William Pritts claims he founded his Church of Universal Love and Music in Bullskin, Fayette County, to "advance non-denominational religion through music."

County officials, however, refused to approve Mr. Pritts' application to use his 148-acre property for "religious gatherings." They believed he had no such purpose, and that his land was being used as a party site for daylong concerts and illicit drug use.

Mr. Pritts filed a federal lawsuit against the county, its zoning hearing board and individual members last week, claiming they violated his First and 14th Amendment rights to freedom of religion and association.

"A core belief of the Church of Universal Love and Music is that religious inspiration and community are advanced by the celebration of live music," the lawsuit says.

Mr. Pritts, who claims his church has informally existed for more than 20 years, is seeking emergency injunctive relief, as well as attorney costs and compensatory damages.

In September 2004, Mr. Pritts applied for a special exception for religious use permit from the Fayette County Zoning Hearing Board. Hearings were held in February 2005, and the permit was denied two months later.

Dennis Nurkiewicz Sr., who was on the hearing board at the time, said there was no evidence of religious use happening at the property.

Among the elements the board examined for such a permit, Mr. Nurkiewicz said, were "dogma, religious practices, and charitable [acts]."

"Without exception, he was found wanting in each of those issues," he said. "There were serious questions of his credibility."

Neighbors didn't like the concerts that went on at the property, and that it had been established as a party site. The church's own minister testified that he observed illegal drug use there, Mr. Nurkiewicz said. And the county's zoning enforcement agent visited the site undercover and found several hundred people gathered there, paying $50 each, for a concert.

Officially, the board found that the church "failed to meet the burden of proof to establish approval of the request," and "did not meet the threshold for the proposed use in accordance with the definitions and words contained in the religious use statute 'in accordance with their customary meanings.' "

There is no formal definition of religion in the Constitution, federal statute or state law, said constitutional law professor Thomas Baker of Florida International University.

"You can claim a religious belief that only you have, and the government is supposed to respect that belief," Mr. Baker said.

It is acceptable, though, for a government -- in this case, a county hearing board -- to ask questions to determine the sincerity of Mr. Pritts' beliefs.

"It's a question of fact of whether or not he believes himself to be on a religious mission, or is he simply a concert promoter?" Mr. Baker asked. "If he believes he's on a religious mission, then he has the First Amendment on his side."

Mr. Pritts appealed the zoning board's decision to Fayette County Common Pleas Court, and a judge there said in an opinion, "I'd have to be a fool to think this was a church," Mr. Nurkiewicz quoted.

Jon Pushinsky, one of the attorneys representing Mr. Pritts, said his client does not have to prove his property is a church.

All that is required, he said, is to prove that it's being put to a religious use.

"From the earliest days, that is the use to which it was put," Mr. Pushinsky said.

The church, which now claims more than 200 members and an annual growth rate of 16 percent, is host to a daily prayer circle, Mr. Pushinsky said, and regular services eight weekends per year between May and September.

Last year it touted its fourth annual three-day Freedom Festival, including bands, 420 Funk Mob with George Clinton; and The Zen Tricksters. On its Web site, www.ilovemusicchurch.com, which doesn't appear to have been updated since 2004, it features the Grateful Dead Dancing Bear.

Tammy Stenson, Fayette County zoning director, said the hearing board must consider several issues in special exception permits, including the impact the use will have on the community, like traffic concerns and safety.

The lawsuit claims that the board never made any findings that granting the permit would have a negative impact on the surrounding community or that the site would be unsuitable for the requested use.

Mr. Pritts originally filed for a permit to operate as a commercial recreation facility to hold concerts three or four years ago, Ms. Stenson said. That request was denied.

Mr. Pushinsky said his client even then specified that the property would be used for fund raising and religious worship.

In 2002, the church filed for nonprofit status with the state, and that application is pending.