Decision Number 904

Decision

The following adaptations made by the Northern Europe Central Conference to the Discipline under which the Norway Annual Conference developed its structure are unconstitutional: eliminating the annual conference board of laity, combining the functions of the annual conference council on finance and administration with the Main Board, and permitting the Main Board to make personnel decisions with respect to the annual conference treasurer. The decision of the bishop is not affirmed in this regard. This matter is remanded to the Northern Europe Central Conference and to the Norway Annual Conference for action consistent with this decision. Such actions are to be returned to the Judicial Council, which retains jurisdiction for review and approval.

Friday, October 27, 2000.

The Judicial Court of the Northern Europe Central Conference

The United Methodist Church of the Nordic and Baltic Area

Ruling regarding whether the organization of the Norwegian Annual Conference is in accordance with the North European Book of Discipline (Metodistkirkens Lære- og Kirkeordning).

The Judicial Council of the Northern Europe Central Conference, according to the North European Book of Discipline § 537.33, has discussed and ruled on the matter of interpreting whether the organization of the Annual Conference of The Methodist Church in Norway is in accordance with the North European Book of Discipline.

From Judicial Council of the the General Conference, a referral of the request of Ole-Einar Andersen from June 1998, is forwarded to be acted upon by the Northern Europe Central Conference's Judicial Council, in regard to bishop Hans Vaxby's proposed interpretation of the legality of the June 1997 decision of the Norwegian Annual Conference to approve a new conference structure.

In decision #847, the General Conference's Judicial Council had discussed and reached a decision regarding the legality of the Annual Conference's organization, and has since, in memorandum #859, withdrawn its ruling.

In memorandum #859, deliberations concerning the accuracy of the judicial interpretation were likewise referred to the Northern Europe Central Conference's Judicial Council. The forwarding of this juridical interpretation has taken place in lieu of the Judicial Council's finding, that the Norwegian Annual Conference has worked within the applicable laws of the North European Book of Discipline, of which adaptations by the Book of Discipline have occurred on the basis of decisions within the North European Book of Discipline § 29.5, § 537.9 and § 537.21, which deal with the Central Conference's right to draw up their own provisions and accommodate them to parts of the Book of Discipline. This adaptation should take place in accordance with the authority invested by the General Conference.

___________________________

The following 5 points are not thoroughly examined, but alone constitute a synopsis of the 5 judicial interpretations, around which the case revolves:

1. The bishop was inquired if the restructuring of the Norwegian Annual Conference is legal according to the amendments to the Methodist Constitution, paragraph 2, section II, article VI, pt. 15 (Discipline § 15.15), since these amendments had not been followed up on by a law giving the Annual Conference such authority to decide.

The bishop responded that his interpretation of the restructuring, which was decided upon by the Norwegian Annual Conference, did not happen according to § 15.15, but was made out of consideration for preservation of the connectional structure, and that a change in the area of responsibility of the Council did not occur. Furthermore, the new structure is not in conflict with the authority assumed by the Council on Finance and Administration and the Council on Ministries.

In his recommendation to the Judicial Council regarding a re-evaluation of the decision on memorandum #847, the bishop furthermore referred to paragraphs in the North European Book of Discipline on the Annual Conference's Executive Committee, in that the paragraphs since 1976 have become distinct from The Book of Discipline's paragraphs on the Annual Conference's Council on Finance and Administration and Council on Ministries.

2. The bishop was inquired whether the Annual Conference can be legally organized since it has dissolved the Laity Council.

The bishop responded that the 1995 Annual Conference voted to disband the Laity Council, effective from 1996, and that all functions and areas of responsibility be transferred to the Board of Home Missions, thus maintaining the connectional structure.

3. The bishop was inquired about the applicability and legality of the organizational plan for the Norwegian Annual Conference, approved in 1997, by, among other things, referring to the Judicial Council's determination that the Kansas West Annual Conference's organization is problematic on several points.

