Within The United Methodist Church, bishops hold a unique and constitutionally limited judicial authority. When a question of law arises during the regular business of a conference session, the presiding bishop is tasked with rendering a decision that provides clarity and maintains order. This process is not arbitrary; it is governed by strict procedures outlined in

The Book of Discipline 2020/2024 and subject to final review by the church’s highest court, the Judicial Council.

This guide provides an expanded look at the essentials of making and submitting a formal decision of law, incorporating the specific legal and judicial citations that govern the process.

The Constitutional Foundation of Episcopal Rulings

A bishop’s authority to rule on questions of law is granted by the Constitution of the church.

Source of Authority: According to ¶ 51, Article VII, a bishop presiding over an annual, central, or jurisdictional conference must decide all questions of law that come before them during the regular business of a session.
Formal Requirements: The question must be presented in writing, and the resulting decision must be recorded in the conference journal.
Limited Power: An episcopal decision is not considered final or broadly authoritative. It is binding only for the specific case at hand until it has been reviewed by the Judicial Council. All episcopal decisions of law must be reported in writing to the Judicial Council annually, which then has the power to affirm, modify, or reverse them. See ¶ 2609.6.

Step 1: Receiving and Evaluating the Request

The process begins when a member of the conference submits a formal request. Proper procedure is critical from the outset.

Receive a Written Copy: The bishop must obtain a written copy of the Question of Law from the conference member.
Ensure Proper Recording: The Conference Secretary must officially record the request.
Decide on Timing: A bishop can rule immediately while the conference is in session or choose to take up to 30 days after the session concludes, as permitted by ¶ 2609.6.

Crucially, the request must present a valid question of law, not an opinion or a question of fact. For example, a request is improper if it simply states an opinion, such as calling a resolution a “crazy idea”. Likewise, it is improper if it asks the bishop to determine a fact, such as whether a specific board was involved in drafting a resolution.

Step 2: Legal Analysis and Deductive Reasoning

Once a valid request is accepted, the bishop must find the applicable church law. While the request may cite provisions, bishops have a duty to know the law and determine if the citations are correct or if other provisions apply. The research process should be systematic:

Start with the Constitution: Does the action or resolution violate a constitutional provision or principle?
Continue with the Discipline: Which parts, sections, and paragraphs of the Discipline, as established by the General Conference, address the issues?
Follow up with Jurisprudence: Has the Judicial Council ruled on this issue before? If so, what was the ruling, and does it still have precedential value?

Applying

Deductive Legal Reasoning is key to forming a conclusion. This involves applying a general rule to a specific factual situation.

Example:

General Rule: “Pastors shall not discontinue services without the consent of the charge conference and the district superintendent” (¶ 341.2).
Particular Fact: An annual conference adopts a policy permitting pastors to discontinue worship services at their sole discretion.
Conclusion: The conference policy is in direct conflict with the General Rule of ¶ 341.2 and is, therefore, null and void.

Step 3: Addressing Commonly Raised Issues

Certain legal questions appear frequently. Familiarity with Judicial Council Decisions (JCDs) on these topics is invaluable:

Aspirational vs. Prescriptive: Is a conference resolution an unenforceable goal, or does it mandate action? (See JCD 1340, 1392, 1398, 1399, 1435) .
Conflict with the Discipline: Does a conference resolution negate, ignore, or violate existing provisions of the Discipline? (See JCD 823, 886, 1044, 1105, 1435) .
Acting Without Authority: Did an annual conference or one of its bodies take an action that it was not authorized to take? (See JCD 878, 1023, 1111, 1371, 1398) .
Unconstitutional Delegation of Power: Is a conference policy an improper delegation of power? (See JCD 78, 79, 380, 400, 584, 590, 599) .

Step 4: Writing and Submitting the Decision

The written decision should be crafted for comprehension and persuasion. Clarity and cogent analysis are more important than citing an exhaustive list of precedents. Remember that less is more; short and concise decisions are most effective.

Submission Requirements: The final step is to submit the ruling to the Judicial Council according to its specific procedures.

Form: The submission must include the “Report by Bishop on Decision of Law” form.
Attachments: You must attach the full Decision of Law, the text of the written request, relevant minutes of the annual conference proceedings, and any other relevant materials like policies or resolutions.
Copies: Thirteen (13) hard copies must be mailed to the address on the form. Electronic copies in both MS Word and PDF formats must be sent to secretary@umcjudicialcouncil.org.

Downloadable PowerPoint presentation:

Essentials of Decision of Law Download