Case Name: Bridges v. Wilson
Court: Tennessee Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Tennessee
Decision Date: 1872-09
Citations: 11 Heisk. 458
Docket Number: 
Parties: Bridges v. Wilson.
Judges: 
Reporter: Tennessee Reports
Volume: 58
Pages: 458–471

Head Matter:
Bridges v. Wilson.
Churches and the Civil Law. Church Property. While secular courts have nothing to do with, or jurisdiction over, questions of Church government, organization or religious tenets, yet questions of title to Church edifices and property belong exclusively to the civil courts, and must he determined by the same rules established for in-terpeting deeds and instruments made in relation to non-religious objects. The intention of the grantor of the lot in question is to be • carried out. It is manifest that he meant the Trustees named and their successors should only hold the naked legal title of the lot, for the benefit of the body of worshipers of the Presbyterian Church of Mars Hill, in Athens. Therefore the surviving Trustee and the'Elders of the Church as elders, without passing upon any question ecclesiastical in regard to them, had no interest in the lot which they could transfer away from the body of worshipers. The Church edifice and lot can' only be disposed of by the Church as a Church — that is, a body of worshipers — by complying with the provisions of the grant- or’s deed, and as authorized by the laws and constitution of the Church itself.
PROM MCMINN.
Appeal from Chancery Court at Athens, June Term, 1872. L. M. Key, Ch.
VanDyke, for complainant, with whom was
W. M. Bradeoed, who said:
1. At the commencement of the war, this Church was regularly connected with Kingston Presbytery, under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the United Synod.
2. When the Federáis occupied East Tennessee, in 1863, the minister in charge and many members were expatriated by violence, and ceased to worship in the Church.
3. The Church never dissolved its connection with the United Synod, by any vote or action of the Church.
4. In 1865, Thorpe, a Northern minister, and in 1867, Wilson, a Northern minister, by sort of sufferance, under duress, were permitted to preach, without ever being called to do so, by action of the Church, although they belonged to a distinct organization.
5. The members of the Church never united with Wilson, or changed their ecclesiastical relations to the church organization to which he belonged.
6. Wilson’s organization assumed the name of Mars Sill Church, under jurisdiction of Kingston Presbytery, so as to take and fraudulently hold the property.
7. A large majority of the actual church members, of highest reputation, appealed to this merciless party, who had so seized the Church, to allow them simply to listen to the ministrations of a minister of their own choice and free selection. They were, for this humble appeal, insulted by a gross and slanderous response; and then, in order to appropriate the property, these wandering adventurers, without notice, charges, or trial, dropped from the roll, contrary to the law of the church, by false and slanderous resolutions, the largest number of the members, consisting of the eldest members, who had erected the building, and who had peacefully worshiped in it for more than thirty years. This unmitigated and glaring fraud, and the intent with which it was perpetrated, is clearly established by the evidence of Gettys, Dixon, etc.
8. The majority of the members of said Church having never become attached to the organization of respondents, or passed lawfully under its jurisdiction, the right in the property, and the trusts in their behalf, created by Anderson’s deed, remain in complainants, and have never been vested in respondents.
9. Although complainants stood mute for a while— permitting respondents to occupy the Church, and sometimes participating with them, this does not forfeit their rights, because the terrors of the times produced a duress which would be excusable even in braver hearts, and stronger arms. Respondents have set up no valid legal title; and rely only on a legal technicality, su-perinduced by such a combination of frauds and oppressions as can scarcely be surpassed by Pontifical Excommunications, or Spanish Inquisitions; the civil courts should enforce the law, and declare the title and trusts in complainants.
The property of complainants, like that of various other Churches in Tennessee, was defiantly seized, in the madness of the times, by irresponsible and fanatical foreign adventurers, without color of right, legal or ecclesiastical, without mercy or Christian charity. But the clouds of storm and passion having passed away, and the lights of law, reason and Christianity having again illuminated the lives and hopes of patriots and Christians everywhere, we only ask a restoration of our vested property, so that we, and our children after us, may worship in the house of God, built by our fathers, and dedicated to us in their dying prayers.
