*2 BROWN, Bеfore JOHN R. Chief Judge, WISDOM, BELL, GEWIN, THORNBERRY, COLEMAN, GOLD- AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, BERG, DYER, MORGAN, Cir- SIMPSON Judges, cuit En Banc.
AINSWORTH, Judge; Circuit Appellant Robertson, David Julita Witness, having jury waived
trial, was tried and convicted Judge District for failure to objector employ- conscientious for civilian service, military ment lieu vio- App. lation of 50 He U.S.C. pealed ground principal improperly Service board grant declined to him a ministerial ex- emption given and therefore that his convic- why the reasons now panel eligible tion was erroneous. A of this for such classification and was Court, by vote, 2-to-l con- reversed the instructed as to how he could un- States, 5 viction. Robertson Regulations. der the Selective Service *3 Cir., 1968, F.2d 1141. On motion of He requirements was informed of the judges qualify Regular one of the active of this preacher, as a Pioneer (see Appellate Congregational Court Federal Rules of Servant and Assistant Procedure, 35), rehearing Congregational religious Rule en banc Servant his rehearing sect, was ordered. conclude on putting and was told that he must be judgment enough that preaching conviction below in time in his activities affirmed, accordingly should be and to consider this as his vocation and must panel preaching rеgularly. verse the decision of the of this be At that he time Court. told Colonel Weeks that he was at- tempting get (ministerial) a IY-D Robertson, regis- years age, then 18 and he further said that Gulfport, tered with his local qualified was either under Selective Mississippi, February on 1963 and Regulations requirements Service (stu- was classified thereafter as II-S Society the Watchtower Bible and Tract dent). He from school on withdrew Jan- (Jehovah’s Witnesses). day On the same uary 14, 1965, and was classified 1-0 local his board sent a letter to him sub- (conscientious objector) on March mitting types three Mis- of work in the August 13, Acceptable and 1-0 on sissippi Hospital appro- State deemed appeals 1965. No were taken him priate perform for him in- in lieu of from these classifications nor did he seek duction into the armed forces. He was personal interview with the local board that ci- informed he would work as a about them. After he left school he had vilian, paid in civilian clothes and employment no except jobs various odd prevailing wage hospital scale grass occasionally cutting such as and given rights privi- and would be and photography. He at home with his lived leges employees offered all other civilian parents gave supported who him him and employment, of similar that his work per allowance of month. $10 supervision would be under direct August 13, 1965, On he was mailed a hospital. Special Report Registrants for Class 1-0 and of- informed Robertson came to the local board that under Selective Ser- Regulations September 3, vice on required fice and submitted he was to sub- signed by mit to the two letters Jehovah’s types fellow board three averaged proved stating you he civilian Witnesses work “which ministry, qualified perform you each month in the hours and which offer perform Congregation Book in lieu he attended of induction into the Study every Tuesday night, August response Armed Theocratic Forces.” His Meeting 17,1965, Ministry Fri- was School that he had chosen the min- istry day night study primary Bible purpose and the his life afternoon, submitting Sunday his “my was he assisted first choice my Magazine-Territory Servant, only en- preference was of civilian work.” gaged Pioneer, had as a Vacation August 27, 1965, given On he was Regular appointment. applied for Weeks, conference with Colonel Shed H. per- say he would He declined whether Chief, Division, Administrative Missis- in lieu form kind of civilian sippi Headquarters, State Ser- going forces. into the armed System, vice at the local office in Gulfport, Mississippi, 8, 1965, company to his where in he wrote On declining accept with his father and civilian two other Jehovah’s local board stating induction, Witness employment workers he met with in lieu of Colonel ministry eligibility Weeks to discuss full-time chosen the he had (minister’s) goal IV-D time he “my classification. He in life.” At was interpretation their Ad- statements Local Board additional two submitted Witnesses, one of No. vice 97 and other Memorandums fellow Regulations, spending to 35 indicated he was ministry, impression that he were under month in hours a Ministry recently applied attending a Theocratic pioneer appointment every week, assistant as a vacation School * * * application for en- had not made Magazine-Territory Servant Sep- regular pioneer, appointment nor gaged Pioneer. On as a Vacation The board 14, 1965, if had.” would he he submitted tember strongly suspected “was stall- retroactive two-week office local board ing Appointment dated for time.” No action was taken *4 by 1965, to appointing him that 2, time the board. Septembеr Minister serve as Vacation regular meeting of the local A board August 31, 1965. August 18 to 1965, 14, on was held October dis- File Service Robertson’s Selective present mem time Robertson was with lo- September 15, the that closes and Colonel Weeks bers of the board “registrant’s file was met and cal board