Global Methodism rolls through Pittsburgh—An overview
Church retains homosexual stance
Pain and protest—A Good News commentary
Is it time for an amicable and just separation?
Judicial Council clarifies church standards
Bishop calls life a song ‘waiting to be sung’
Episcopal address calls for new future
Forgetting ‘I’ and becoming ‘we’
African-American contribution celebrated
Issues: Marriage, bio-ethics, and Iraq
Prayer room offers praise in a variety of styles
Delegates support education, Africa University
African bishop urges delegates to fear the Lord
Eunice Mathews honored/ Apportionment ruling
Former presidential spokesman confronts church politics
Cote d’ Ivoire denomination joins UMC/Budget set
Biblical scholar speaks on homosexuality
Connectional Table replaces GCOM
Ministry with Young People/Pittsburgh by the numbers
Transforming Congregations—“compassion without compromise”
Episcopal Bishop Robert Duncan gives warning
The UMDecision 2004 team effort
Good News board responds to unity statement
Film Focus
Hollywood makes a pitch for marriage and family
COLUMNS
Editorial—A bittersweet 2004 General Conference
Renew Women’s Network
A violation of trust, space, and spirit
The Next Generation
Wading into youth ministry
The Great Commission
Beyond Samaria
From the Heart
Of bare feet and blackberries
The United Methodist high court ruled during General Conference that unwillingness by a pastor to lead a local church toward full payment of apportionments is not a chargeable offense. In the UM Church, apportionments are defined as the funds each annual conference or local church pays to support church-wide ministry.
The Judicial Council ruling's "Analysis and Rationale" section did state, however, that any clergy member's "deliberate" encouragement of a church "not to pay its apportionments in full, when the church is otherwise able to do so.may rise to the level of a chargeable offense under Paragraph 2702" of the church's Book of Discipline.
The council was asked by the General Conference to determine whether or not a pastor's unwillingness to counsel his or her church to pay apportionments constituted "failure to perform the work of the ministry" or "disobedience to the order and discipline of the United Methodist Church," two of the chargeable offenses listed in Paragraph 2702.
In its ruling, the council affirmed that the duties of a pastor include "leading the congregation in the fulfillment of its mission through full and faithful payment of all apportioned ministerial support, administrative, and benevolent funds." (Paragraph 331.2f)
The decision continued: "The pastor of a church has an important role in leading a local church to.pay its apportionments in full, including the apportionment for the Episcopal Fund, but the pastor does not carry this responsibility alone. The pastor of the church is just one of many individuals, lay, and clergy, who have responsibility for providing leadership to a local congregation and thereby leading a local church toward full payment of apportionments. To hold the pastor of a church personally accountable for a chargeable offense when a church under his/her leadership does not pay its apportionments in full, including the requirement for proportionality in the case of the Episcopal Fund, is unjust.
"The clear legislative intent of the list of chargeable offenses in Paragraph 2702 is to hold pastors accountable for their own personal actions, not the actions of other ordained or lay persons."
Neill Caldwell is a correspondent for United Methodist News Service.
Click here to send your response plus the title of this article to us at Good News.