Decision Number 1490

Decision

The rulings of law on the five questions presented to the bishop are affirmed. Paragraph 2549.3(b) and ¶ 2553 are not in conflict, and until a local church is disaffiliated, the provisions of ¶ 2549.3(b) remain available in appropriate circumstances. In light of the annual conference’s formal approval of the local church closure, the question of whether a local church’s intent to initiate, or the initiation of, the process of disaffiliation under ¶ 2553 can be considered an exigent circumstance under ¶ 2549.3(b), is in fact moot and represents a hypothetical question.  The appropriate forum for a local church to challenge an exigent circumstances and interim closure determination under ¶ 2549.3(b) is at the next meeting of the annual conference when formal closure is before that body for consideration; that challenge may be considered in debate and the annual conference shall then decide whether to approve or disapprove formal closure.  The bishop and district superintendent do not violate ¶ 414.2 and ¶ 419.4 when they inform a local church of interim closure under ¶ 2549.3(b). The interim closure of Fifth Avenue United Methodist Church and the vesting of the church’s property in the annual conference board of trustees under ¶ 2549.3(b), and that congregation’s interim and final closure, did not violate the plain reading of ¶¶ 414.2, 419.4, 2549.3(b), or 2553 of the Book of Discipline.

Deanell Tacha was absent. Kent Fulton, lay alternate, participated in this decision
Luan-Vu Tran was absent. Timothy Bruster, clergy alternate, participated in this decision.

November 7, 2023