Tho's. A. R. Nblson, for defendants, said:
1. The deed of 19th March, 1837, is to David Reid and others, “ruling Elders in the Presbyterian Church at Athens, Tennessee, said Church known by the name of Mars Hill Church,” * * “and their successors in office, for the use of said Mars Hill Church,” * * “in trust, to be used and enjoyed by said' Church, as a site for the erection of a house to worship in, or otherwise, as may be deemed most advisable and most for the good of the Church.”
This created a trust, and there can be no doubt of the jurisdiction of the court to cause the trust to be executed. Bowden v. MeLeod, 1 Edw., 588.
It is' denied that complainants and those they represent are a majority of the Church as now existing.
The principal question in the case is, who were the beneficiaries of the deed? And to show that the defendants and those for whom they act, and not the complainants, are the eestuis que trust, the following propositions and facts are submitted — premising that Gettys, Wattles, Bogart and Ross were lawful trustees.
(1.) The term “Church,” used in the deed, means professors of religion and not the entire congregation. Lawyer v. Gipperly, 7 Paige, 281.
(2.) The Church belonged to the New School General Assembly until the Secession of 1857, when the Kingston Presbytery, on the 19th September, 1857, seceded, after the protest "of three of its members against a previous resolution to this effect, and appointed delegates to the United Synod held at Knoxville in April, 1858. Said delegates attended.
The United Synod itself withdrew from the General Assembly , as shown in its declaration of principles, and formed a new organization. This was, to all intents and purposes, an act of secession — a “severance of their -former ecclesiastical connection” — the United Synod having been formed in Richmond 27th August, 1857. Viewed as a question of Ecclesiastical Law, the Presbyteries forming the United Synod could not legally withdraw without the consent of the General Assembly. No church member, or Elder, can withdraw from the church; nor can a Session, Presbytery or Synod withdraw, without the assent of the highest judicatory in the Church.
(3.) As the Mars Hill Church belonged to Kingston Presbytery, which was in connection with the New School General Assembly, and Kingston Presbytery had no right to secede, it follows that Mars Hill Church is still, upon general principles, in connection with the Northern Church, and never has been legally, separated from it. And in case of a division or schism, the property is not to be divided, but belongs to that body which, in view of the law of the general church, is the lawful successor of the original grantee for whose use it was conveyed.
(4.) The act, above named, of the Kingston Presbytery in uniting itself, and, with it, Mars Hill Church, to the United Synod, as testified to by Rev. Thomas Brown, was, in an ecclesiastical sense, illegal and unauthorized, because it changed the governmental relations of the Ghureh without any authority from the people. Within its own ecclesiastical organization, each of the Churches is governed by its own tribunals, and as a representative democracy, and must submit to the final decision of the highest church judicatory; but no church judicatory can change the Form of Government, or transfer the Church to another government without the assent of the people, any more than a State Constitution can be changed without a popular vote.
(5.) “The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America,” organized at Augusta, 4th December, 1861, was an entirely new organization, though it adopted the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, etc., in all respects, except that it substituted “ Confederate States ” for “United States.” It revolted against and “ renounced the jwrisdietion” of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States. See its Address to the Churches “throughout the - earth.” This body was chartered by the State of Tennessee.
A plan of Union or Treaty between the United Synod and the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America, was submitted to and approved by the latter body, at its meeting in Charlotte, U. C., assembled 4th May, 1864? In this Treaty it was provided that the Presbyteries of Holston, Union and Kingston, under the care of the United Synod, shall he received into the Synod of Nashville, under the care of the General Assembly, at their next meeting. In their Narrative of the State of Religion, they “hesitate not to affirm that it is the peculiar mission of the Southern Church to conserve the institution of slavery and to make it a blessing both to the master and slave.” It was this last sentiment that gave rise to the offensive “Order” by the Northern Church in 1865.
Rev. W. W. Morrison states that the connection of the Kingston Presbytery with the United Synod never was dissolved, and that the Presbytery was attached to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States, as now called, by “regular treaty,” in May, 1864.
The Rev. Mr. Brown, (who was connected with it thirty years), says the Kingston Presbytery became disconnected with the United Synod by an act of their own, and that the United Synod ceased to exist by its members uniting with the General Assembly South.
The Minutes of Kingston Presbytery show that representatives were appointed, in March, 1858, to the United Synod at Knoxville in April, 1858. The “report on the narrative” to the April Presbytery, 1862, says: “our Churches remain united.”