Headquarters. that At carefully.” board by The them studied an made to reach time an effort was Society letter of digested the Watehtower registrant agreement to the with the 2, 1965, the two-week per type to he be ordered work should Appoint- retroactive minutes The form in lieu of induction. “other state- registrant, reviewed ment of file, reports part his dis :1 /‘Before ments and of the show board registrant is as fol of the minutes 1. The full text local if he board asked qualified felt he for a IV-D lows: classi- BOARD OF LOCAL the criteria fication under “SUMMARY Regulations. IN REGISTRANT He not MEETING WITH Service plied negative, SECTION WITH in the but stated that ACCORDANCE qualify (C) minis- THE REGULATIONS he a full-time 1660.20 OF did ROBERTSON, “Subject: required by David Julita ter the Watehtower regis- Society. No 22 45 35 SS Bible and Tract The 1660.20 Section “In accordance with trant further stated that he was not re- questing Regulations, expecting (c) to the local board of Selective subject regis- classification, grant met with him a IV-D there- local board representative type him trant and the fore the of civilian work for perform reach an in an effort in lieu induction was then State Director explained type agreement that work as to the discussed. Weeks Colonel per- registrant registrant type that should be ordered to of work agencies approved into the armed available at form in lieu of induction was Mississippi. advised The local board forces. present registrant members that rehabilitation work “Local board Anderson, Chairman; Hospital, Mississippi Mr. B. State Dr. John located Whitfield, Mississippi Petro; Jr.; Roy, M. Mr. Joe was available for Alex W. Lundy, induction, perform Mr. B. Jr. Local him along in lieu of Claude Virginia acceptable types present were Mrs. other clerks May- Hall, Clerk; R. Mrs. Carole then asked the work. any atte, registrant he that he Clerk. Lt. Colonel Shed if Assistant Weeks, Mississippi Headquar- willing perform approved if H. ters, represented would be by State Director of He stated the State Selective Service. meeting. They Mississippi him then at this that he did not. offered discussing type of work work located at Missis- “Before rehabilitation Hospital, Whitfield, registrant perform, sippi Missis- should that State sippi, accept. again He reviewed the file con- which he declined to local board accept ap- registrant’s preaching cerning activ- was then asked if he would proved photo- any approved other reviewed work at ities. The local board agencies state, any copy in this state or other of Vacation Pioneer static accept. registrant pointment He and letters which he also declined to concerning would was then file brothers informed friends and Headquarters registrant’s ministerial activities. be submitted National cussing type regis of work period, September two-month to1 Oc- perform, trant should the local board tober postscript 1965. The to the again concerning the stated, the file reviewed letter “In view of fact registrant’s your preaching ministry quite activities. low, you will want copy photostatic local board up by reviewed giving strive build it atten- appointment of the of Vacation Pioneer tion to all (Em- features work.” and phasis letters of friends Court.) added concerning registrant’s brothers 2, 1965, board, On November the local ministerial activities.” The having necessary approval obtained the stated, to Colonel Weeks he had so, Headquarters from National to do August 27, 1965, did Report mailed to Robertson Order to required for a minister full-time Civilian Work at its office on Novem- Society he was and that Watchtower ber proceeding to receive instructions for requesting expecting min a IV-D place employment isterial He declined classification. (the Mississippi Hospital) in lieu State Mississippi accept at the civilian work military Robertson, of years old, service. then ap type of Hospital State up was called order proved informed work. He was then according the board He to birth date. to Na his file be submitted *5 report 1965, 15, failed to on November approval to Headquarters for tional their receiving as ordered. order the After him order authorize board to the local 2, report 1965, to of November wrote Mississippi State the to civilian Hospital. at a letter to the local board dated Novem- orally ad The 8, 1965, requesting ber the board they not would vised the board reopen his and classification that he be classify him reopen his and personal appearance accorded a before and did as new evidence anew he had no the on of his the basis ministerial a minister. He the claim. attached Watchtower later, 1965, days 18, four On October (the Society September 20, letter 1965 of registrant a from the board received by him the board same letter to submitted Pioneer copy Vacation two-month relating 18, 1965), October to his on 1965, 23, September Appointment dated Pioneer, pointment as and a Vacation Pio- appointing aas Vacation Robertson spent 100 further that he stated September Octo- 1 to neer Minister from during ministry hours in the full-time 31, Also submitted ber the month of October Society to letter the Watchtower 1965, 20, Robertson dated stating number With the increased all “meet did that Robertson cases come which have requirements for years, of the established regular pioneer courts in recent before federal hours, to service” principles certain of law evolved studies, “Since Bible scope back-calls known. are The now well appoint case, limited, are not able this is you we very of review in cases is draft at this regular pioneer service range аnd the of review is the narrowest appoint- The letter stated time.” not sit to the do known law. courts October substituting boards, ment through January super their draft as judgments although as 31, 1966, evidence, weight only for days later it was issued three they for substantial evi- nor should look approval their for review and “FOR THE LOCAL BOARD: him rehabilita- Virginia local board to order R. Mrs. Hall /s/ Virginia Hall,
