wfn.org | Commentary: Judicial Council should rethink 'step aside' mandate

["NewsDesk" <NewsDesk@UMCOM.ORG>]

Jan. 9, 2004  News media contact: Tim Tanton7(615)742-54707Nashville, Tenn. 7
 E-mail: newsdesk@umcom.org7	ALL-BGLT {006}

NOTE: A photograph of the Rev. Dean Snyder is available. For further
commentary on this issue, see UMNS #005.

A UMNS Commentary
By the Rev. Dean Snyder* 

The United Methodist Judicial Council has instructed people elected to annual
conference committees on investigation to step aside and allow others to
serve in their places if they are "unwilling to uphold the (Book of)
Discipline for reasons of conscience or otherwise." 

They have also ruled that people "who state that they cannot in good
conscience uphold the Discipline are ineligible to serve on a (church) trial
jury." (Judicial Council Decision No. 980. See
http://umc.org/judicial/900/980.htm.)

It seems to me that this is a ruling that may require additional thought and
discussion among United Methodists.   

If serving on a committee of investigation would require me to enforce every
word of the Discipline's 721 pages, without considering whether a specific
line might be unjust or inconsistent with the spirit of Christ or in conflict
with other deeper principles within the Discipline, I guess I am
disqualified. And apparently, if I choose to interpret the Discipline
differently than the Judicial Council, I must step aside, even if my annual
conference has elected me to serve. 

The Judicial Council's order that committee members vote the "right" way or
step aside is part of a ruling concerning the Rev. Karen Dammann, a pastor
who informed her bishop that she was living in a "partnered, covenanted,
homosexual relationship."  There were no other complaints about her ministry.

The job of a conference committee on investigation is to determine, when
there are charges made, whether "reasonable grounds" exist to proceed with a
trial. The Pacific Northwest Annual Conference Committee on Investigation
decided that the circumstances regarding the Rev. Dammann did not provide
reasonable grounds for a trial. The Western Jurisdiction Committee on Appeals
chose not to overrule this decision.  

The Judicial Council overruled the decisions of the conference and
jurisdictional committees. It sent the case back to the conference committee
with instructions as to how it should rule and included an order that anyone
who could not, for any reason, comply with its interpretation should "step
aside" from the committee. This kind of ruling is hard to understand.
 
The Judicial Council's interpretation of the role of members of committees of
investigation and trial juries would seem better suited to a computer than to
a human being, much less a thoughtful, prayerful follower of Jesus Christ.
Our church is not as neat and antiseptic as this ruling by the Judicial
Council would seem to suggest.

One of the difficulties of movements to exclude people is that they tend to
spread. We begin by attempting to exclude the Rev. Dammann from ordained
ministry because of her sexual orientation, her desire to be in a committed
relationship and her honesty. Now we are attempting to exclude those who
refuse to prosecute her, essentially barring them from positions to which
they have been duly elected.
  
It may be frustrating for the Judicial Council to deal with real people who
make decisions based on conscience, intellect, feelings, experience and their
understanding of the spirit behind the church's Book of Discipline, rather
than a strict interpretation of a particular sentence or two. But the church
is not a machine. It is a community of praying people. 
 
I hope the Judicial Council refrains, in the future, from these kinds of
rigid, exclusionary mandates, and that it retracts this one. I hope annual
conferences continue to elect committees of investigation in accordance with
the disciplinary requirement that members "shall be in good standing and
should be deemed of good character." I hope that members serve in a Christian
spirit of love without checking their consciences, caring or intellect at the
door. I hope committee members who disagree with the Judicial Council's
interpretations do not step down from the responsibilities to which they have
been duly elected.   
 
Our church can stand the strain of disagreement. Our judicial process does
not need to be lock step. We may even grow in grace from the tension between
conference or jurisdictional committees and the Judicial Council without
purging committees. Let us be patient and slow to resolve disagreements by
forcing others out or into the margins. I do not think that is the kind of
church we are or want to be.  
 
In 1670, William Penn, the Quaker, was tried in England for street preaching.
He was prosecuted for violating the "Conventicle Act," which prohibited any
meetings for worship other than those of the Church of England. Members of
the jury refused to find him guilty despite the judge's insistence that they
do so. The judge ordered the jury to be locked up without food or water until
it changed its verdict. 

As the jurors were being led away, Penn called out to them: "Ye are
Englishmen; mind your privilege, give not away your right." The jury refused
to change its verdict. Those jurors' courage helped break the back of the
English ban against street preaching. 

My encouragement to the Pacific Northwest Annual Conference Committee on
Investigation is this: "Ye are United Methodists." 

# # #

*Snyder is pastor of Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington and former
editor of UMConnection, the newspaper of the Baltimore-Washington Annual
Conference.

 
 

*************************************
United Methodist News Service
Photos and stories also available at:
http://umns.umc.org