The Minutes of Kingston Presbytery, commencing September 22, 1864, express deep regret at the action of their small Presbytery in 1857, and an earnest desire to be re-united with the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America.
Commissioners were appointed to the General Assembly in April, 1865 — John J. Dixon being an alternate delegate — and, 6th September, 1865, “Mr. Dixon gave some interesting items respecting the feeling exhibited during the Assembly.”
J. J. Dixon, one of the complainants, was appointed an alternate delegate. to the General Assembly in St. Louis on the 3d April, 1866.
It does not appear that the Plan of Union was adopted by the United Synod, as a committee to correspond with said Synod was appointed at the Charlotte General Assembly in May, 1864. This was after the action of the Committee of Conference on the part of the two Organizations had been amended by the General Assembly of the Confederate States, and, of course, required further action by the Synod.
On the foregoing facts, it is to be observed:
(1.) That the United Synod had no more authority to transfer Kingston Presbytery than the latter had to transfer Mars Hill Church.
(2.) That it does not appear that the “Treaty” was ratified prior to the 22d September, 1864.*
(3.) That on the 22d September, 1864, Kingston Presbytery, with which Mars Hill Church had all the while been in connection, took steps to restore the Presbytery to the Northern General Assembly.
(4.) That in so restoring it, the original purpose of the deed of trust was carried out, and the Mars Hill Presbyterian Church resumed the relation which existed at the date of the deed.
(5.) That while the Kingston Presbytery had no authority, without the consent of Mars Hill Church, to transfer the Presbytery and the Churches connected with it to a new and different organization not existing at the date of the deed, without the consent of the congregation, it had full authority to restore it to the organization existing at the date of the deed without the consent of the congregation, and even against its will, because, in so doing it carried out the purposes of the deed. 'Robertson v. Bullions, 9 Barb., 64, cited in 3 Clint. N. Y. IX, 2879, No. 18; Kinshern v. I/utheran Churches, 1 Sandf. Ch., 439, cited in 3 N. Y. D., 2378, No. 15.
(6.) That, as the right to the property is dependent upon the action of the Church judicatory in ascertaining and declaring the relation of Mars Hill Presbyterian Church, and the Presbytery has connected that Church with the Northern General Assembly, its action cannot be reviewed or annulled by the civil tribunals without invading the province of the ecclesiastical authorities, and so interfering with the absolute religious freedom secured by the Constitution.
2. John J. Dixon, one of the complainants, was the only acting successor and survivor of the Elders named in the trust deed at the time' when Mars Hill Church and Kingston Presbytery were attached to the Northern General Assembly. As such successor and survivor, he had all the powers conferred by the trust deed, and his action was absolutely binding upon the Church, and could not be revoked by a majority of the congregation. Dixon was a commissioner to the New School General Assembly of 1865, and acted as ■a delegate to the New Market Synod in October, 1865. He acted as Elder after the Church attached itself to the Northern Assembly as well as before. He was also a member of the Synod at Athens in 1867.
■ 3. If Dixon had no authority as sole Elder and Trustee to represent the Church and Presbytery in the Northern General Assembly, Charles Bogart, one of the defendants, is the sole surviving Trustee named in the deed, and as such approves, and has a right to approve, the restoration to the Northern Church. Bogart was elected and set apart as Elder, on the 15th May, 1840.
4. This honorable court has no jurisdiction or authority to inquire into the legality of the election of the Elders, and can only recognize the fact that they were Elders de facto. If they are'not entitled to that position, it is purely an ecclesiastical question, determined only by the Church authorities. The election in 1849 occurred long after the Presbytery joined the Northern Church.
The connection of Mars Hill Church with the Kingston Presbytery never was broken, as the- Church records show, before the Presbytery attached itself, in September, 1864, to the New School General Assembly, or before the Synod of Tennessee attached itself to said Assembly, 12th October, 1865.
Whether the Church was .represented in Presbytery by a stated supply, or a pastor and elders regularly chosen, was a question for the Presbytery and not for this honorable court — a question for the Synod and General Assembly, and not for the civil tribunals.
If the Presbytery was lawfully connected with the United Synod, the latter lost its existence in another organization, and the Presbytery, not having assented to it, was remitted to its original rights.
