Judicial Council Needs to Recalibrate Its Perspective

2016 Discipline Barry

A copy of the 2016 edition of the United Methodist Book of Discipline rests on a table during an oral hearing before the Judicial Council on May 22, 2018. (Photo by Kathleen Barry, UMNS)

Special to United Methodist Insight

The Judicial Council needs to take a step back from its present modus operandum for interpreting the Book of Discipline, particularly as its members make rulings regarding General Conference for 2024 and beyond. Here are some basic principles of interpretation which they need to adopt:

Annual conferences, congregations, and church members do not exist to follow the rules of the BOD! The Book of Discipline is a tool to help the church achieve its mission. Following the BOD is not that mission! Therefore, General Conference does not take place to allow a certain elected group of delegates to meet and make decisions.
The makeup and number of delegates to General Conference should reflect the present realities of the makeup of the UMC. Since that has changed significantly since delegates to GC 2020 were elected: Conferences should have elected a new slate of delegates this year for the General Conference being held in 2024. Conferences may have reaffirmed their previous election results, but a vote should have taken place.

The United Methodist Church does not hold meetings every four years because it must have a General Conference every four years! General Conference is held to allow the necessary decisions to be made for mission and ministry. Thus there is no need to call the General Conference which is meeting in 2024 “General Conference 2020.” There was no General Conference in 2020. Let’s be honest about that and move on.

The coming assembly should be General Conference 2024. That’s called reality orientation. It is ludicrous to require a second General Conference in 2026 to be called General Conference 2024! Once again, conferences, churches, and members of the UMC do not exist to meet every four years in a General Conference! General Conferences should meet the needs of those conferences, churches, and members of the UMC.

The frequency or number of General Conferences shouldn't be the concern of the Judicial Council or of the Book of Discipline. The concern should be instead: “How can we conduct the business of the United Methodist Church in a way that ensures that the proper number and makeup of the delegates and how we meet allows for the continued mission of the church to: “To make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world!”

The Rev. Linda A. Richard is a retired clergy member of the Illinois Great Rivers Annual Conference.

Comments (1)

Comment Feed

We need more...

Thank you for your comments, they are timely. It is imperative that we reconsider our institutions in order to prevent the turmoil and distress of another division. Our church's governance structure was established during the Cold War, when the Church was involved in a cultural conflict, spreading American-style democracy worldwide. This structure was designed to mirror that of the US Government, which was appropriate then. However, as we observe the current struggles of the United States in governing itself, we also notice similar challenges within our Church. It prompts us to question whether our governance should continue to resemble the US context.

I am skeptical of this notion, just as I am skeptical of the current format and timelines of the General Conference (GC). As we confront an upcoming future without division, it is crucial that we contemplate what we desire the next fifty years to encompass. Global governance plays a pivotal role in this process. Should we retain the Judicial Council in its current form? I argue against it. It is evident that a purely legal body was a significant contributor to the chaotic division. While we still require a body to adjudicate on law and policy matters, should it resemble a court or a council? A council is the way forward. We need a smaller voting council that convenes annually to oversee the management of the church and address controversies. Bishops should have increased involvement and accountability moving forward. This proposed arrangement should replace the Council of Bishops and the Judicial Council.

Furthermore, we require a more straightforward mechanism for innovation and change in the church than what the General Conference currently offers. The preceding crisis has exposed the inadequacy of the GC, as currently configured, to respond to global challenges effectively. The precise nature of this alternative remains uncertain. However, we need profound transformation. We must distance ourselves from any resemblance to the GMC (Global Methodist Church) and strive to be distinct and unique in our approach.

Eric Pone more than 1 year ago