The bishop responded that there is no comparison between the organizational plan of Kansas West and the approved organizational plan of the Norwegian Annual Conference.

4. The bishop was asked if the "check and balance" system is functional in the new organizational plan since the Executive Committee serves concurrently as economic administrator while controlling administration.

The bishop responded that in light of the North European Central Conference's adaptation of the Discipline, going back to 1976, the Executive Committee serves both as the Annual Conference's Council on Finance and Administration, and the Annual Conference's Council on Ministries.

5. The bishop was inquired about the legality of Hovedstyret (the Main Board) altering the Conference's work schedule without authorization from the Annual Conference.

The bishop responded that no changes have occurred for the 1998 Annual Conference and there was no break from § 605, in that it was stated that the Annual Conference had the opportunity to single out certain issues that were treated compositely during the plenum.
________________________

In light of the need to make a statement about the legality of the North European Central Conference's adaptations, the Central Conference's Judicial Council has reached the following decisions regarding the above 5 judicial interpretations:

re. pts. 1,3 and 4

The Judicial Council's perception of the interpretation regarding the restructuring of the Norwegian Annual Conference is that it is accurate, in that it falls in under the North European Central Conference's adaptation of the Discipline, and therefore the bishop's judicial interpretation must belong under the Central Conference Judicial Council's jurisdiction, and the Council may draw a conclusion regarding the bishop's interpretation.

The bishop's interpretation of the restructuring did not take place by referral to additions to the Discipline's § 15.15 (Additions to the the Constitution's paragraph 2, section II, article VI pt. 15: "... to seek to organize, promote and administrate the work of the church outside the United States, to allow the Annual Conference to make use of a structure particular to it's task, without regard for different approved structures...") is thus correct.

The restructuring of the Norwegian Annual Conference took place by referral to the North European Discipline, which in § 608-615, 616 and 626 determines the tasks of Hovedstyret (the Main Board), and in § 628-632 and § 637-643 mentions the remaining conference bodies, which are impacted by the restructuring. Restructuring, which assigns the work tasks of several Annual Conference bodies to fewer bodies or councils is not wrong in principle, but possible and correct, if the Annual Conference agrees in light of the Discipline § 626, which states that an Annual Conference can be organized in it's own way on the basis of the formulation of the Annual Conference... can choose a Conference Council... (§ 628.3) or, .... shall vote ... or ... shall have .... or other arrangement which implements these functions... (§ 629, 630, 632, 638, 643). It does not appear that the restructuring should have as its purpose the reduction of the North European book of Discipline's necessary functions, but alone has the intention of creating a different way of determining the functions and work tasks. Of the original suggestion to the 1997 Annual conference in Porsgrunn, it does not clearly appear which of the 3 work areas (work area on Diaconal services, Commission on Missions and Home Missions Board) would assume which of the functions and tasks that the North European Book of Discipline enumerates for other conference bodies in § 628-632 and § 637-643. In the meantime, this relationship was changed at the 1999 Annual Conference, such that there is now a clear division of function, and thereby in accordance with the North European Book of Discipline. For the time being, the following councils and organizations have special positions, according to the North European Book of Discipline: § 631 Council with responsibility for foreign mission; § 633 Board of Ordained Ministry: § 644 Women's Division; and § 646 Conference Council on Youth Ministries, whereby the following remarks can be made:

1. Hovedstyret (The Main Board) thus does not override the following organizations: (Board of Missions, Board of Ordained Ministry, Conference Council on Youth Ministries), and this work area (Women's Division) in this context, and thus does not override the Commission on Missions, which the 1999 Annual Conference assumes. An Annual Conference has the possibility for organizing itself as it chooses, so long as the functional and connectional structure demanded by the North European Book of Discipline is maintained. It would thus be possible to define the work areas relation to and authorization for the Councils mentioned in § 628.3, § 629, § 630, § 632, § 638 and § 643, but not for the Councils mentioned in § 631, 633, 644 and 646, since these Councils are clearly defined and the paragraphs written in the Discipline are unambiguous. Therefore, the question regarding Hovedstyretâ's (The Main Board's) delegation of work assignments and the competence of the work area on Missions is irrelevant, since the Missions Board, in pursuance of the North European Book of Discipline § 631.2-10, has tasks and qualifications defined by the Annual Conference.