The claim of the complainants to Eldership rests upon their unauthorized connection with another and different organization; and although as private citizens they have a perfect right to belong to any denomination they choose, it does not follow that their former ecclesiastical rights and privileges follow and accompany them into the new organization.

Opinion:
Tukney, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
On 29th March, 1837, William W. Anderson, by deed, .conveyed to David Reid, William H. Deaderick, David Wilson, Samuel Hale, W. W. Anderson, George Mayo and Charles Bogart, ruling elders of Mars Hill (Presbyterian) Church at Athens, and their successors in office, in trust, for the purpose, use and benefit of said Mars Hill Church, a lot of ground in Athens, as a site for the erection of a Church edifice.
The building was erected and was occupied and used as a Church, without molestation or discord, until the latter part of the year 1863, when it was appropriated for a military hospital. About the close of the war the regularly installed pastor was compelled to leave his congregation and change his residence for personal safety.
Soon after the surrender of the Confederate armies, one Thorpe, with the assent of a small minority of the members of the Church, occupied the pulpit. He left about the first of the year 1867. Next, and very soon, came one David M. Wilson, claiming to be a missionary from the New School General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church.-
During the minstrations of these two professed ministers, elders were elected for the Church, but under circumstances of disorganization and irregularity portraying a want of Christian liberality revolting to the most indifferent, and made manifest by dropping from the rolls of the Church and excommunicating from its rites and privileges, a long list of members, many of whom had been consistent members of the Presbyterian Church for forty years, and had worshiped in the house in controversy since its erection — the reason assigned being a heresy of political and not religious opinion, and the humble expression of a desire to reorganize upon the old basis and in strict conformity to the rules and laws of Presbyterian Church Government.
However shocking these things may be to the reader of their details, and however much, they may obstruct the growth of the Church and paralyze its influence for good, we are not to deal with them. Regretting the existence of that intolerant spirit which threatens to soil the mantle of Christianity by dragging it in the dust of the halls of the courts of the country, and joining with the able solicitor of defendants in the hope that all breaches may be healed, all wounds cured, and the Church again be- one, oblivious to its present bickerings and heart-burnings, we approach the question •addressed to our consideration.
Ecclesiastical courts have exclusive jurisdiction in matters of church government, church organization, religious tenets, and the laws of religious judications; with these the civil courts must not and can not interfere; but must leave them to the free, uncontrolled jurisdiction of the tribunals established by the Church,, for they are matters of religious faith and conscience, and are subjects for determination by a jurisdiction ordained and inspired by a power above the creator of. political institutions.
The personal and property rights of Churches and their members are civil, and of them the courts of the State have exclusive jurisdiction. Ecclesiastical courts, have no jurisdiction to decide the rights of property- and enforce its protection.
Here the question is one of title to the Church edifice and lot, which must be determined by a construction of the deed from William W. Anderson. We have already recited the conditions of the deed.
From thence it is apparent, the intention of the grantor was to benefit and promote the interests not of the trustees and their successors, but of the Presbyterian congregation, or members of the Presbyterian Church at Athens; the trustees were invested with the-mere naked legal title, without any beneficial interest,, except such as resulted to them as members of the-Church proposed to be established, or if already established, to be continued and advanced by the donation -or grant.
Without comment upon a decision of the effect of' acts of the only surviving trustee at the close of the- war, or of those claimed to have been created by the defendants and those cooperating with them afterwards, upon the relation to any ecclesiastical court of Mars Hill Church as a Church, which is an organized body of Christian believers worshiping together, we hold, that action had no effect to transfer the title to the property used as a place of worship from the body of worshipers; that the elders, as elders, had no interest in the property of which they could dispose by sale or transfer. Carrying out the purpose of the grantor, the law will continue the property in the members of the religious body designated, (i. e.) the Mars Hill Presbyterian Church at Athens, unaffected by its transfer from jurisdiction to jurisdiction in Church government, unless the Church, as a Church, see proper to dispose of it under the provisions of the deed, and as authorized by its constitution and laws.
Whatever may be the extent of meaning of the term Church, as understood by divines and ecclesiastical courts and lawyers, we are confined in this case to the meaning intended by the grantor, derived from the language employed. He has given it a ' limited meaning and we are bound by it.
Affirm the decree with costs.