Print this Post

Bishop Holston’s statement regarding Judicial Council decision

Bishop Holston

Many of you have been waiting to learn how the Judicial Council would rule on the request by the South Central Jurisdiction for a declaratory decision regarding the consecration last July of Karen Oliveto, an openly gay, married bishop in the Western Jurisdiction.

On Tuesday, April 25, the Judicial Council held a public hearing on the matter and late Friday, April 28, the Judicial Council issued its decisions for this and others it dealt with this week.

Decision 1341 is a lengthy and technical one. There are two key components to the decision. First, the Judicial Council ruled that the consecration of an openly gay bishop is a violation of church law. Second, it affirmed the right of clergy persons to due process and declared Bishop Oliveto remains “in good standing” until a judicial or administrative proceeding is concluded.

United Methodists around the globe are in a season of prayer for God’s guidance as we seek resolution to the deep division in our denomination over human sexuality. This Judicial Council ruling represents an additional matter for our prayers, along with the work of the Commission on a Way Forward and the called 2019 General Conference.

When new members join our churches, we join them in renewing our vows to uphold the ministries of our local congregation and The United Methodist Church with our prayers, our presence, our gifts, our service and our witness.

May our lives be a testament to the love of God, the saving power of Jesus Christ, and the work of the Holy Spirit in our midst as we prayerfully seek God’s will and continue to engage our communities for the sake of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Grace and peace,

Bishop L. Jonathan Holston

South Carolina Conference of the United Methodist Church

Council of Bishops president’s statement on Judicial Council ruling

Consecration of gay bishop against UM church law


Permanent link to this article: http://www.umcsc.org/home/bishop-holstons-statement-regarding-judicial-council-decision/


Skip to comment form

  1. Michael Clancy

    When will these comment writers allow Christ’s Love and teachings to influence their negative thoughts and “opinions”?
    How could Christ’s commands to “Love God” and “Love one another” cause people to respond in such negative ways ?
    Has anyone considered What would Jesus Do ?

    WWJD ?

  2. Meredith Barrioz


    Change is difficult. I trust th at no hasty decisions will be made and pray that those who choose to comment on social media do so with kindness, trust, and without judgement. Thank you.

  3. Jan Fleming

    This subject is a sad commentary on our Wesleyan heritage. It continues to be a huge distraction from spreading the gospel and continuing our day to day discipleship responsibilities.

    Lifelong Methodist.

  4. Steven Dial

    Very disappointed in the second part of the ruling. In an effort to be “politically correct” you are losing the basis of our teaching, and you will lose many members.
    I am a member of the local scouting and we are still trying to counter what “National” did to us with their ruling. Those in government seem to forget when they look at the constitution that our country was formed on Judaeo-Christian principles and our forefathers who rote it must turning over in their graves with what is going on now.

  5. Roger M. Gramling

    Mr. Plowmen’s concurrent and dissenting opinion in this case is correct and should have been the opinion of the Judicial Council. In this case the Western Jurisdiction acted clearly in violation of church law in the nomination, election, consecration, and assignment of Ms. Oliveto as a bishop, and they did so intentionally. They knew full well that their action would violate church law. Accordingly, the election of Ms. Oliveto is null and void, and the office is vacated. The only administrative and/or judicial process remaining in this case is related to her continuation as an Elder in Full Connection within an annual conference in the United Methodist Church.

  6. Bobby Parker

    I do not agree with this, next we will be rewriting the bible

Comments have been disabled.