tion work which was available R. Mrs. Clerk qualified perform, lo- meeting which he was “This 14 held October Hospital, Mississippi at State cated Local office of Whitfield, Mississippi. 26, Gulfport, Mississippi” fur- The board No. reopen ther declined to his classification classify him anew. support time, dence determinations. and that considered all applicable final and Decisions of local boards are receiving facts. Prior weigh are the courts the evidence November 1965 notice to the classification work, determine whether only civilian supporting evi- justified, made local boards appellant dence which furnished the lo- conformity their decisions made ministry cal board of his were several though regulations even are final written statements from fellow Jehovah’s they may question of be erroneous. The spending that he Witnesses to 40 jurisdiction reached board is per hours ministry month in as Va- in fact” for the if there is no “basis Pioneer, Maga- cation assistant regis gave classification which zine-Territory Servant attendant trant. bears burden Congregation Study Book and Theo- right clearly establishing Ministry cratic All School once a week. exemption. of these considered statements were person requires such a Act 14,1965 meeting, the board at its October religion regular must be minister September 15, had at recognized by such “who is meeting one By definition, as well. regular organization church, sect, aas are not Pioneers ministers 466(g) (50 App. minister.” U.S.C. Society. They Watchtower regu Therefore, (2).) must be there temporarily, List said as we activities, larity religious a vocation McCoy States, supra, F.2d v. United recog avocation, and a rather than an Superintendent 901. The Ministers congre standing to a a minister nized Evangelists of the Watchtower So- group mem gation of lesser leader of a ciety, Sullivan, T. a Vacation J. described generally registrant’s faith. See bers appointment “It as follows: Cir., McCoy persons arrangement whereby can en- *6 States, 896; Camp United 403 F.2d v. gage ministry for shorter the Pioneer Clay 419; Cir., 1969, v. Unit F.2d 5 413 periods, one vacation such as is on when 901; States, Cir., 1968, F.2d 5 397 ed or a two or when one is free for month 114, States, Estep 327 U.S. v. United longer engage can the Pioneer (1946); 423, Dick L.Ed. 567 66 S.Ct. 90 ministry.” pointed out Mc- alsoWe 389, States, 74 U.S. 346 according United inson v. a Coy, supra 901, to that at 152, (1953); Wood 132 98 L.Ed. S.Ct. Selective to National memorandum 1967, F.2d Cir., States, 373 5 Hayden v. United Appeal Cov- Service grounds, 894, 389 U.S. ington, reversed Wit- of Jehovah’s Counsel General (1967); 20, 3, L.Ed.2d 20 Society 19 88 S.Ct. nesses, the Watchtower 1968, Matyastik Cir., States, 5 United v. for for classification not contend a IV-D States, 657; 5 v. United 392 F.2d Greer except those who Jehovah’s Witnesses 931; Cir., 1967, Unit Congrega- Foster 378 F.2d v. qualify and as a as Pioneers 372; Cir., 1967, States, devoting 5 384 F.2d ed their are tion Servant who Cir., 1968, States, 387 5 sufficiently Jones v. United to time to ministerial States, Cir., 909; 5 F.2d Fitts United 'than it their rather claim as vocation 1964, F.2d 416. 334 to which Pioneers their avocation. Regular Covington referred Mr. carefully examined We have spend an required to Pioneer who light of the above facts in this case average to- per 100 month of hours law, principles of are convinced we annually 1,200 in ministerial of hours tal in fact” a “basis was not there is re- work, Special who Pioneer and a minis of deniаl for the local board’s average 150 hours quired put of in an to exemption but appellant, to terial Robertson, a Vacation per month. Thus findings were correct. the board’s Pioneer, minis- did gave the board record indicates exemption the hier- even within terial to patient consideration deliberate long archy religious period of His situ- sect. appellant’s of that case over
