The courts consistently have held that ministers who fail to “exhaust” their appeals within an ecclesiastical hierarchy are forbidden to seek redress in the civil courts.84 See, e.g., First Baptist Church v. State of Ohio, 591 F. Supp. 676 (S.D. Ohio 1983); Hickman v. Owens, 322 F. Supp. 1278 (D. Ga. 1971); United Pentecostal Church v. Morrison, 527 P.2d 1169 (Colo. App. 1974); Rodyk v. Ukrainian Autocephalic Orthodox Church, 328 N.Y.S.2d 685 (1972). This means that the courts will refuse to hear controversies involving the dismissal of a minister if the minister failed to pursue the remedies available within his or her church or denomination.
This rule has been recognized by the United States Supreme Court: “In short, the First [Amendment] permits hierarchical religious organizations to establish their own rules and regulations for internal discipline and government, and to create tribunals for adjudicating disputes over these matters. When this choice is exercised and ecclesiastical tribunals are created to decide disputes over the government and direction of subordinate bodies, the Constitution requires that civil courts accept their decisions as binding upon them.”85 Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, 423 U.S. 696 (1976).
Case study. A New York court has observed: “It should first be noted that the Presbyterian Church of the United States has established a procedure by which any minister who believes that he or she has been injured by rumor or gossip may initiate an action called a ‘vindication’”. Once initiated, the presbytery must appoint a committee to investigate and report its findings. [The United States Supreme Court has ruled] that the First Amendment permits hierarchical religious organizations to establish their own rules and regulations for internal discipline and government, and to create tribunals for adjudicating disputes over these matters. In this regard, the Supreme Court stated that “when this choice is exercised and ecclesiastical tribunals are created to decide disputes over the government and direction of subordinate bodies, the Constitution requires that civil courts accept their decisions as binding upon them.” 86 Jackson v. Presbytery of Susquehanna, 686 N.Y.S.2d 273 (Sup. Ct. 1999). See also Jay v. Christian Methodist Episcopal Church, 531 S.E.2d 369 (Ga. App. 2000).