November 6, 2006 By Neill Caldwell
CINCINNATI – The United Methodist Church's top court says the denomination's regional
conferences may pass petitions that disagree with court decisions, as long as
they do not mandate any violation of the Book of Discipline or ignore directives
included in those decisions. Meeting here Oct. 25-28,
the United Methodist Judicial Council considered several petitions that stemmed
from a ruling it issued last fall, Decision 1032, which dealt with a Virginia
pastor who denied membership to an openly gay man. The nine-member council ruled
that a pastor has the right to determine who is ready for church membership. During
last summer's annual meeting of the Baltimore-Washington Annual Conference, a
petition encouraging churches to be inclusive was ruled to be in order by Bishop
John R. Schol because it "represented the hope of the annual conference." Judicial
Council – which routinely reviews all bishops' rulings during annual conference
sessions – agreed with Schol. A petition from the Kansas
East Annual Conference went beyond the court's standard, the council said, but
did not violate the specific paragraphs in the Book of Discipline that
were cited in the request for a decision. The difference
is in the wording. The Baltimore-Washington's petition "expects and encourages
its congregations and clergy" to be inclusive, the Judicial Council said. Because
it is "aspirational in nature" it does not violate Paragraph 16.1 of the church's
Constitution, the court said in Decision 1044. The Kansas
East petition reads: "No pastor . . .shall deny membership solely based on the
candidate for membership being a self-avowed practicing homosexual." That is "proscriptive
language" according to the Judicial Council, meaning the resolution "does more
than express ideals and opinions . . ." according to the analysis and rationale
section of Decision 1052. Addressing the Kansas East
petition, the council reiterated that annual conferences are welcome to express
ideals and opinions, but cannot direct pastors or lay members to do something
that is contrary to the Discipline or past council decisions. "All actions
of an annual conference must be faithful and consistent with the Discipline,"
the council said. "Annual conferences may express disagreement with other bodies
of the United Methodist Church, but they are still subject to the Constitution,
the Book of Discipline and the decisions of the Judicial Council." Kansas
clergy disagree During oral arguments in the Kansas East
case, the Rev. Mark Holland of Trinity United Methodist Church in Kansas City
said that the council had created a "wedge issue" for the church by requiring
a "litmus test" for church membership. "It's an embarrassment
to the church that we've picked this one issue," Holland said. He compared the
action to that of a Baptist church in Kansas City "that requires members to sign
a statement that says, ‘I'm not gay.'" Holland told the
council that the Kansas East petition passed with 90 percent approval "and Kansans
don't agree on anything. You'd be hard-pressed to get 90 percent to agree that
the sky is blue." The Rev. Paul Stevens, also from the
Kansas East Conference but speaking against the petition, told the Judicial Council
that the conference action should not be upheld "because it's not in line with
the Book of Discipline and what the United Methodist Church says it believes.
. . . If a pastor sees fit to accept a person into membership, they can. Decision
1032 got it right, and still is right." Pacific
Northwest decisions Reviewing other annual conference
cases, the council affirmed Bishop Edward W. Paup's ruling that upheld a Pacific
Northwest Conference petition "expressing dismay" at Decision 1032. The
council also agreed with Paup's ruling that another petition from the conference
was out of order. That petition invited pastors to say publicly that they "voluntarily
relinquish the authority granted them by Judicial Council Decision 1032." The
Judicial Council agreed with Paup that the petition was contrary to the Book
of Discipline. Cases deferred The
Judicial Council deferred six cases on its 20-item docket – including one dealing
with the National United Methodist Native American Center – until its spring session,
which will be held in April 25-28 in Manila, the Philippines. That will be a historic
meeting, as it will be the first time a United Methodist Judicial Council has
convened at a location outside the United States. The
Judicial Council also: • Ruled that the 2004 General
Conference was within its authority to limit the Methodist Church of Cote D'Ivoire
(Ivory Coast) to two General Conference delegates. (See related story.) •
Ruled that the Task Force on Connection Funding in the Iowa Annual Conference
was in violation of "many provisions" of the Book of Discipline. The task
force set up a "tithe system" for the conference budget whereby churches sent
10 percent of their income to the annual conference and could choose additional
conference ministries to support. "A system that allows local churches to choose
what ministries to support violates the Discipline and undermines the spirit
of the connectional system," the council stated in Decision 1054. "General Conference
has set forth very specific and detailed processes by which annual conferences
are to determine and set their budget." Bishop Gregory V. Palmer of Iowa had rejected
the budget plan on the apportionment grounds and because it was not presented
to Iowa's Council on Finance and Administration. His decision was affirmed. •
Affirmed North Georgia Conference Bishop G. Lindsey Davis's ruling that only ordained
clergy in full connection may vote for General and jurisdictional conference delegates,
saying that Amendment VII to Paragraph 32 of the Book of Discipline did
not change Paragraphs 35 and 602. Upheld Bishop Sally Dyck's decision that the
Minnesota Conference may officially join the Minnesota Religious Coalition for
Reproductive Choice even if some of the group's stances disagree with the position
of the United Methodist Church. • Ruled that it did
not have jurisdiction in an item from Minnesota related to supervisory records
because the questions were moot and hypothetical and the record did not have enough
facts to show jurisdiction. • Affirmed Bishop Ben
R. Chamness' decision of law in the Central Texas Conference regarding a question
of the rights of an elder, saying that fair process procedures apply when a written
and signed complaint is received by the bishop and that the actions in question
preceded the filing of a complaint. • Said Bishop
Jonathan D. Keaton of the Detroit Annual Conference had improperly ruled on a
hypothetical question. The council repeated information from an earlier ruling
that requests for decision of law from a presiding bishop must be related to the
business under consideration by the annual conference. •
Approved the clergy sexual misconduct policy for the Minnesota Annual Conference,
saying it fulfilled the requirements of the council's Decision 736. •
Ruled that it did not have jurisdiction in a request from the Greater New Jersey
Annual Conference on just resolutions in judicial proceedings because the questions
posed lacked factual context. • Ruled that it did
not have jurisdiction in a bishop's decision of law from the Rocky Mountain Conference
because it did not receive the minutes from the session in question. •
Ruled in a case from the North Carolina Conference that a pastor's withdrawal
– whether it is made under complaint or is voluntary – is effective at the time
it is received. "The decision to surrender credentials before being presented
with a formal complaint . . . works as a forfeiture of further rights," the ruling
said. In a dissenting opinion on the North Carolina case,
the Rev. Keith Boyette, Judicial Council secretary, wrote: "The decision of my
colleagues concludes that a withdrawal is a withdrawal and that it does not matter
whether the clergy person understood that he was withdrawing in response to a
complaint which in fact did not exist at the time of his withdrawal. . . . It
is the bishop and the annual conference that (have) the responsibility of ensuring
that disciplinary procedures and processes are faithfully followed. In my opinion,
that was not done here." Two members of the council,
Mary A. Daffin and Shamwange P. Kyungu, were absent from the meeting. United
Methodist News Service Neill Caldwell covers the Judicial Council for United
Methodist News Service and is editor of the Virginia Advocate of the Virginia
Annual Conference in Richmond. |