The Midway Session erred when it announced RE Dudt’s censure publicly, and the NWGP did also when it agreed with them…
RE Dudt, in his appeal to the NWGP, identified the Session’s public announcement of his suspension and censure as a rush to judgment that indicated prejudice on behalf of the lower court.
The SJC Panel agreed with RE Dudt.
The NWGP, however, did not. It did not think the Session did anything wrong. It saw no errors or rush to judgment. RE Dudt identified the NWGP’s action as a specification of error in his appeal to the SJC.
THE FAILURE OF THE NWGP
As would be expected, when the SJC Panel agreed with RE Dudt, it also agreed with him regarding the failure of the Northwest Georgia Presbytery to recognize this prejudicial action by the Midway Session.
The SJC Panel decision says:
A 4th specification of Presbytery error, Appellant alleges that Presbytery erred in its ruling that Session did not violate BCO 42-6 when Session announced to the congregation the Appellant’s conviction and censure on November 12.
This specification of error is sustained.
A Minute Explanatory. See Minute for the 33rd and 34th specifications of Session error.
Why was the NWGP consistently incapable of identifying any acts of prejudice or clear constitutional violations by the Midway Session?