Ministerial Exception Bars Fired Minster’s Claims

       A former minister was barred by the ministerial exception from pursuing his claims for statements made by his church to the congregation that the homosexual pastor was fired for engaging in “sinful” conduct. In Gunn v. Mariners Church, Inc. (2008) __Cal.App.4th___ (G038445), the court of appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision granting the religious employer, Mariners Church’s motion for summary judgment against Robert Gunn, a former worship director at the church.

       The church terminated Gunn upon discovering his sexual orientation and then proceeded to make statements about the termination to church staff and congregation. The day after the termination, some of the senior church leaders announced to the congregation that Gunn had been terminated due to his “sinful” conduct, had suffered “a breakdown in character” and was a “broken man.” Gunn sued the church for intentional infliction of emotion distress, defamation and invasion of privacy.

       Following a judgment in favor of Mariners Church, the court of appeals in the first Gunn case remanded the action based on two of Gunn’s allegations, which potentially did not implicate Mariners Church’s religious doctrine. Gunn alleged that the church leaders told the congregation that he had lied about his sexual orientation when he was directly asked if he was gay. He also claimed that revealing his sexual orientation after his termination was an invasion of his privacy. However, the Gunn II court of appeals concluded that even those allegations were part of the termination process of the religious employer. Gunn did not dispute the fact that the church routinely explained to church staff and the congregation about church employees' terminations. He even admitted that he had previously made statements to the congregation explaining the terminations of other church employees.

      This case provides a more clear delineation of the ministerial exception than most but many courts struggle with how this exception should be applied in a variety of contexts regarding employment decisions. It is increasingly used in Title VII and FEHA claims to preclude employees, some of whom may not typically be categorized as ministers, from bringing suit against their religious employers regarding employment matters. There are no bright-line definitions when it comes to this judicially created exemption and this is especially true in the case of post-termination issues regarding privacy and defamation.

       For more comprehensive information about the ministerial exception, take a look at this article from Corbin, Caroline Mala, Above the Law? The Constitutionality of the Ministerial Exemption from Antidiscrimination Law. Fordham Law Review, Vol. 75, p. 1965, 2007. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=981235. The article sets forth many of the problems riddled by the ministerial exception, and presents viable constitutional justifications for severely limiting it.

       -- Mythily Sivarajah

Comments

[Air Jordan Retro]

Je me consoler comme ceci: alors que je suis à l'intérieur du point le plus bas, car maintenant des fleurs en fleurs, je peux habituellement témoin le roman lorsque les pétales tombent et volent à l'intérieur du vent.