446 substantiating re- therefore similar in that far short of ation was a full-time McCoy McCoy. ministry spect appellant. to that of See as a vocation for States, supra at 901. Neverthe- of Appoint None United Vacation Pioneer consideration, less, independently to ments Robertson constituted certifi of the facts spending per all cate that the local board reviewed he was 100 hours ministry. pertaining case at to Robertson’s month in the One hundred again meeting 15, September goal 1965 hours awas toward which a Vaca meeting, 14, at the aspired. 1965 October The two-month appellant appointment Robertson was 23, latter dated 1965 present personally “Arrange Weeks part: and Colonel stated in to devote at Headquаrters ministry the State Service least 100 hours each Selective your pioneer The minutes also in month of was attendance. vacation service.” clearly meeting 14, apparent appellant the October It was likewise reviewed, it recognized standing show that local board did not per- do, duty congregation of the facts all its minister leader was taining appellant’s “preaching activi- group faith, of a of his of lesser members important critically neces photostatic which is reviewed ties” and sary Appoint- law. copy of the Vacation 901; McCoy States, supra v. United of friends letters ment well as Cir., 1967, concerning Hull, appellant’s ligious States v. brothers therefore, contrary satisfied, F.2d 257. We are It ministerial activities. for the de that a “basis fact” existed say therefore, record, evidence exemption claimed nial request for a ministerial that Robertson’s by appellant, established and that solely exemption due was denied any single from fact or circumstance only a Pioneer. fact that controlling from record classification of the IV-D Denial Swaczyk whole. Cf. and circum- the facts all of based on Cir., 1946, F.2d in- the board believed stances which justify required such a classification. sufficient Nor was the local board pur the evidence reopen appellant’s are convinced all considered request the local of November record that suant to written appel- (six days and circumstances the facts November after Work). received Report case which lant’s Order Civilian copies together of Vacation pellant, docu local board considered *7 of fel- Appointments letters not letter, but did ments attached to attesting to the any Witnesses new evidence. low Jehovah’s there believe though was —of Regulations, extent —limited 32 C.F.R. § fell may evidence 1625.2,2 provide ministerial activities. board local regulation change regis- reads as justify text the The full in the would classification; (b) upon its follows: trant’s or registrant’s upon classifica- 1625.2 When if “§ is own motion such action based reopened may registrant considered be tion when the facts not considered jus- which, true, if anew. would was classified reopen tify change registrant’s and con- “The local board classi- regis- fication; provided, event, of a sider anew the clаssification either request upon (a) registrant trant written of a shall classification appeal government registrant, reopened has board be after person agent, any registrant claims be a who mailed such an Order registrant, per- dependent Report (SSS or of the Form No. Induction request 252) Report son has file written who or an Order for Civilian regis- Employer (SSS for the current deferment of the Statement of Work and involving occupational 153) trant in a case local board Form No. unless the deferment, accompa- request specifically if has such first finds there been presenting change registrant’s nied written information result- status regis- ing facts not considered when the from circumstances over which classified, which, true, registrant trant was if had no control.” reopen trary, and consider anew the classifica- the conclusion reach we here is registrant upon holding principles of a his written accord with the quest request accompanied McCoy. “if such presenting written information facts Proceedings a draft before board registrant considered when stages prosecution, are in a criminal classified, which, justify true, if there, therеfore, appel is no merit to change registrant’s in the classifica- lant’s contention that Selective Service regulation pro- tion.” The same also Regulations constitutionally are defi vides, however, classification cient under the Fifth and Sixth Amend reopened shall not after the local right denying ments in to assistance registrant board mailed has counsel, compulsory attendance Report “un- Order to for Civilian Work witnesses, confrontation or to silence specifically less the first local board and freedom incrimination in from reg- change in the finds there has been a proceedings. McCoy States, 5 v. United resulting circum- istrant’s status Cir., 904; 403 F.2d Merritt registrant had stances over which Cir., 1968, 401 F.2d were, course, no no control.” There 768, 769. changed circumstances over which the panel judgment of this of the might no control which had reversed, judg- and the Court is therefore brought change in his sta- about a the Dis- ment of entered in conviction had tus. For this reason the local trict Court is affirmed. authority no under the circumstances reopen registrant’s af- classification Judge, ter for civilian work BROWN, order with whom Chief already Judge, joins, Spe- United COLEMAN, mailed. See been Circuit Cir., III, Banks, сially Concurring: C. States v. Arthur I not detract do opin- the board my Nor Court’s F.2d in the full concurrence required by decision, of the case com- the circumstances these I think ion and reopen concerning dissent
to exercise its discretion
in order
ments are
information
as a result of
Judge
Godbold.
per-
in his
submitted
(See
Vague
1 of the dis-
Note
it is
appearance
sonal
before the
on Oc-
sent),
extends
the Statute
14, 1965,
tober
on October
thereafter
“regu-
exemption
who
to those
18, 1965,
copy
he filed
when
reli-
duly
ministers
ordained
lar
Appointment
456(g) and
App.
gion.”
