Part IV: Church Discipline Litigation

In Part I of this series, we discussed church polity and governance and how they relate to legal issues and church litigation. In Part II, we discussed the significant of governing documents of a church in creating and resolving disputes. In Part III, we discussed church property disputes and how to prevent and prepare for them. In this part, we focus on avoiding legal trouble related to defamation and other claims resulting from church discipline.

When church members act in ways that their church consider immoral, or go against its teaching, they may face church discipline, including dismissal or excommunication. Sometimes, these members take legal action against their former church, claiming defamation, invasion of privacy, and other causes of action.

As we will discuss in Part V, constitutional immunities may bar many lawsuits like these. However, these immunities do not always apply. Therefore, churches should take certain steps when disciplining members or employees and communicating with others about disciplinary decisions.

Check the Bylaws

As we have said, clear and effective governing documents are a way of preventing and resolving church disputes, including matters of discipline. Churches should ensure that disciplinary proceedings go “by the book” to avoid claims that leaders did not follow proper protocols or acted outside of their authority.

Also remember that churches are often legal corporations as well as spiritual bodies. And if a church is set up as a corporation with voting members, state law might give those members certain rights. Some states require that, without a provision in the bylaws governing membership, a corporation may not suspend or terminate someone’s membership without a sufficient vote of either the members or directors. This is another reason why it is important for churches to have good governing documents in place and to be aware of those documents and how they interact with state law.

Sign on the Dotted Line

Having a clear membership policy and a signed agreement can prevent litigation stemming from church discipline. These documents can establish members’ informed consent to the disciplinary standards and processes of the church, which reduces the risk of legal challenges. We will discuss these documents in greater detail in Part VI of this series.

Be Careful What You Share

Most lawsuits arising from church discipline involve claims for defamation and invasion of privacy. Defamation is a claim that a defendant published false information about the plaintiff that damaged the plaintiff’s reputation. Invasion of privacy claims say that a defendant publicized sensitive information about the plaintiff for which the plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

A classic example could be a scenario where a church member is disciplined for sexual misconduct, and information about their sexual activities is made public to the church. To avoid these claims, churches should not disclose sensitive details about the member and only communicate facts that are absolutely true. Sharing intimate details or making speculative statements can increase the likelihood of lawsuits.

Communicate Only on a Need-to-Know Basis

Churches can defend against defamation and privacy claims by limiting communications to those with a legitimate interest. One defense that churches can claim is known as “qualified privilege” or QP. Although the elements of QP can vary from state to state, its essence is that certain persons or groups are allowed to communicate certain information to others who have an interest in knowing. QP as it is applied to church discipline may protect churches and leaders who share about a member only with other members of the church or church leaders.

Churches may want to communicate membership discipline decisions in limited ways, such as a members-only special meeting. In any event, churches should consult with legal counsel to advise on the criteria for QP in their state.

Don’t Chase Them on Their Way Out

Some claims related to church discipline that might otherwise have been barred could go forward if the disciplinary proceedings occurred after the member resigned from the church. For example, a court in Oklahoma upheld defamation and invasion of privacy claims against a church that communicated information about a former member’s sexual activities to other members after she had resigned her membership. While defenses would have applied if the communications were about a member of the church, the fact that she had already resigned her membership meant that these defenses did not apply. ¹ This is an example of why churches should consider allowing members to leave quietly on their own rather than risking legal claims.

Stay Tuned

In Part V, we will discuss constitutional principles that affect how courts handle church disputes. And finally, in Part VI, we will discuss conciliation agreements and other practical steps that churches and leaders can take to prevent conflicts and keep church disputes out of the legal system

_________________________________________

¹ See Guinn v. Church of Christ, 775 P.2d 766 (Okla. 1989).

Featured Image by Rebecca Sidebotham.