wfn.org | Judicial Council decisions carry added concurrence, dissent

[NewsDesk <NewsDesk@UMCOM.ORG>]

Oct. 29, 2002  News media contact: Joretta Purdue7(202) 546-87227Washington
10-71B{500}

BALTIMORE (UMNS) -- The fall session of the United Methodist Church's
equivalent of the U.S. Supreme Court will perhaps be most remembered for the
number and content of concurring and dissenting opinions filed on a docket
of 25 items rather than the actual content of some of the decisions.

Members of the nine-member Judicial Council wrote four concurring opinions
and three dissenting opinions to accompany some of the decisions handed
down.  Two cases were deferred, and one was remanded to a bishop. All three
should come before the spring session.

Both dissenting and concurring opinions were filed on two docket items
related to whether or not an annual conference's clergy session (formerly
called executive session) has the authority to ask the council for
declaratory decisions without  the vote of the full conference session,
including lay delegates.

One such case originated in the California-Pacific Annual Conference. Its
2002 clergy session asked for a declaratory decision on whether a bishop and
district superintendents are permitted to vote in an administrative hearing
about placing clergyperson on involuntary leave of absence. 

The council decided that the bishop and district superintendents "shall not
participate as voting members" and may not be present before and after the
hearing has concluded prior to the issuing of the decision. "To do so would
violate fair process," the council said in its decision.

The other case came from the Illinois Great Rivers Annual Conference. There,
the clergy session of the conference perceived a potential conflict between
two paragraphs of the church's rulebook. The session asked the Judicial
Council to decide if an administrative complaint must contain the words
"administrative complaint" to be valid. 

The council said the two paragraphs are not in conflict and correspondence
with the affected clergyperson shall include the term "administrative
complaint."

In both cases, a concurring opinion was signed by four members of the
council: the Rev. Keith Boyette, the Rev. C. Rex Bevins, the Rev. John G.
Corry and James W. Holsinger. In their concurrence for the Illinois Great
Rivers case, they said, "The Judicial Council has jurisdiction in this
matter ... because the request for declaratory decision was made by the
clergy session during its meeting on matters solely with the province of the
clergy session and ... constituted an action for and on behalf of the annual
conference." 

Sally Curtis AsKew, Mary A. Daffin, Sally Brown Geis and the Rev. Larry
Pickens signed a dissenting opinions, adding "The Judicial Council does not
have jurisdiction ... when the request comes from the clergy session only."
They also said the Discipline gives the clergy session authority only over
questions relating to matters of ordination, character and conference
relations of clergy.

The council overruled a bishop's decision in the Illinois Great Rivers
Annual Conference on  questions related to an administrative proceeding.
"Since Bishop Sharon A. Brown Christopher does not have the authority to
decide issues solely related to a judicial or administrative matter, her
decisions are not of affirmed," the council said. 

A dissenting opinion, filed by Boyette, Daffin and Holsinger, said that the
questions addressed to the bishop were "proper questions of law which the
bishop was authorized to answer." They further commended the bishop for
voiding actions of the cabinet, the board of ordained ministry and the
annual conference in regard to improperly placing a clergywoman on
involuntary leave. 

The council agreed with the bishop's decision of law in the East Ohio Annual
Conference, where a member of the conference asked at the 2002 session if
the substitution in the 2001 ordination service of the words "in the name of
the Triune God" for the words "in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit" was in violation of the church's rules.

 The bishop ruled that the question was not proper as it did not relate to
business of this year's conference, but he went on to say that the wording
used was not correct.

The council ruled that it does not have jurisdiction in such cases, where
the question is not properly raised, but five members attached a concurring
opinion adding that the substitution, although used in many United Methodist
worship services, "is not language which the General Conference has approved
for the consecration of bishops, the ordination of elders and deacons, the
consecration of diaconal ministers and the commissioning of deaconesses and
missionaries." Signing the opinion were Holsinger, Bevins, Boyette, Corry
and Daffin.

On an entirely different matter from the East Ohio Annual Conference, the
council agreed with Bishop Jonathan L. Keaton that a question about using
interest generated from capital raised for funding pre-1982 pension
liability to fund health care costs, as raised in the 2002 session, is moot.

Again a concurring opinion was written delving into the "significant issues
raised by the precedent that has been set ... regarding the use of funds
raised to pay pre-1982 pension obligations." The opinion, signed by Pickens
and Boyette, cites earlier council decisions noting that it is appropriate
for the conference to use funds from its capital funds drive "to provide for
pre-1982 pension obligations and any reserves needed to assure that the
obligations will be met. ... Furthermore, in expanding the use of interest
for health care benefits we would find that these resources should only
benefit pastors with pre-1982 service." 

