JCD 1247

http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1381&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1201&EN=1259

REVIEW OF CONFERENCE RESTRUCTURING

South Carolina Annual Conference has been subject to restructuring for some time.  The Council was first approached about it in April of 2010 (JCD 1147).  This decision is the fourth in this series (JCDs 1147, 1204, 1222, and 1247)..

The persistence of the Council in following through on its concerns has minimized violations of connectionalism in the reorganization in South Carolina, one hopes.  The previous decision pointed out the flaw in the plan regarding the significance of the Board of Global Ministries (JCD 1222).  Although no details are supplied in the instant decision, the Council has approved whatever amendments the conference made.  

All reorganization plans that have been detailed in decisions by the Council tended to centralize authority in the episcopal office and downplay groups that tend to have a mind of their own, based on the realities which they serve.  I hope the acceptance by the Council minimizes those tendencies.  In my experience, church law has not changed the heart of those who want control.  Watchdogs, beware.

JCD 1195

http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1316&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1101&EN=1200

The parallel situation in a second of conferences previously served by Bishop Tagonan provides the request in this decision. The commentary for JCD 1194 obtains here.

JCD 1196

http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1317&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1101&EN=1200

The wording is different but the issue is the same as in the previous two rulings. The result is the same.

The cumulative effect of all the decisions in the Philippines case is that the college of bishops, no matter what they did, was essentially supported from the United States, further enhancing the power of that group to do as they think is best, whether or not the Discipline is on their side. They have had the Judicial Council, which is even better.

That could fall apart if the Council seeks all the documentation they should have received as these cases came their way. Will the adeptness of JCD 1156 be applied to the spring session’s review or will the tendencies of this whole series, essentially backing up the college of bishops no matter what? We’ll see.

Surely there have been questions in other annual conferences in other parts of the world. History shows that the Church in the Philippines has turned to the Judicial Council more frequently than any other conferences outside the United States. Some historian may find it an interesting study to see why that is so.

JCD 1147

http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1267&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1100&EN=1181

Those interested in restructuring their conferences will find this decision loaded with argument for and against its various aspects. Whoever wrote this for the Council is very capable of excellent analysis in a complicated circumstance.

Restructuring annual conferences has been very popular for a number of years now. Where I live, for example, there are no district superintendency committees. There is what amounts to a single administrative council that does nearly everything at the district level. I’m told it works for them. It doesn’t for the very reasons stated in the decision. The alternate structures must provide for a clear connection with the required agencies established by the Discipline. Let me add another point. Maintaining the separate agencies required by the Discipline maintains separation of powers so that conflict of interest and influence of command are minimized.

When I taught UMC polity in church membership classes, I showed connectionalism to be parallel structures at every level of the church which interacted to develop ideas, share information, and solve problems. In recent years, unfortunately, “Connectionalism” is defined as “obeying the bishop no matter what she/he orders.”

But this decision based on questions that come from the Dakotas puts the correct emphasis on what is truly connectional in our system of church administration.