of episcopal polity, churches with congregational polity are independent and autonomous. There is no hierarchy beyond the local church. Each congregation governs its own affairs, owns its own property, employs its own ministers, and oversees its own transactions. While congregational churches may associate with other bodies of like-minded congregations or religious institutions such as seminaries or mission boards, each church makes decisions about its own affairs as a congregation. A good example of this is the Southern Baptist Convention.

In some churches with congregational polity, all the members of the congregation vote on church affairs. Other churches vest decision-making authority in a board of directors or elders. But the common principle is that the local church manages its own affairs, both ecclesiastical and legal, without interference or supervision from a higher organizational authority.

Checks and Balances: Presbyterian Polity

The term “presbyterian” also comes from a Greek word, “presbuteros” which means “elder,” traditionally a church leader who participates in a broader council of other church leaders. Presbyterian polity is mid-way between episcopal polity and congregational polity. Each congregation has leaders who govern the affairs of the local church, but who also participate in regional and/or national church bodies (sometimes called presbyteries, synods, assemblies, etc.) that oversee the member churches.

Churches with presbyterian polity can vary on several aspects of church governance. The denomination may own the church property directly, the local congregation may hold the property in trust for the denomination, or may own the property free and clear. The presbytery usually has some kind of appellate authority to review the doctrinal, ecclesiastical, and disciplinary issues that arise in local churches. It may or may not control local churches in matters such as selecting and ordaining ministers, buying or selling real estate, and other transactions.

Mixing It Up: Amalgamated Polity

Some churches and denominations mix elements of the three forms of polity described above, to make a unique system of church governance. Some congregations in the same denomination may differ in terms of the rights they have to own their own property, select their own ministers, or make other decisions. These variations might be based on whether a church is a daughter or plant congregation of a larger, more established church.

Why Does Church Polity Matter?

Church polity can have significant legal implications. It often determines whose name goes on a contract or a deed to property, who is the correct party to sue in a lawsuit, who is an employee and an employer, and who gets the final say on a given decision that affects legal rights or obligations. Church leaders should have a firm understanding of their church’s governance and polity to conduct their ministry in a way that avoids legal liability and church discipline.

Stay Tuned

This first installment in this series on internal church disputes has provided an important framework of understanding church governance. Part II discusses issues that arise from church bylaws and how governing documents can be clarified to prevent litigation andhttps://telioslaw.com/blog/part-iv-church-discipline-litigation confusion. Part III, discusses litigation arising from schisms and church property disputes and how to prevent and prepare for such controversies. Part IV addresses defamation claims and other lawsuits resulting from church discipline, and how to prevent liability for those claims. Part V discusses restrictions on courts from being able to decide certain church disputes. Part VI discusses practical steps that churches and leaders can take to prevent conflicts and keep church disputes from spilling over into courts.

_________________________________________

Featured Image by Rebecca Sidebotham.