“Did you know that the China Buddhist Association faced a Supreme Court case?” That legal battle touched on religious freedom. This is the China Buddhist Association. It is a vital Dharma center. The China Buddhist Association’s story is one of community support, legal challenges and religious freedom.
The China Buddhist Association was incorporated in 1963. Master Mew Fung Chen founded it. The goal was to support Chinese immigrants in Manhattan. Later, it aided the growing community in Flushing, Queens. The China Buddhist Association thrived. In 1970, it gained tax-exempt status. It purchased the Fa Wang Temple in Manhattan. Later, it acquired the Chi Hang temple in Flushing.
Today, Chi Hang temple serves as its headquarters. Services are offered in Mandarin and English. The China Buddhist Association celebrated its 50th birthday in 2013. The celebration lasted two days. Buddhist leaders and community members attended. The organization received gifts for its historic milestone.
In the mid-1990s, growth was rapid. Master Chen hired Master Ming Tung. Master Tung became the resident monk at the Manhattan location. His duties included teaching new members. He taught worship, praying, chanting, and preaching. He also conducted Buddhist ceremonies. Master Chen resided at the Flushing headquarters.
Master Chen claimed Master Tung went rogue. This led to legal issues. Master Tung showed a lapse in faith. He promoted disharmony. He disobeyed Master Chen’s authority. He strayed from righteousness and engaged in wayward behavior. These actions led to police intervention. Protests occurred at the Manhattan temple.
In 2010, Master Chen severed ties with Master Tung. He closed the Manhattan temple in 2011. He excommunicated its members. He claimed to hold a CBA members meeting and vote.
Master Tung filed a lawsuit. He claimed Master Chen overstepped his authority. He said Chen did not abide by the organization’s bylaws. In 2012, the New York Supreme Court agreed. Judge Wright declared the 2011 meeting invalid. He required a new all-members meeting. Master Tung and the excommunicated were to be invited.
Court documents show Master Tung’s goal. He wanted to split the China Buddhist Association. He aimed to divide it and its holdings into two temples.
The China Buddhist Association appealed the 2012 ruling. They argued the court interfered with religious matters. They said the court should not invalidate the 2011 meeting. They felt the court shouldn’t direct who participates in meetings.
In 2014, the New York State Supreme Court reviewed the case. They overturned the lower court’s decision. Judge Gische cited the First Amendment. It guarantees religious bodies independence from secular control. They have the power to decide matters of church government and faith.
Judge Peter dissented. He believed the matter was organizational, not religious. He felt Master Chen disregarded the law. He violated the association’s bylaws. These bylaws were not religion-based.
The appellate judges disagreed. They noted the bylaws were unhelpful. They were silent on membership requirements. Overturning the CBA’s meeting would overturn the excommunication. This would place the court in an ecclesiastical judgment.
Master Tung petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court. On Jan 9, they declined to hear the case. The appellate court’s ruling stood.
The appellate court’s summary cited cases. These involved court action and religious organizations. These cases showed when secular courts can interfere. The cases ranged from Jewish temples to Catholic churches. The specific religion was not the main concern. The Tung v China Buddhist Association case was cited in a 2016 case. It also involved membership concerns.
The China Buddhist Association lawsuit demonstrates the relationship between secular law and religious administration. The rulings show what could happen if a religious organization took internal disputes to court. The China Buddhist Association’s story continues to shape our understanding of religious freedom.