Re: JCD 1109

http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1192&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1100&EN=1110

For the purposes of this commentary, I am most concerned about personnel matters. But it is hard to pass up some observations that can be made on this ruling.

The Council takes pains to parse their role in looking at whether pastors can send the elements of Holy Communion with lay people to remote places or where the pastor is not going for whatever reason.

That parsing means that no theological group can storm the gates of General Conference to precipitously change the Articles of Religion.

Meanwhile, on this issue, pastors are stuck with being directly involved with Holy Communion distribution. Perhaps Cabinet members can offer help on occasion to ease the loads of their pastors. Bishops are ordained elders, after all, as are superintendents. What an example that would be to us pastors if our superiors in office cared enough about the remote folks to help us out. That might be an encouragement to us pastors to make sure we find a way to reach out even more than we have . . . .

The dissenting opinion reinforces the responsibility of conference secretaries to get with the program. That this dissent is raised shows that the Council sometimes takes jurisdiction despite that failure.

Without thorough discussion with others on this ruling, I find myself accepting it and glad it was dealt with even though all the proper steps were not followed. The Council needs to have some flexibility to resolve conflicted issues.

May they be wise about which of their future decisions are handled with such Christian concern.