SSM, Church Government & Rulings vs. Judgements

Last updated on: November 17, 2015 at 9:09 am by Blair Van Dyke

SSM, Church Government & Rulings vs. Judgements 2015-11-17T09:09:36-06:00 Blair Van Dyke

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The following comparison may help to clarify certain decisions made in church governance. I hope so.

I am a high school basketball official. In the realm of officiating, there are rulings and there are judgments. As an official I must do both many times per game. I must rule and I must judge. And these are two very different officiating functions.

A ruling is a call that I cannot change through my own workings or assessments. For example, if a player that is dribbling the basketball steps on one of the four boundary lines of the floor they have gone “out of bounds” and I have absolutely no choice—I must call them out of bounds and award possession of the ball to the other team. This is a ruling. And rulings are determined by officiating boards at the state and national levels.

On the other hand, a judgment is a call that I have total autonomy to make. A judgement does not exist within the exacting realms of rulings. I have liberty to interpret these calls very widely. For example, when a foul is committed I judge as to whether the infraction was a personal foul, a player control foul, an offensive foul, a defensive foul, a double foul, a flagrant foul, an sportsmanlike foul, a technical foul and so forth. In fact, I can call a technical foul on a player, coach, announcer, or fans. My judgements also extend to calls that include goal tending and basket interference—which means I have the limited power to put points on the scoreboard or take points off the scoreboard for one team or the other. Furthermore, my officiating partners have absolutely no authority to override my judgment. The call is mine and mine alone.

Similar principles are at play with Church governance in Mormonism—only there is one distinct difference and it is this: ninety-nine percent of all calls made by local ecclesiastical leaders in Mormonism are rulings and not judgments. Take the recent policy regarding same-sex marriage. The central hierarchy explicitly identified a ruling—if a couple enters into a same-sex relationship and break the law of chastity, there must be disciplinary action taken. However, and here’s a noteworthy difference, the central hierarchy of the Church did not identify which ruling that local leaders must make. The final call is a judgement, not a ruling and it is made at the local level.

Furthermore, there are a series of outcomes that may result from that ruling. Now, like in basketball, the judgements may be quite similar to judements made in different Church jurisdictions. But there remains a significant autonomy wherein local leaders may consider individual circumstances that may make the judgement entirely different from previous rulings in different wards or stakes. That is quite remarkable. As a high school official, I do not enjoy that flexibility. Not in the least. I’m glad that the central hierarchy of the Church has granted this limited flexibility to local leaders. They didn’t have to, and yet they did. Again, that is quite remarkable.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

November 16, 2015

To Those That Departed, You Will Be Missed

Next Post

November 18, 2015 Mr. Trump & Senator Cruz: There is No Such Thing as Radical Islam

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2018 November 2017 August 2017 July 2017 March 2017 February 2017 December 2016 November 2016 August 2016 July 2016 May 2016 March 2016 February 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What was the name of Saul's son who ruled Israel except Judah after Saul died?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Abner Jonathan Mephibosheth Ish-bosheth