http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1315&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1101&EN=1200
There were several annual conferences that were impacted by the removal of Bishop Tangonan and his being supplanted by retired Bishop Arichea. The request before the Judicial Council shows there is lingering discontent about it.
The impact of this ruling is that only the session presided over by Bishop Arichea sends the valid representatives to the General and Jurisdictional Conferences in 2012.
I find it interesting that the Council did not cite its own rulings to justify supporting Bishop Arichea’s decision of law saying his conference session was the only legitimate one (see JCD 1149). Interesting, but who knows how significant it is?
Showing posts with label election of delegates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election of delegates. Show all posts
Monday, November 21, 2011
Sunday, November 20, 2011
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)