Bishops Face Penalties over Audit Issues



Comments (2)

Comment Feed

Auditing Bishops

I have no problem with a bishop being held to audit requirements. We hold other clergy to the same requirements for the handling of church funds. Most of us make sure we are not signators on local church accounts, that two signatures are required on any check issued, and we have our church finances reviewed for accuracy. I have served as defense advocate for one minister in my own annual conference who mistakenly checked a box in Charge Conference report forms stating that the books had been audited. He thought a bank review of church funds as part of an effort to get a loan to buy a new church site constituted an audit. It turned out that the church business manager had been embezzling funds for several years and he had not worked to find that out. He was forced to retire.
As for the GCFA calling for a Bishop's resignation: they can call for it all they want, but for a bishop to be forcibly removed from that office, the procedures of Paragraph 413, part of our "judicial process," still have to take place. Apparently the African Central Conference College of Bishops dismissed some charges against Bishop Wandabula. I do not know the status of the GCFA complaint against this Bishop (whom, for the record, I do not know and have never met.) Until Para. 413 procedures have been completed, the most the GCFA can do is to reduce or stop payment of this Bishop's compensation package until such time as the complaints are resolved.

Tom Griffith more than 7 years ago

No Resolution?

Why is Wandabula still, after several years of this, a Bishop in the Methodist Church. If there is not a procedure to remove him, then we need to establish one at the next GC, and if there is one, why has it not been initiated. How many chances do these guys get?

BJohnM more than 7 years ago