JCD 1131

http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1248&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1100&EN=1181

Like JCD 1130, this same bishop in her other conference (Rocky Mountain) withheld the questions and her answers from publication and again Jon Gray raised the issue about the necessity of confidences possibly being violated.

I do not have what Judge Gray and the Council had before them. There is only the coincidence of the same bishop ruling in the same way, which to me says more about the bishop and the processes occurring under her administration than they do about the advocates.

Speaking of advocates, it is clear that the questioner did not think through the problem of relating the questions to the business of the conference, especially in light of the various restrictions put on that definition by various JCDs in the past. This is an area where Associates in Advocacy needs to provide guidance for those trying to help pastors in trouble.

This decision warns all those bringing questions of law to be ready to challenge a bishop’s making a parliamentary ruling that the questions of law are out of order and seek a conference vote to overturn that ruling. Preparation for conference requires ascertaining the grounds for the questions to be framed and supported as business of the conference.