Commentary: Lawyer on meaning of bishop ruling

Courtesy photo of the Rev. Keith Boyette.

Courtesy photo of the Rev. Keith Boyette.

On April 28, the Judicial Council of The United Methodist Church issued Decision 1341 in what some have called the “Oliveto Case.”  The ruling responds to a petition for declaratory decision from the South Central Jurisdictional Conference regarding the election of the Rev. Karen Oliveto as a bishop, but which did not name her specifically.  Although my brief on behalf of Dixie Brewster invited the council to nullify the election, the petition also sought guidance for the church going forward — the very purpose of declaratory decisions.

While Oliveto continues as a bishop, a cloud covers her episcopacy and the cavalier way in which she was nominated by her annual conference, elected by the Western Jurisdictional Conference, consecrated by her fellow bishops and assigned by the jurisdiction’s committee on episcopacy.  The manner in which these bodies have dealt with the requirements of The Book of Discipline has caused great harm to the church.

Decision 1341 declares the following to be church law:

  • A self-avowed practicing homosexual cannot be consecrated as a bishop. If bishops consecrate such a person, they have acted unlawfully.  However, the person must first have been found to be a self-avowed practicing homosexual in an administrative and/or judicial process.
  • A same-sex marriage license issued by competent civil authorities together with the clergy person’s status in a same-sex relationship is a public declaration that the person is a self-avowed practicing homosexual.
  • An openly homosexual and partnered bishop may be charged with being a self-avowed practicing homosexual.
  • Self-avowal does not nullify the consecration and cause removal from the episcopal office but is a sufficient declaration to subject the bishop’s ministerial office to review.  Such a declaration must be brought to the attention of a committee on episcopacy and a supervisory process must be initiated and be brought to conclusion, protecting the person’s constitutional right to fair and due process.  Decision 1341 outlines specific steps that are to be followed during such review.  Those steps are applicable to Oliveto.  The Western Jurisdiction is not free to ignore those steps.

Any confusion and complexity associated with Decision 1341 results from the irresponsibility and neglect of those in the California-Nevada Conference and the Western Jurisdiction charged with the administration of the Discipline. Oliveto publicly affirmed prior to her election as a bishop that she had performed more than 50 ceremonies of homosexual union, a violation of the Discipline, and yet those responsible for supervising her ministry never brought charges against her or subjected her to accountability.

Furthermore, more than two years prior to her nomination, election and consecration as a bishop, Oliveto was named as a partner in a public record certifying her marriage to a person of the same gender.  The Rev. Angela Brown, a United Methodist pastor, performed the ceremony, a clear violation of the Discipline.

However, the supervisory authorities in the annual conference (i.e., the bishop, district superintendent, and board of ordained ministry) failed to file complaints against Oliveto for being a party to a same-sex marriage and against Brown for presiding at one.

Complaints are now pending against Oliveto.

Decision 1341 requires that a jurisdictional college of bishops must file a complaint in circumstances such as Oliveto’s if the existing complaints do not raise all the issues addressed in that decision. Oliveto’s status as a bishop continues under a cloud.

It is in the best interest of the church, the episcopal area where she is assigned and herself that the issues that give rise to this cloud be resolved as expeditiously as possible and in conformity with the requirements of the Discipline.

Boyette, an ordained elder and an attorney in Virginia, was counsel for Dixie Brewster, the maker of the motion which resulted in the South Central Jurisdiction’s petition for declaratory decision to which Decision 1341 responded.  He served on the Judicial Council from 2000 to 2008.

Last week, Richard Marsh, counsel for the Western Jurisdiction College of Bishops in the challenge of the Western Jurisdictional Conference’s episcopal election, offered his interpretation of the Judicial Council ruling.

Sign up for our newsletter!

SUBSCRIBE

Latest News

General Church
Bishop Cynthia Fierro Harvey observes the results from a Feb. 26 vote for the Traditional Plan, which affirms the church’s current bans on ordaining LGBTQ clergy and officiating at or hosting same-sex marriage. The vote came on the last day of the 2019 General Conference in St. Louis. Photo by Paul Jeffrey, UMNS.

Outcome of General Conference bittersweet

United Methodist traditionalists say General Conference vote was best way forward for denomination, but it probably means a split is coming.
General Conference
The Rev. Adam Hamilton speaks March 28 at the Perkins Theological School for the Laity, at Southern Methodist University’s Perkins School of Theology, in Dallas. His topic: “The Future of a Divided Church.” Photo by Sam Hodges, UMNS.

Denomination’s future under discussion — quietly

Conflict over homosexuality, unresolved by GC2019, prompts allies and opponents to talk afresh about options.
General Church
Messages of support for LGBTQ students cover the United Methodist cross and flame in a hallway at the Boston School of Theology after the special General Conference voted to affirm and strengthen the denomination’s rules against gay clergy and same-sex weddings. Photo by Anastasia Kidd, Boston School of Theology.

Seminary leaders stress inclusiveness after GC2019

Leaders of most U.S. United Methodist theological schools say the passing of the Traditional Plan won’t change their policies of inclusion.