inion over, property expressly entrusted to the Methodist Church. Courts in this and other jurisdictions have consistently held that, although the members of a local church may secede from a hierarchical system, they cannot secede and take the church property with them. Independent Methodist Episcopal Church v. Davis, 137 Conn. 1, 13, 74 A.2d 203 (1950); McAuliffe v. Russian Greek Catholic Church, 130 Conn. 521, 536, 36 A.2d 53, cert. denied, 323 U.S. 726, 65 S.Ct. 60, 89 L.Ed. 583 (1944); see, e.g., Holiman v. Dovers, 236 Ark. 211, 366 S.W.2d 197, 200, (1963); Baker v. Ducker, 79 Cal. 365, 374, 21 P. 764 (1889); Trustees of Pencader Presbyterian Church v. Gibson, 26 Del. Ch. 375, 383, 22 A.2d 782 (1941); St. John's Presbytery v. Central Presbyterian Church of St. Petersburg, 102 So.2d 714, 718 (Fla. 1958); Apostolic Holiness Union of Post Falls v. Knudson, 21 Idaho 589, 594, 123 P. 473 (1912); Stallings v. Finney, 287 Ill. 145, 149, 122 N.E. 369 (1919) (congregational church polity); Stansberry v. McCarty, 238 Ind. 338, 149 N.E.2d 683 (1958) (congregational church polity); Black v. Tackett, 237 S.W.2d 855, 855-56 (Ky. 1951); Hanna v. Malick, 223 Mich. 100, 119, 193 N.W. 798 (1923); Mt. Helm Baptist Church v. Jones, 79 Miss. 488, 502, 30 So. 714 (1901); Erie Conference Central Office v. Burdick, 440 Pa. 136, 139-40, 269 A.2d 735 (1970); Bogert, Trusts and Trustees 398 (2d Ed. 1965). As did the trial court, we find it useful to test our conclusion by examining the events that occurred between 1921 and 1978, when the present controversy erupted.

Cheshire v. Giles, supra. A majority of the congregation always had the right to withdraw the Level Green Christian Church from the Society and the Convention. Furthermore, the uncontradicted evidence shows that there has been no change in the religious doctrine and faith of the Level Green Christian Church. Stansberry v. McCarty, 238 Ind. 338, 349, 149 N.E.2d 683, 688 (1958); Wright v. Smith, 4 Ill. App.2d 470, 476, 124 N.E.2d 363, 366 (1955); Ragsdall v. Church of Christ, 244 Iowa 474, 482, 55 N.W.2d 539, 543 (1952).

The courts of Indiana will not interfere with the internal affairs of a private organization unless a personal liberty or property right is jeopardized. Stansberry, etc. et al. v. McCarty et al., (1958) 238 Ind. 338, 149 N.E.2d 683; State ex rel. Givens, etc. v. Marion S.Ct. Rm. 1, (1954) 233 Ind. 235, 117 N.E.2d 553. The Board of Directors of a corporation may adopt bylaws to govern matters of internal discipline, policy and management, and these bylaws constitute a contract between the corporation and its members. Brendonwood Common v. Franklin, (1980) Ind. App., 403 N.E.2d 1136.

Likewise, Indiana recognizes that in local schism cases the principle of presumptive majority rule applies as to the right to control the actions of the titleholder; that is, as to the right to possess, enjoy and control the use of church premises. Stansberry, etc. et al. v. McCarty et al. (1958), 238 Ind. 338, 149 N.E.2d 683. Of course, this presumption may be rebutted if an application of neutral principles of law involving an examination of such sources as state statutes, corporate charters, relevant deeds, local by-laws and the organizational constitutions of the denomination discloses that the identity of the local church is to be otherwise determined. In the case at hand both parties claim to represent the majority of the St. George congregation.