In the case of Montgomery v. St. John’s United Church of Christ, 2023-Ohio-1168, an appellate court held that religious organizations are immune from claims of sexual harassment or hostile work environment based on the “ministerial exception” when a Consistory president acted in both the president’s official capacity and parishioner capacity.
In this case, the employees argued that the ministerial exception does not bar claims of sexual harassment and/or hostile work environment when a parishioner acts within the Consistory president role. In response, the church and Consistory president argued that Consistory president’s actions were so deeply intertwined between the president’s dual roles as the Consistory president and as a parishioner that the ministerial exception prevented the court from reviewing the inner workings of the church under the First Amendment. The appellate court agreed with the church and Consistory president.
In support of its decision in favor of the church and Consistory president, the appellate court explained that “the ministerial exception prevents application of a secular review and analysis of such claims in this case without engaging in “excessive entanglement” with the ecclesiastical inner workings of the church * * * and the ministerial exception stripped [the court] of jurisdiction to consider [the employees’] claims that the church had violated state employment laws.” 2023-Ohio-1168 at ¶ 58.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.