Hence it follows that the organization of the Norwegian Annual Conference regarding the Commission on Missions as subservient to Hovedstyret (The Main Board) is not in accordance with the North European Book of Discipline.

2. Since the formulation, Hovedstyret (The Main Board) shall approve all budgets worked out by the work areas and the Methodist Church's Youth Council..." (page 23 in the protocol for the 1997 Annual Conference in Porsgrunn), has been changed to, "Hovedstyret (The Main Board) shall consider all budgets worked out by work areas and the Methodist Church's Youth Council, and promote these and the Treasurers budget for approval by the Annual Conference..." (approve changed to consider) (point 2. Hovedstyret (The Main Board) and point 5 Budjett og Regnskab page 37, point 2 Hovedstyret og budget og regnskab page 38 in the protocol for the Annual Conference in Bergen 1999), this function of the Hovedstyret (The Main Board) is thus regarded to be in accordance with the North European Book Discipline.

Should the "check and balance" system in regard to the arrangement with the Executive Committee be found lacking, it is not due to the lack of accord with the North European Book Discipline's provisions regarding the Executive Committee, but rather the Discipline's own provisions. Regarding economic administration in connection with restructuring, work areas are not given less control than other Annual Conference organs are given before restructuring.

The Central Conference's Judicial Council has not decided on the matter regarding whether the restructuring (pt. 3 of Ole-Einar Andersen's question) is in accordance with the Constitution, in that the Constitution cannot be adopted or adjusted by the Central Conference, which is why this question rests outside the Central Conference Judicial Council's area of competence.

re. pt. 2

Without drawing an opinion on the legality of the abolition of the Laity Council in 1996, the dissolution of the Council and the reassignment of its work tasks and responsibility over to the Home Missions Board is, at the current time, in accordance with the 1997 North European Discipline, on the background of the statement in § 630. Since this paragraph is one that accommodates the North European Central Conference, the Central Conference Judicial Council has, at this time, jurisdiction in the matter of legal interpretation of this question. § 630 in the 1997 version of the North European Book of Discipline allows for another arrangement for the Laity Council, as long as the Council's tasks are managed by another work area. This was specified by the 1999 Annual Conference in Bergen, in that the Home Missions Board assumed responsibility for the Laity Council's work areas (see page 34 in the 1999 Annual Conference protocol).

re. pt. 5

Since this question and the answer belong under the unadopted part of the Discipline, namely §604.1 and § 605.2, the extent of accordance with the Discipline has not been juridically acted upon.

It can at any rate be named that during the oral presentation of the agenda and materials for the 1998 Annual Conference in Oslo, it was intimated that if the delegates wished to state objections to the agenda and work groups, or focus on single matters that were being treated compositely, there would be afforded the opportunity to do so. From the protocol for the 1998 Norwegian Annual Conference, there appears on p. 87, pt. 9, that points were singled out of issues that were to be treated compositely and discussed during the plenum. From the same minutes, in point 10 there appears that the legislation was approved after several amendments. This seems to clarify that Hovedstyret (the Main Board) did not act independently of the Annual Conference or by their own hand alter the procedure of the Annual Conference.

Submitted and passed at the Judicial Courts meeting in Stockholm, the 29th of March, 2000.

Finn Uth, Chairman for the Central Conference's Judicial Court

Other members: Steinar Hjerpseth, secretary -- Meeli Tankler -- Christer Lundgren -- Per Wallsted, substitute

translated by Mark Lewis