Can Arizona Courts Decide What Is Christian? Religious Freedom and Parenting Plans After Ball v. Ball
By Joel Thurston | Arizona Family Law
For Christian parents, few responsibilities are more important than raising their children in the faith. Scripture instructs parents to teach God’s Word diligently to their children (Deuteronomy 6:6–7) and to bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4).
But what happens when Christian parents divorce and subsequently disagree about their children’s religious upbringing? Can a family court determine which religious beliefs qualify as Christian?
In Ball v. Ball, 250 Ariz. 273, 478 P.3d 704 (App. 2020), the Arizona Court of Appeals confronted these very questions. Its decision provides an important lesson for divorcing parents: If your children’s religious upbringing matters to you, your parenting plan must address it clearly and specifically.
The Dispute: Is the Mormon Church Christian?
Kathleen and Shawn Ball married in 1999 and had two children. When they divorced in 2017, they represented themselves and completed a court-provided parenting plan that was incorporated into their divorce decree.
The parenting plan contained two important provisions:
- Each parent could take the children to a church or place of worship of that parent’s choosing during his or her parenting time.
- Both parents agreed that their children “may be instructed in the Christian faith.”
Approximately one year after the divorce, the father joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (commonly known as the Mormon Church), and the children occasionally attended services with him. The mother objected, arguing that Mormonism was not Christianity and that taking the children to LDS services violated their parenting plan.
At an evidentiary hearing, the mother presented testimony from a youth ministry leader who asserted that the LDS Church was not Christian. The court also received a chart comparing LDS teachings with Christian beliefs. The Maricopa County Superior Court agreed with the mother, concluding that Mormonism fell outside the Christian faith and prohibiting the father from taking the children to LDS services.
The father appealed.
The Arizona Court of Appeals Reverses
In a decision issued December 10, 2020, the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected the trial court’s ruling on two independent grounds.
- The Parenting Plan Did Not Prohibit Other Religious Services
First, the appellate court examined the actual language of the parenting plan.
The agreement expressly permitted each parent to take the children to a place of worship of that parent’s choosing. Although it also provided that the children “may” receive Christian instruction, it did not require that they receive only Christian instruction. The distinction between “may” and “shall” was critical. The appellate court explained that “may” generally expresses permission, whereas “shall” or “will” ordinarily establishes a mandatory obligation. Consequently, the parents’ agreement allowing Christian instruction did not prohibit the father from taking the children to another religious service.
- Courts Cannot Decide Theological Questions
The appellate court went further, holding that the trial judge violated the First Amendment by attempting to determine whether Mormonism qualified as Christianity. The First Amendment’s Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses prohibit civil courts from resolving ecclesiastical controversies involving religious doctrine and belief.
As Judge Paul McMurdie explained:
“Courts are not the appropriate forum to assess whether someone who self-identifies as ‘Christian’ qualifies to use that term.” Ball, 250 Ariz. at 280–81, ¶ 27.
The court recognized that whether LDS beliefs fall within Christianity has long been a matter of theological debate. Although churches, theologians, and individual believers may have strong convictions about that question, the government cannot use judicial authority to declare which theological position is correct.
Importantly, the Court of Appeals did not decide whether Mormonism is Christian. It held that the trial court had no constitutional authority to decide that theological question. The appellate court vacated the religious-education portion of the trial court’s order and remanded the attorney-fee issue. It otherwise affirmed the ruling, including findings concerning other parenting-plan violations.
Can Arizona Parents Agree to Raise Their Children in a Particular Faith?
Yes, subject to the court’s continuing responsibility to protect children’s best interests and the constitutional limitations on judicial involvement in religion. Arizona law specifically contemplates religious training as part of parental decision-making. Under A.R.S. § 25-403.02(C)(2), parenting plans involving joint legal decision-making must address each parent’s rights and responsibilities concerning important decisions, including religious training. The Ball court expressly recognized that religious-education provisions may be enforceable when disputes can be resolved without requiring a judge to interpret religious doctrine. The court also acknowledged prior Arizona decisions permitting limited judicial intervention when conflicting religious beliefs affect a child’s general welfare. The distinction is between enforcing an objectively identifiable parenting arrangement and asking a judge to decide which religious beliefs are theologically correct.