§
50 U.S.C.A.
period September
31, 1 to October
466(g).
already
with the board. The board was
necessity
is,
Similarly,
broad as it
familiar with his Vacation Pioneer sta-
organized
a minister of some
this means
tus,
ministry,
temporary
and with
law,
or faith. The
because
sect
Registrant
facts which surrounded it.
Amendment,
look into
cannot
First
prima
had not
out a
case for
made
facie
*8
believes, preaches
weigh
that faith
what
reopening of
of
his classification. None
one to whom
But the
or communicates.
by
the evidence submitted
Congress
exemption
has
extends the
reclassification
sufficient
warrant
“regular
that
of
minister
or ordained”
registrant.
board,
therefore,
of
body.
duty
reopen
case,
no
and did
his
therefore,
not,
declining
so.
or
It
administrative
in
do
is
abuse its discretion
Nothing
McCoy
judicial
to determine
United
we said in
abdication
States,
Cir., 1968,
896, re-
standards whether
403 F.2d
basis of
sect’s
Episcopalian
quires
person qualifies.1
the con-
An
a different
result —to
ways.
necessarily
1.
do
the Westminster
It does not
Calvinists
so
work both
concept
spiritual grounds
may regard
of
On
the sect
of Faith’s
Confession
Actually
But,
with
all adherents
as
of Believers.
as
“ministers”.
Priesthood
Bap-
standards,
Episcopalian, a
qualify as an
he
qualify
does
as
must
Jew, a
Baptist,
a Jew
tist as
exemption
Lutheran minister and the
is
limits
If the sect
Muslim as a Muslim.
not available no matter
how devout
duly
“regular
regards
or
those
important
or
is
how
is his
or effective
having
persons
ministers”
ordained
advancing
in
of
the interests
qualifications,
then
specified
faith.
judg-
against
the law
which
standard
of
non-exempt
status
exempt or
es the
principles
These
con-
are illustrated
registrant.2
sidering
by my
imposed
the standards
faith,
Presby-
happens
which
own
to be
claiming
the Lutheran
If,
of
to be
By
its
terian.
Book of Church Order
its
not meet
faith,
applicant does
Prеsby-
requires
Witnesses,
Calvin wrote
first modern
the law
duties,
person
Book of Order for
church
terian
leader,
in
responsibilities
at Geneva
work,
as a
and
See,
g.,
Knox
just
practitioner.
John
sat at
the feet of John
e.
Fitts
years,
Cir., 1964,
States,
re-
F.2d
Calvin
several
and then
United
turned to
and
first
Scotland
wrote the
Presby-
Discipline”
of
“Book
for the
Scotland,
duly
terian Church of
in 1560.
ordained
of
2. The
definitions
codal
Presbyterian
history
regular
The whole
of
out
ministers bear
and
government
goes
proach
church
in Scotland
:
‘duly
Discipline.”
“(g)
(1)
ordained
back to this first “Book of
The term
religion’
person
Assembly,
who
means a
Westminster
minister of
ordained,
with
in London
accordance
met
wrote not
has been
discipline
ceremonial, ritual,
of
our Confession
or
of Faith
and Cate-
Presby-
organiza-
religious sect,
chisms,
church,
or
but also “The Form of
com-
basis of a
terian Church
byterian
The Pres-
on the
Government.”
tion established
munity
belief,
England,
doctrines
Scot-
Churches of
of faith and
character,
religious
land,
adopted
practices
and
of a
Ireland
this West-
preach
Form of
doctrines
minster
Government.
and to
teach
Presbyterian
organization
church, sect,
When our
forefathers
suсh
they brought
ceremonies
came to America
rites
to administer
Presby-
public worship,
and who
them
“Form of
thereof
Westminster
customary
Government,”
vocation
terian Church
and it be-
principles
preaches
came the basis
teaches the
law in the
Church
Presbyterian
religion
the ordinances
American
and administers
Church.
Assembly
worship
public
in the
first
embodied
General
sect,
church,
Presbyterian
principles
such
Church in America was
creed or
organized
Synod
oi'ganization.
in 1789. The General
‘regular
preparing
organization
(2)
minister of
The term
religion’
Assembly practically
his cus-
General
means
who as
re-
one
Presbyterian
tomary
preaches and teaches
wrote
“The
vocation
Form of
church,
principles
religion
Church
Government”
in order
adjust
organization
religious
of which
it to
sect or
in Ameri-
conditions
member,
having been
This
lie is a
formally
without
ca.
new book
called “The
Discipline
minister of
Form of
ordained as a
Government and
Presbyterian
recognized
ligion,
who
Church in the United
regu-
church, sect,
organization, as a
States of
America.”