In another case related to funding health care benefits, the council heard
oral arguments from the North Georgia Annual Conference. The current
decision commended the conference for the changes it had made in the ways it
was funding and providing health care benefits as a result of an earlier
Judicial Council decision. The earlier decision had voided a plan put
forward after adoption by the conference in a special session Oct. 17, 2000.
Bishop Lindsey Davis led the oral presentation team. Council member Sally
Curtis AsKew, the spouse of a retired North Georgia clergyman, recused
herself and took no part in the deliberation or decision.

Council member Sally Brown Geis, who is from the Denver Area, recused
herself from the three cases originating in the Rocky Mountain Annual
Conference. In one, the council affirmed Bishop Warner H. Brown Jr. in his
decision of law that the legislative process used at annual conference was
constitutional and did not abridge any member's rights by limiting making of
motions and voting in committee to assigned members of that committee.

Brown's responses to questions of law about the presentation and publication
of the annual conference budget drew mixed support from the council,
affirming one and not affirming two others. The council ruled that a
conference is not required to publish its annual budget in its conference
journal, but "best practices would suggest that it do so"; that the
Discipline sets forth what is to be included in certain lines of the budget;
and that a budget that does not state expected income, including estimated
apportionments, is not complete.

The third case from Rocky Mountain Annual Conference questioned a staffing
plan. "A conference personnel committee may have the responsibility of
reviewing and evaluating conference job descriptions and reviewing and
evaluating persons in those jobs" but it is unlawful for the conference
council on finance and administration to do so, the council ruled.

 In the Pacific Northwest Annual Conference, Bishop Elias G. Galvan was
asked for a decision of law on whether a clergyperson could refuse to answer
any questions that are intended to review his eligibility for certification
as an elder in the United Methodist Church. The bishop responded, and the
council agreed, that the question was improper because it involved a
judicial or administrative process and was, therefore, moot and
hypothetical.

In the Kansas East Annual Conference, the bishop was asked if the
conference's policy to require pastors to report reasonable suspicion of
child abuse contradicts the church's rule about pastors' keeping confidences
inviolate. This occurred after the conference defeated an amendment that
would have added an exception limiting the policy requirement when required
under the confidentiality rule. The bishop said the policy did violate the
Discipline in this regard, and the conference subsequently reconsidered and
passed the amendment, rendering the issue moot. The council agreed.

A Baltimore-Washington Conference case that dealt with fair process for a
clergy member arose in the clergy session. The council decision notes,
"Bishop Felton E. May has correctly delineated the process by which a
clergyperson may be placed on involuntary leave of absence." The council
affirmed his ruling that a motion made in the clergy session of the
conference to place a clergy member on involuntary leave was out of order.

The restructure plans of the Western Pennsylvania  and West Virginia annual
conferences were approved by the council after the conferences made needed
changes to comply with an earlier council decision and the 2000 Discipline. 

East Ohio Annual Conference's sexual ethics policy was remanded to the
conference and the current policy was voided. In its decision, the council
directed "Appendices and any other material directly related to the policy
must be adopted by the annual conference and included when the policy is
resubmitted for review and approval by the council."

Questions asked of Bishop Sharon Zimmerman Rader related to licensing and
appointment of a local pastor during the Wisconsin Annual Conference session
were ruled moot and hypothetical by her because they were unrelated to the
business of the conference. The council agreed.

Two docket items from the Illinois Great Rivers Annual Conference were
determined by the council to be instead parliamentary rulings, over which
the council has no jurisdiction. They related to a question on having a lay
member of annual conference from each church and one about using church
buildings for dialogue on homosexuality that would have added to the
Discipline's description of clergy misconduct.

In a case from Northern Illinois Annual Conference, the bishop's response to
questions involving a campground was also deemed a parliamentary ruling by
the bishop. Council member Larry Pickens recused himself from this
discussion.

The council also noted that a request for a declaratory decision on
equitable compensation of women pastors in the Kansas West Annual Conference
did not meet the requirements for declaratory decisions as set forth in the
Discipline. The council does not have authority to rule in such cases.
Likewise the council does not have jurisdiction in a case from the Illinois
Great Rivers Annual Conference about changing by-laws of the conference
foundation. 

"Bishop Edward W. Paup is not affirmed in his decision of law and is
directed to answer the questions that were posed to him" during the regular
session of the Alaska Missionary Conference, the council has decided. He is
to submit his answers to the conference journal and to the Judicial Council
within 90 days of the publication of the decision.

Cases deferred until spring 2003 include a request from the General Council
on Finance and Administration for a declaratory decision relating to the
number of bishops assigned to each jurisdiction, a review of the Virginia
Conference bishop's decision of law related to clergy retiree health plan
eligibility and consideration of the bishop's decisions of law regarding the
West Virginia Conference plan for pension and health care funding. A related
question in the West Virginia case was determined to be a parliamentary
ruling and out of the council's jurisdiction. The council plans to meet in
Fort Worth either just after or just before the Legal Forum in April.
# # #

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