2 jurists add opinions to
pastoral authority decision

United Methodist News Service
Amid continuing debate about the Judicial Council’s recent ruling on a pastor’s authority to determine membership readiness, two jurists have added opinions.
The additional opinions became part of the official ruling for the Judicial Council’s Decision 1032, issued Oct. 31, and can be found at www.umc.org.
In the ruling, The United Methodist Church’s supreme court determined that The Book of Discipline gave a Virginia pastor authority not to accept a self-avowed, practicing gay man into membership of his congregation.
The ruling reversed a decision of law by Bishop Charlene Kammerer and reinstated the Rev. Ed Johnson as pastor of South Hill (Va.) UMC. He had been placed on involuntary leave last summer by the Virginia Conference.
The Rev. Keith Boyette of Virginia, one of nine members of the Judicial Council, filed a concurring opinion with Decision 1032. Judge Jon R. Gray of Missouri filed a dissent.
Boyette wrote that “contrary to what some will assert, our decision here is not a statement that homosexuals are barred from membership in the local church.”
“As one can plainly see from the decision and digest of the Judicial Council as well as the analysis and rationale, there is nothing in such language that can remotely be construed as making a sweeping declaration that the Judicial Council has held that ‘homosexuals’ are barred from membership in the church,” Boyette wrote.
Boyette was joined in his concurrence by lay Judicial Council member Rodolfo C. Beltran, an attorney from the Philippines.
Gray lamented the “serious ramifications” of Decision 1032. Those include a potential loss of credibility for the court because the ruling “abandons the traditional and limited role of the Judicial Council as interpreter of church law and assumes a new mantle as creator of church law.”
“The majority’s decision now condones the denial of the fellowship of the church to persons in need of its ministry and guidance who are homosexual,” he wrote. “The decision eviscerates our statement that God’s grace is available to all and reduces it to an empty platitude.
“More tragically, the same Judicial Council charged with giving effect to the intent of the enactments of the General Conference has turned a cold and rejecting ear to its plea that families and churches not reject lesbian and gay members and friends.”
Another council member, the Rev. Susan Henry-Crowe of Atlanta, also wrote a dissenting opinion, which was included in the majority decision.
“We cannot begin to comprehend the unwanted and undesired consequences of this ruling,” Gray added. “The majority’s ruling has dangerous potential to create adversarial relationships between pastors and persons who seek membership in our denomination. It encroaches upon the authority of the office of bishop by judicial whim rather than through a deliberate legislative process. It upsets the delicate system of checks and balances inherent in our governance.”