Judicial Council asked to review Virginia decisions

United Methodist News Service
United Methodist leaders in Virginia have asked for reconsideration of two Judicial Council decisions that have stirred debate on homosexuality and pastoral authority.
Bishop Charlene P. Kammerer, who leads the Richmond Episcopal Area, and the Virginia Conference Board of Ordained Ministry have separately filed motions for reconsideration of Decisions 1031 and 1032.
Both rulings relate to the Rev. Ed Johnson, senior pastor at South Hill (Va.) UMC.
The Virginia Conference clergy executive session placed Johnson on involuntary leave last summer for refusing to admit a practicing gay man into membership.
At its Oct. 26-29 meeting in Houston, the Judicial Council ruled in favor of Johnson, reinstating him with all salary and benefits. As a result, Kammerer reappointed Johnson to South Hill.
Council President James Holsinger placed the motions for reconsideration on the nondocket agenda for the court’s spring session, set for April 26-28 in Kansas City, Mo. That means at least five members must agree to reconsider the actions.
The Rev. Keith Boyette, council secretary, has instructed the other parties in these two matters, including Johnson, to file any written response to the motions within 30 days. The motions and briefs are to be delivered to the council’s nine members for consideration once the 30-day period has expired.
Under Judicial Council rules, only parties directly involved in rulings may file appeals.
“After very careful and prayerful review of the Judicial Council Decisions 1031 and 1032, I made the decision to ask for reconsideration, which is within the rules and procedures of the Judicial Council,” Kammerer said in a statement issued Jan 27.
“As a matter of integrity and keeping faith with my understanding of the Virginia case, it is crucial for the Judicial Council to review its own rulings, which have brought harm to the body of Christ represented in The United Methodist Church.”
Johnson’s case involved an openly gay man who was participating in the South Hill congregation and wanted to transfer his membership from another denomination.
Johnson ultimately refused to receive the man into membership because he said the man would neither repent nor seek to live a different lifestyle.
Johnson’s district superintendent contacted the bishop, starting a disciplinary process that resulted in Johnson being placed on involuntary leave last June by a vote of conference clergy members.
Decision 1031 dealt with how John-son was disciplined. The council found errors in the process, mainly that the Virginia Conference’s board of ordained ministry transformed an administrative complaint into a chargeable offense, which is a judicial complaint. In that situation, the board didn’t have any authority to take action.
Decision 1032 dealt with Kammerer’s interpretation of Discipline Paragraphs 214 and 225 on whether she could order Johnson to accept a person into church membership. She said she could.
The council said The Book of Discipline “invests discretion in the pastor-in-charge to make determination of a person’s readiness to affirm the vows of membership.” Paragraphs 214 and 225 of the Discipline are “permissive, and do not mandate receipt into membership of all persons regardless of their willingness to affirm membership vows.”
The ruling went on to say that the “pastor in charge cannot be ordered by the district superintendent or bishop to admit into membership a person deemed not ready or able to meet the requirements of the vows of church membership.”