It was revised
prior
number of times
when
lar minister.”
(2).
Presbyterians
App.
466(g)
(1),
Southern
withdrew
50 U.S.C.A.
Presbyterian
and formed The
Church
the Pres-
in the
3. The Book of
Order of
Church
States.
byterian
Assembly
When the
Church in the United
General
Presbyterian
Gen-
Church in the United
revised
reenacted
*9
Assembly.
organized
roots are
States was
eral
Its historical
on December
by
adopted
preface
the
in the
written
it
described
the Form of Govern-
Lingle,
Discipline
one of
ment and
late Reverend Walter L.
which had been in
preach-
scholars,
great
use since 1788.
the denomination’s
1863 our General
Assembly
steps
took
teachers:
this Form
ers and
to revise
Discipline
a
Book of
has
of Government
with the
Our
Church Order
and
long
thoroughgoing
John
a
notable line of ancestors.
result that
and
revision was
claiming
“regular
duly
great precision the
prescribes
One
to be
or
a
it
with
Presbyterian
ordained”
would
minister
one must meet
standards
compliance
show
these re-
with
a minister.
quirements.
question
proof
Without
by
approval
call for
standards
These
usually
proper-
form
a
take the
of
gospel
the
Presbytery
of candidates
ly
authenticated
of
certificate
candidates,5
ministry,4
of
licensure
Presbytery
Moderator or
of
Clerk
pastors,6
perhaps
and the ordina-
of
the election
the Clerk of
of
the Session
congregation
ministers.7
pastor.
installation of
tion and
of which he is
And
many
great
adopted
having successfully
amend-
A
1879.
of
testimonials
com-
forty
during
pleted
theological
next
were added
course of
ments
years.
studies.”
Chap. XXIII,
115.
§
Assembly took
In 1921 our General
steps
Chap. XXIV,
Except
Church
our Book of
6.
to revise
§§ 125-136.
thoroughgoing
again.
Temporary Supply,
pastor
Another
Order
must have
by
proposed
the Commit-
revision was
been ordained.
by
Revision, adopted
Gen-
tee on
large
approved by
Assembly,
ma-
eral
“126.
relation
Minis-
between a
Presbyteries,
jority
and enacted
of
ter and a
church
that of
Assembly
by
Pastor,
Pastor,
of
law
General
Associate
into
Assistant Pas-
tor,
Supply,
Temporary Sup-
1925.
Stated
or
present
ply.
Book of Church
our
All of
While
these shall be ordained
Ministers, except
Presbytery may
revi-
of numerous
is the result
Order
many phrases,
sions,
approve
lay-
licentiates, candidates,
contains
still
sentences,
paragraphs
Temporary Supplies.”
which are
men as
Chap. XXIV,
of
found in “The Form
Government
§ 126.
Presbyterian
Discipline
Chap. XXV,
Ameri-
7.
the United States
Church
137-145.
§§
adopted
ca,”
by
which
first
1788.
This
Presbytery covering
includes examination trials
qualifi-
our
This
sketch shows
brief
educational
goes
cations, preaching
sermon,
back
Book of
through
Order
Church
a trial
congregational
long
of an-
and noble line
formal
installation serv-
days
ice,
preaching
“adapted
of John
cestors to the
Calvin.
of a sermon
prin-
(§ 140) by
appoint-
basic
We also believe that
its
to the occasion”
Holy Scrip-
ciples
goes
representative
Presbytery,
back to the
ed
or-
questions propounded
tures.
dination
being
(§ 140)
minister
installed
congregation
ceremony
(§ 141),
4. The Book of
of the Pres-
Church Order
byterian
laying
(§ 142),
in the United
Church
on of hands
after
Government, Chap.
Ruling
XXII
Form of
§§
Elders and Deacons
Pastor,
106-112.
“come forward to their
give
right hand,
him their
in token of
pro-
examination,
reception
includes formal
This
cordial
and affectionate re-
preach-
pounding
prescribed questions,
gard” (§ 143).
sermons,
ing trial
etc.
XXIII,
Chap.
Clerks, Chap. XII,
formal
113-124. The
See for
§§
§ 52 and es-
exacting:
requirements
pecially
educational
54:
Clerk,
Clerks,
A
for licensure shall
“115.
candidate
“54. A
shall be
required
present
diploma
Session,
Presbytery,
be
degree
elected
four-year
Synod,
Assembly
col-
from a standard
and the General
lege
university,
period,
or at least authentic
to serve for a definite
as deter-
successfully
having
duty
com-
testimonials
mined
the court.
