Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
for her obedience, they would protect her from physical and emotional injury. This count of the plaintiffs revised complaint is not barred by the statute of limitations since the alleged act of Watchtower that disfellowshipped her can be considered as the date the breach of the implied agreement occurred, which is less than six years from the date this action was instituted. The defendants also argue that the first amendment prohibits this court from considering the breach of contract claim, since, to determine this claim, the court necessarily would become involved in an “excessive entanglement” with religion. The first amendment does not bar application of a secular standard to certain tortious conduct in a chinch setting. See Mullen v. Horton, 46 Conn. App. 759, 700 A.2d 1377 (1997) ; see also Martinelli v. Bridgeport Roman
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that claim of breach of fiduciary duty can be resolved under connecticut law
B. recognizing respondeat superior liability
C. holding that respondeat superior claim against institutional defendant for tort committed by defendant priest can be resolved under connecticut law without resorting to ecclesiastical standards of church doctrine
D. holding that first amendment barred child victim of sexual abuse by priest from bringing breach of fiduciary duty claim against priest church official and church
E. holding that the liability reform act preempted in part the common law doctrine of respondeat superior
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.