{"id":2408,"date":"2012-10-30T10:48:45","date_gmt":"2012-10-30T17:48:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.pnwumc.org\/news\/?p=2408"},"modified":"2013-11-08T10:05:40","modified_gmt":"2013-11-08T18:05:40","slug":"judicial-council-upholds-security-of-appointment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.pnwumc.org\/news\/judicial-council-upholds-security-of-appointment\/","title":{"rendered":"Judicial Council upholds security of appointment"},"content":{"rendered":"

A UMNS photo by Mike DuBose.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

By Neill Caldwell and Heather Hahn*<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

ELK GROVE VILLAGE, Ill. (UMNS) \u2014 The top court of The United Methodist Church has upheld church rules that ensure security of appointment for elders and associate clergy members, striking down legislation passed by the denomination\u2019s lawmaking assembly last spring.<\/p>\n

The church\u2019s General Conference, meeting in Tampa, Fla., had approved on May 1 a much-debated piece of legislation that would have deleted language in the church\u2019s Book of Discipline ensuring security of appointment. The legislation also would have added steps for discontinuing elders and associate members from receiving an appointment. A churchwide Study of Ministry Commission<\/a> had proposed the changes as a way to replace ineffective pastors.<\/p>\n

However, the church\u2019s Judicial Council, meeting Oct. 24-27 in Elk Grove Village, ruled that the General Conference action was in violation of the church\u2019s constitution.<\/p>\n

Security of appointment \u201chas long been a part of the tradition of The United Methodist Church\u201d and \u201cabolishing security of appointment would destroy our historic plan for itinerant superintendency,\u201d the nine-member court said in Decision 1226<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The General Conference action was in violation of the church\u2019s third and fourth Restrictive Rules, which ban changes that would destroy that historic plan and do away with clergy rights to a trial and appeal, respectively, the court said. That right to trial and fair process is \u201cabsolute,\u201d the ruling states, and it has been upheld repeatedly in previous decisions.<\/p>\n

Left untouched were\u00a0revisions to Paragraph 338 in the Book of Discipline that allow bishops \u2014 with two-thirds support of the conference\u2019s clergy members \u2014 to appoint elders, provisional member elders\u00a0and\u00a0associate members\u00a0to a less than full-time appointment. The Judicial Council was not asked to review the constitutionality of those changes and thus did not specifically rule on them.<\/p>\n

\u2018Itinerancy is the cornerstone\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

Frederick K. Brewington, the General Conference delegate who had asked that the matter be referred to the Judicial Council, argued in favor of overturning the legislation during an Oct. 24 oral hearing before the court.<\/p>\n

\u201cItinerancy is the cornerstone of the whole structure,\u201d said Brewington, a lawyer and lay member in\u00a0the New York Annual (regional) Conference. \u201cThis action shifts power from the annual conference to the episcopacy. There would no longer be a need to bring charges against an elder, just fail to appoint them. \u2026<\/p>\n

\u201cElders make a contract, a covenant, to serve where the bishop sends them,\u201d Brewington said. \u201cThis turns things into a mish-mosh \u2014 and that\u2019s not a legal term. It will take away our ability to attract new and young clergy, who will go elsewhere.\u201d<\/p>\n

Reached by phone afterward, Brewington was pleased with the council\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe need to be all thankful that we have a church that allows us the opportunity to be able to have these important issues decided clearly and in a fully articulated fashion as the Judicial Council has done,\u201d he said. \u201cI think this is an important determination for over 30,000 clergy who basically would be left without recourse if indeed there were determinations made that were not just. That\u2019s really what we \u2014 my team and I \u2014 were looking at as we put this together, the justice issue.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Rev. John Feagins, director of San Antonio United Methodist Campus Ministry and member of the Southwest Texas Conference, helped Brewington argue for keeping job guarantees for elders and associate members in good standing. He said he expects the Judicial Council\u2019s ruling will help clergy be more focused on ministry.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe clergy can be motivated by their love for Christ and their love for the church and their love for the mission field rather than by fear of arbitrary denial of appointment,\u201d he said. \u201cI think it makes a tremendous difference for our clergy to have questions about their character and\u00a0status determined in the open forum of the annual conference (clergy session) \u2026 rather than in the secrecy of a cabinet room some place.\u201d<\/p>\n

Conflict within lawbook<\/strong><\/p>\n

The ruling restores Book of Discipline Paragraphs 337, 321 and 354 to their 2008 language.<\/p>\n