High court hears case over church control of SMU

Key points:

• The Texas Supreme Court heard arguments to decide if Southern Methodist University’s board can alter the university’s articles of incorporation without a United Methodist jurisdictional conference’s approval.
• The South Central Jurisdictional Conference sued the university in 2019 after the university’s board moved to sever ties with the conference and denomination.
• Justices pressed both parties in the suit to address whether the dispute was more of an internal church issue in which civil courts should not intervene.

The dispute between Southern Methodist University and a United Methodist jurisdiction has reached the highest court in Texas.

The Texas Supreme Court heard oral arguments Jan. 15 in the South Central Jurisdictional Conference’s nearly six-year legal battle to retain some governance of the Dallas university with Methodist in its name.

At issue in the case is whether Texas law allows SMU’s board of trustees to alter the university’s articles of incorporation without the jurisdictional conference’s approval.

The South Central Jurisdictional Conference filed the lawsuit in 2019 after the university’s board of trustees voted to change the university’s 1996 articles to remove its explicit connection to the jurisdictional conference and, by extension, The United Methodist Church.

The new articles, submitted to the Texas Secretary of State, delete the phrase that describes SMU as an educational institution “to be forever owned, maintained and controlled by the South Central Jurisdictional Conference of The United Methodist Church.”

A lower-court judge dismissed the South Central Jurisdictional Conference’s suit in 2021. However, an appeals court in 2023 largely sided with the jurisdictional conference. The Texas Supreme Court agreed to take up the case last year.

During the Jan. 15 arguments, the court’s justices seemed split on what laws, if any, could determine control of Southern Methodist University.

But at least one justice seemed skeptical that SMU could alter its relationship with its founding church so easily.

“It seems to me that we the courts should be very, very hesitant to undermine what seems to be over 100 years of settled expectations about the way all this is supposed to work,” Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock said.

He went on to say that SMU seemed to be using “clever lawyering in response to a dispute about a hot-button political issue to just throw out over 100 years of the course of conduct of these parties.”

SMU made the move to distance itself from The United Methodist Church after the denomination’s 2019 special General Conference strengthened enforcement of bans on gay clergy and same-sex marriage. SMU has long maintained a non-discrimination policy in the admission and hiring of LGBTQ people.

Last year’s General Conference eliminated the denomination-wide bans. However, that has not ended the legal dispute over control of the university, which enrolls more than 12,000 students and has an endowment of $2.12 billion.

One question the justices pressed both parties to answer is whether the dispute was less a business issue and more a church issue.

Specifically, the justices wanted the attorneys to address a friend-of-the-court brief filed separately by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. That brief argued that The United Methodist Church has the right to govern SMU and that under the U.S. First Amendment, civil governments should not meddle in religious organizations’ internal matters.

Allyson N. Ho, the attorney representing SMU, argued that “the doctrine of ecclesiastical abstention” did not apply in this case. She was referring to the legal doctrine that prevents civil courts from intervening in internal religious disputes.

Instead, she said the court could decide this based on the neutral principles of state law that hold regardless of church beliefs.

In this case, she argued that the supreme court should dismiss the jurisdictional conference’s lawsuit based on state law governing nonprofits.

“At issue in this case is whether the conference lacks statutory authorization to challenge SMU’s amendments to its articles of incorporation,” she said.

Sawnie A. McEntire, attorney for the South Central Jurisdictional Conference, said that what the court has before it is “a hybrid situation” that involves both the church’s mission as well as matters of state law. The jurisdictional conference’s lawsuit accuses SMU of going beyond its legal authority and breaching its contract with the denomination.

Justice Debra Lehrmann asked McEntire what the need was for the ongoing litigation since the underlying disagreement around LGBTQ people has been resolved.

“The fact this dispute has been resolved about same-sex marriages and things of that nature, that’s not going to let us back in the door,” McEntire said. “They shut the door on us. We need relief.”

What is not in dispute is that predecessors of what is now The United Methodist Church founded SMU in 1911 with a gift of 133 acres, where the main campus still sits.

SMU is home to Perkins School of Theology, one of 13 United Methodist seminaries that receives support from the denomination’s Ministerial Education Fund. Since SMU’s founding, Perkins has trained Methodist clergy and even bishops — many of whom serve in the South Central Jurisdiction. Even now, more than half of the seminary’s students are United Methodist.

SMU is also home to the Bridwell Library, which now houses the entire collection of the World Methodist Museum previously located at Lake Junaluska, North Carolina.

“As you can see, maintaining the historical relationship between SCJ and SMU is important because of SMU’s Methodist heritage while integrating its educational mission with the church’s teachings and fostering a unique environment that nurtures academic excellence and moral development,” the Rev. Derrek Belase, chair of the South Central Jurisdiction’s Mission Council, said in a statement after oral arguments.

In the U.S., The United Methodist Church is organized into geographical jurisdictions, consisting of annual conferences overseen by bishops. Delegates to jurisdictional conferences, which typically meet every four years, elect bishops and deal with other church matters.

The South Central Jurisdiction includes annual conferences in eight states. Its Mission Council — consisting of bishops, other clergy and lay people — makes decisions about the operations of the jurisdiction between conference meetings.

In a joint statement, the South Central Jurisdiction’s Mission Council and bishops said they hope to maintain a strong, healthy relationship with SMU.

“Our hope is that we can be partners in ministry, just as we have since SMU was founded by our foremothers and forefathers in faith in 1911,” said Louisiana Conference Bishop Delores Williamston, who is president of the jurisdiction’s college of bishops.

A spokeswoman for SMU said the university does not comment on pending litigation.

“SMU cherishes its Methodist heritage as it pursues its educational mission,” said Ho, the attorney, in her closing remarks. But she urged the court to side with SMU in the case.

“Non-member nonprofits, like SMU, operate for the benefit of the public,” she said, “not for private interests.”

Court observers expect the Texas Supreme Court to rule months from now.

Hahn is assistant news editor for UM News. Contact her at (615) 742-5470 or [email protected]. To read more United Methodist news, subscribe to the free UM News Digest.