It
pleted
regular'
Clerk,
recording
course
academic
besides
the trans-
actions,
preserve
for ordination
studies.
candidate
A
the records care-
required
present
fully,
grant
di-
shall also be
and to
extracts from them
theological seminary
required.
ploma
properly
un-
from a
whenever
Such ex-
Church,
tracts,
Clerk,
or one
requir-
der the control of our
the hand of the
approved
Presbytery
shall be evidence to
ecclesiastical
years’
court,
ing
every part
not less than three
and to
of the Church.”
Presbytery
conferring
See,
Session, Chaps.
theo-
residence for the
logical degree,
authentic
or at
least
XV
and XIV
§§ 70-79
61-69.
§§
*10
undoubtedly
properly
recently
authenticated
so
concerning
Court
declared
the
Presbytery
per-
Georgia judges
that such
efforts
certificate
to ascertain
reason)
(for
specified
Presbyterians
sectarian
did not
some
son
standards of
weigh
compliance by
an ordained minister would then
as
the church’s
ruling
on
the
Presbyterian
which
sufficient basis
bodies with them.
itsеlf be
exemption.
deny
Presbyterian
the
Church v.
Board could
Hull Memorial
Church, 1969,
393 U.S.
89 S.Ct.
thing
left in doubt is the
601,
451
difficulty
recognize
faced
I
the
row. But a classification made on the
Board,
others, composed of
basis of an
and
erroneous view of the law
laymen performing
public-spirited
range
judicial
falls within the
of
scru-
proved
tiny.
States,
It has
vital national
service.
McKart v. United
395 U.S.
185,
attempt
fit
excruciatingly
1657,
difficult
89 S.Ct.
1.
cannot, solely
board
basis
appellant
is not
certified
“Pi-
judicial
scope
review
classification,
oneer”, deny
nar-
him
service
selective
Judge
portions
Significant
Wisdom
1
A.
of the well-known
1. See the statement
Hayden Coving
Wiggins
United
memorandum from
this court
Cir.)
denied,
ton,
(5th
cert.
Jehovah’s Wit
General Counsel for
incidentally, had date that BY MR. HAUBERG States [United meeting board) first with his Attorney]: McCoy’s advised board: ColonelWeeks please Court, If it the Vacation Reg- requirement for a minimum The Category Pioneer is not in the that Special meet the ular or Pioneer will they certify said would as criteria for a IV-D classification ministerial h—D classification. defined 1622.43 of the under Section Regulations. A Pioneer will BY THE COURT: meet this criteria because he that, I realize I’ll let her an- regularly preaching defined swer. Regulations. under The Clerk understood what Board’s If there is that the Board’s doubt requirement was. United States At- pursuant actions taken various torney understood candor understanding the erroneous recognized judge The trial under- .it. Regular pre- certificate was Pioneer stood it. requisite,7A occurred this which This is the flood tide of evidence which Clerk, should cross-examination of my judges My brother do not mention. dispel it: argu- adopt government’s brothers Q. Now, Hall, appellant’s ment that in a dated because con- Mrs. letter file September 17, to tained other factual data to which 1965 addressed arguably Weeks, document num- Board’s decision can Colonel H. be re- Shed throughout you paragraph, lated the erroneous ber in the third use an arrange a standard of error asked Colonel meet- law becomes Weeks without part discussion, infra, 7. This record in of United letter also is See States McCoy [Apr. W.D.Wis., Duecker, this court States. 67-CR-78 McCoy a member of his board testi- 1968]. obtaining fied that a Pioneer certificate acceрting approach was the “sole criteria” for IV-D classi- The erroneous fication, appears that other information concern- certificate as conclusive ing congregation spect types not be of certificates duties would suf- other says: memorandum ficient because certificate well. Colonel Weeks’ Pioneer policy Mississippi con- “The is to also was “the one we have been Congregational McCoy’s with.” sider Assistant Servants concerned The Clerk qualifying IV-D classification.” for a board testified to the same effect.