For example, a parenting plan might specifically address:
- The church or religious institution the children will regularly attend, specifically noting Protestant or Baptist or Assembly of God, etc.
- Whether the children will participate in Sunday school, youth ministry, or other identified religious education programs, either at specific denomination or agreed upon religious institution.
- Whether the children will attend worship services with each parent during their respective parenting time.
- How the parents will make decisions concerning baptism, confirmation, or other religious ceremonies.
- Whether either parent may enroll the children in additional religious instruction without the other’s agreement.
These provisions must be carefully drafted, and even specific agreements remain subject to judicial review, the children’s best interests, and constitutional protections.
A Warning to Christian Parents: Do Not Rely on Vague Language
Perhaps the most practical lesson from Ball v. Ball comes directly from the appellate court’s advice:
“Parents who wish to address aspects of their children’s religious education in a parenting plan should take great care to ensure those provisions are as specific and detailed as possible.” Ball, 250 Ariz. at 281, ¶ 29.
Consider a divorcing couple who agrees that their children will be “raised Christian.” What does that mean? Does it mean the children will attend a particular denomination? Must both parents agree before changing churches? Does it prohibit attendance at another religious institution? Does it require participation in religious education, or merely permit it? Parents may believe they have reached a clear agreement while holding fundamentally different understandings of its meaning.
As Ball demonstrates, such ambiguity can create substantial conflict and leave courts unable to provide the relief one parent expected. The solution is not to ask courts to define Christianity. Rather, parents should identify the specific religious practices, educational arrangements, and parental responsibilities they intend to establish.
A Biblical Perspective: Parenting After Divorce
At Keist Thurston Law Firm, we believe parents have a profound responsibility to nurture their children’s spiritual development. Proverbs 22:6 reminds us:
“Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.” (ESV)
Divorce does not eliminate that responsibility. However, it often complicates how parents fulfill it, especially when they no longer share the same religious convictions. Christian parents should strive to approach these disagreements with wisdom, humility, and a commitment to their children’s welfare. Scripture encourages believers to pursue peace whenever possible (Romans 12:18). That principle is especially important when children are caught between parents who disagree about matters of faith.
A carefully negotiated parenting agreement can help establish reasonable expectations, minimize future disputes, and protect opportunities for meaningful religious instruction. It is equally important to recognize that courts cannot resolve every spiritual disagreement. Some questions belong to families, churches, and religious communities—not the judiciary.
How KT Law Firm Can Help
At Keist Thurston Law Firm, we understand that divorce involves far more than dividing assets and establishing parenting schedules. For many families, the spiritual upbringing of their children is among the most significant concerns they face.
Our Arizona family law attorneys help parents negotiate and draft parenting plans addressing religious education, legal decision-making, parenting time, and other important aspects of raising children after divorce.
We also encourage parents to consider mediation as a means of resolving disagreements before those disputes become costly and emotionally damaging litigation.
Whether you are negotiating an initial parenting plan, seeking to modify an existing agreement, or facing a disagreement over religious upbringing, thoughtful legal guidance can make a meaningful difference. As we repeatedly inform potential clients, it is easier and far less costly to get it right than to litigate after the fact issues or try to correct poorly written court and internet based plans. Having handled or litigated hundreds of cases, we have seen this adage play out many times.
Your children’s faith matters. Your parenting plan should reflect the importance you place upon it.
Contact Keist Thurston Law Firm to discuss how we can help you develop a clear, practical parenting agreement that respects your family’s convictions while complying with Arizona law.
Keist Thurston Law Firm — Serving Families Throughout Arizona
Note: This article provides general information about Arizona family law and does not constitute legal advice. Parenting-plan provisions must be evaluated in light of the particular family’s circumstances and applicable law.