By Heather Hahn
April 25, 2023 | ST. SIMONS ISLAND, Ga. (UM News)
The Judicial Council released rulings April 25 stemming from last fall’s jurisdictional conferences, including one dealing with a resolution on LGBTQ inclusion adopted by all five jurisdictions.
The United Methodist Church’s top court also issued a memorandum related to a special session held by the Congo Central Conference in 2018....
In November 2022, the five U.S. jurisdictional conferences — meeting simultaneously — elected 13 new bishops. In collaboration across jurisdictional lines, the five jurisdictional also each passed three resolutions seeking to set the future for the denomination.
One of those resolutions was the “Queer Delegates’ Call to Center Justice and Empowerment for LGBTQIA+ People in The UMC.” The resolution calls “for a future of The United Methodist Church where LGBTQIA+ people will be protected, affirmed, and empowered in the life and ministry of the church… .”
The South Central Jurisdiction’s Bishop Cynthia Fierro Harvey and the North Central Jurisdiction’s Bishop Frank Beard each faced questions about whether the resolution violated church laws against same-sex weddings and “self-avowed practicing” gay clergy.
In Decision 1483, the Judicial Council — as required by the Book of Discipline, the denomination’s law book — reviewed both bishops’ decisions about the resolution. The church court partially affirmed and reversed each bishop’s decision.
“Jurisdictional conferences may adopt resolutions that are aspirational in nature, and express their ideals and opinions so long as they do not attempt to negate, ignore, or contradict The Discipline,” the Judicial Council said.
Most of the resolution was aspirational, the Judicial Council’s majority said, but Paragraph 2 of the resolution called for action counter to the Discipline.
That part of the resolution affirms “the spirit of the abeyance or moratorium… until changes can be made in The United Methodist Book of Discipline.” Put another way, that part of the resolution is asking bishops to hold off on processing complaints against violations of the Discipline’s homosexuality prohibitions until such prohibitions no longer exist.
Decision 1483 noted that the Discipline currently mentions the term “abeyance” only once, saying complaints can be held in abeyance when civil authorities are involved.
“It is only in the context of ongoing or imminent civil or criminal proceedings that abeyance can be contemplated,” the decision said.
Judicial Council members the Revs. J. Kabamba Kiboko and Dennis Blackwell signed a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.
“Taking all paragraphs together as a whole, the overall message may result in the violation of the Discipline,” their opinion said. “As a whole, it has a clear message: a call to negate, ignore, and violate provisions of the Discipline.”
In Memorandum 1474, the Judicial Council said it lacks jurisdiction to rule on Bishop Jonathan Holston’s determination that all three resolutions were out of order and should not have been up for consideration by the Southeastern Jurisdiction.
Holston issued what the Judicial Council considered a parliamentary ruling 30 days after the Southeastern Jurisdiction had approved all three resolutions and the gathering had adjourned.
In a concurrence, four Judicial Council members reiterated earlier memoranda calling on bishops to issue parliamentary rulings during the business session to give members the opportunity to appeal the bishop’s parliamentary ruling. Judicial Council members the Rev. Luan-Vu “Lui” Tran, the Rev. Øyvind Helliesen, Deanell Tacha and Oswald Tweh signed the concurrence.... [Read the complete article here.]