A105 Amend Canon IV.5.4.g
Resolved, the House of ________________ concurring,
That Canon IV.15.4.g is hereby amended to read as follows:
<Amended text as it would appear if adopted and concurred. Scroll below the line of asterisks (******) to see the version showing all deleted and added text.>
IV.5.4.g
g. No Bishop or Clergy member of the Court of Review may serve in any matter originating from the Diocese in which such Bishop or Clergy member is canonically resident or is then currently licensed to serve, and no lay member may serve in a matter originating from the Diocese of the lay member’s primary residence or a Diocese in which the lay member is then currently active.
******
<Proposed amended resolution text showing exact changes being made:>
IV.5.4.g
g. Whenever a matter is referred to the Court of Review, the President must appoint a Panel for that case consisting of one Bishop, two Members of the Clergy, and two lay persons. No Bishop or Clergy member of the Court of Review may serve in any matter originating from the Diocese in which such Bishop or Clergy member is canonically resident or is then currently licensed to serve, and no lay member may serve in a matter originating from the Diocese of the lay member’s primary residence or a Diocese in which the lay member is then currently active. In such event, the President shall appoint another member of the Court from the same Order to serve; if no other member is available to serve, the President must appoint an alternate of the same Order to serve.
Explanation
The provisions stricken from this section may have been left inadvertently when Title IV was amended to remove the Provincial Courts of Review. In any case, there is no benefit or reason to designate panels within the Court of Review. Moreover, it is already difficult enough for the Joint Nominating Committee to recommend slates of candidates who have the requisite “skills, gifts, and experience” the Court needs, while also representing the cultural and geographic diversity of the church, including historically underrepresented voices. To create a subset of the Court which still contained this diversity would be both impossible and create a hardship for some members of the Court.