Guidence

You are in: Manual > Guidelines for district councils

O > GUIDELINES FOR DISTRICT COUNCILS

(July 2002)

Note from the Mission Council's Section O Advisory Group

July 2007

Because of substantial changes to the Section O Process which are currently being made by the General Assembly, the Advisory Group is preparing revised sets of Guidelines. It is hoped that this task will be completed by the 2008 General Assembly. Meanwhile, although there is much useful and relevant information in these guidelines, readers should be aware that some paragraph references may not be correct.

These Guidelines, including a flowchart have been prepared by mission council's Section O Advisory Committee to help you to understand the part which the District Council (as distinct from its Mandated Group) has to play in the Section O Process. Make sure you have the latest version of Section O by your side when reading this. Section O is printed in full in the Manual, and can also be found on the Church’s website (http://www.urc.org.uk ).

N.B. The text of Section O Parts I and II always takes precedence over these guidelines.

Bracketed numbers refer to the notes at the end of the document. References are to the revised text of the Ministerial Disciplinary Process as approved by the General Assembly 2002.

The Ministerial Disciplinary Process (the “Section O Process”) was approved by the General Assembly 1997 in order to provide the Church with a means of resolving issues affecting the conduct of ministers of the United Reformed Church which could not be resolved by any other means.

The oversight of ministers is the responsibility of District Councils (1). Therefore the responsibility for identifying the need for disciplinary action will normally fall upon the District Council (under the guidance of the Synod Moderator) (2), rather than the other Councils of the Church.

Most of the work of the District Council is entirely pastoral. However, issues of natural justice and confidentiality arise in the conduct of the disciplinary process, and for that reason the Process involves the total separation of disciplinary action from pastoral care. Therefore the disciplinary action is entrusted to a “Mandated Group” (3) which acts in the name of the District Council.

It is important to identify precisely when the concerns about any particular minister move from the pastoral to the disciplinary. This occurs at the moment when the Synod Moderator calls in the District Council’s Mandated Group (4). Thereafter there are separate provisions for the disciplinary procedures and the exercise of pastoral care.

Each District Council is called on by the Section O Process to appoint a Standing Mandated Group (5), which can be called in when the need arises (4).

Once the Mandated Group has been called in, the officers and members of the District Council must play no part in the Disciplinary Process, because the role of the District Council in the Process will be undertaken in its name by the Mandated Group.

Those in the District Council charged with pastoral responsibilities must arrange (in consultation with the Synod Moderator) for appropriate pastoral care to be provided for the minister, his/her family, his/her pastorate and the other churches of the District.

This also applies in cases where the disciplinary process has been initiated not by the District Council but by the Synod or in the name of the General Assembly. In all cases, the District Council remains responsible for arranging appropriate pastoral care for the minister in question, and for his/her family and pastorate.

When serious allegations are made against a minister, and such allegations are proved on the balance of probability (6) to the satisfaction of an Assembly Commission (7), the Process provides for the removal of a minister from the Roll of Ministers (8).

There is also provision for the Assembly Commission (although finding the case proved) to retain the minister’s name on the Roll, but to issue a written warning to the minister (9). The effect of such a warning would be that, if the conduct complained of were to be repeated, a future Assembly Commission might decide that the minister’s name should be removed from the Roll.

However, anyone contemplating the initiation of the Process (4) must realise that it has the potential to lead to the removal of a minister’s name from the Roll. Since his/her livelihood and pension rights are at stake (and in many cases their accommodation), the Process should not be invoked until all other means of resolving the issue have been exhausted.

At the conclusion of its initial enquiry, the Mandated Group may decide that there is no case to answer. In which case, it issues a Notice of Non-Continuance (10). There is no appeal against such a decision by the Mandated Group.

Once a minister’s name has been referred into the Commission Stage of the Process (11), it is not possible to withdraw the referral. The case must proceed to a Hearing before an Assembly Commission, unless Paragraph E.9.2 of the Rules of Procedure applies. This Rule gives the Assembly Commission the discretion to dispense with a formal Hearing if the Mandated Group informs the Commission beforehand that, as a result of its investigation, it does not consider that it has a case – or at least a sufficiently strong case to satisfy the required standard of proof – against the Minister.

Suspension. If the case of a minister is referred into the Commission Stage of the Process, the Mandated Group, acting in the name of the District Council, must suspend the minister from ministerial duty. It is very important that the minister and all who have dealings with the minister (for example, the pastorate, the other pastorates in the District, churches of other denominations) understand the implications of suspension (12). In particular, it should be understood that suspension does not carry any implication of censure.

The District Secretary will be notified by the Secretary of the Assembly Commission at various stages in the Process (13), so that s/he may pass on the information on a “need to know” basis.

Confidentiality. No publicity should be given to any case until the Assembly Commission has reached its decision, other than a simple statement by the Secretary or Convener of the Assembly Commission that a case is proceeding in relation to a particular minister. In any case in which the public media approach members of the District Council for information, they should be referred to the Church’s Press Officer.

Para. 2(3)(A)(i) of the Structure (Section B of the Manual)

Part II, Para. B.6.1

Part I, Para. 3.12; Part II, Para. B.1

Part II, Para. B.6.1 and B.6.2

Part II, Para. B.3

Part II, Para. E.16.1.2

Part I, Para. 3.3; Part II, Section C

Part I, Para. 10.1

Part I, Para. 10.2

Part II, Para. B.7.2

Part I, Para. 3.6 and Para. 5; Part II, Para. B.8.1

Schedule E, Para. 4; Part II, Para. B.8.2