7A. No member of testified. the Board Heavy placed on ex- injury. This testimony reliance is is inconsistent with the reports himself, of the Board cerpts quoted above,' Colonel Weeks September meetings and October of what local boards would consider. report report right But even if the 14. The and Colonel say wrong, meeting Board met Weeks does if the Board “considered” by them “registrant’s alone, file was studied the Vacation Pioneer certificate says evidence, more than carefully.” much or plus But it other or the certificate margin boilerplate. evidence, I out in оther set this “consideration” is meeting sent not a valid full basis fact for the clas- suspected The Board sification if Colonel Weeks.8 conducted under er- stalling appellant legal because roneous standard. To “consider” found aqyplied meaningless looking a Vacation file upon if Regular Pioneer not a up documents made certificate certificate, had under- thought Weeks Colonel file the Board members that a and, do, Regular going stood he the sine certificate was interpretation qua Board Advices classification, non to their Service], Memo- Vacation Pioneer [from certificate com- denial, Regulations appel- [sic], and randums manded Pi- a Vacation Regular Pi- oneer simply lant could certificate was irrelevant. traveling anyhow. The oneer trail on unwaveringly down the rabbit problem 3. The reach of the through wholly understand- which, error problem is not alone one able, set. it had been registrant, Mississippi Board and this meeting, report of the October registrants. boards and do not *15 present, was at Colonel Weeks which misunderstanding know whether says: reaches all Selective Service in the stаtes. discussing type of work Before know, minimum, But we do aas from registrant perform, should this case and those in discussed this again reviewed local board opinion, it has in touched boards preach- registrant’s concerning the file Kentucky, Ohio, Mississippi, Wisconsin, board ing local activities. Oregon know, and California. And we copy of Vacation photostatic viewed from memorandum to Colonel Weeks’ appointment Mississippi clerks, and boards and brothers friends letters of and misunderstanding has at roots least some concerning registrant’s ministerial System.9 in the National Selective Service activities. complying on 15 evade No. 26 convened with Selective Service Board 8. “Local registrant’s subject regulations requiring September serve his and him to 1965 carefully. years by two tary civilian work mili- them in lieu of studied file digesting letter service. the attached “After Society, “They Tract two let- Bible and therefore directed that the Watehtower by hereto, by September received ters this attached received 1965 2 dated September 1965, board on 14 be 14 forward- this board reports you your reviewing ed to in for further information statements other interpretation rеquest file, this from their case with that a con- in his arranged immediately ference be with the No. 97 Advice Board of Local Regulations, registrant, board, representa- and a and Selective Memorandums impression Headquarters tive from State order under the recently applied pos- only quickly for resolve this matter as had pioneer and sible.” appointment a vacation you, made not, as he stated had appointment 9. And the courts have aided in plication themselves perpetuating E.g., if had. error. pioneer, United nor would he only stalling Heljenek, F.Supp. suspect strongly States They 275 he is 579 attempting (E.D.Pa.1967) possibly time, 581 : even 456 tion
theory may items first was secretary said: new reopening judgment defendant’s Board Pioneer certificate. Wis.1965) refusal to and the quarters. States v. Tichenor was tion. clude that made neer”, theory quarters of make led Society isterial classification The Board with a This evidence F.Supp. the local board had Wisconsin explicit, pioneer”, out Hestad, is that record, suggests, is entitled was the concerned The district improperly *16 meeting: have been distinguished from a “vaca- classification. record the local furnished as the basis acquittal prima opaque found this defendant. theory Selective Service for work because only in the Watchtower defendant’s indicating that this Kentucky. and the state facie case The district a F.Supp. to 4-D classifica- maintained. The refused notation Wisconsin court directed He have “regular Part of the found charge Vacation erred for min- does connec- to con- reopen (W.D. judge board head- head- been This pio- two secular activities. ministerial classification. Appeal Appeals classified month to the He ing ther Dillon, ber could quent events. But he added: The district of Jehovah’s correct. classification, ister”, lieved that conclusion ficer’s letter of civilian your board’s so If # However, the state twenty-five exemplified by United widespread misconception is fur- for fourteen months. Local Board at this time. Board and devoting “or Dillon as IV-D. The work, [*] board, F.Supp. failure to higher”, ministry and judge unanimously standard was Witnesses the Administrative Of- headquarters, [*] but no action is Headquarters “regular pioneer at least hours was classified asked challenged by The Board refused May noted that that other members [*] is entitled reopen perhaps (D.Or.1968). local it to reconsider per month in 130 hours On had been do- reversed supports [*] required by applied not. appeal the in Decem- wrote States He endorsed possibly Oregon to 4-D IV-D. subse- [*] spent min- per be- in- by A only a Vacation Pi- because Dillon was Q. every general CO’s “which, generally oneer, been has not to have nation. Do [sic-due?]. and the a IV-D.” considered basis Class higher for a Certificate min- and denied the Board reconsidered (Neby). 4-D. prosecution On isterial classification. report F.Supp. element to The second for failure civilian at 655. guilty judge not found Dillon a which occurred district was series of events jointed er- mailed out Selective Service’s after the order was 18, 1964. In fact he was ror —“the that [Dillon] defendant on December May, appointed not Pioneer’ and defendant was classified ‘Vacation 1965 the Responding preclude Regular him from does not a a ‘Pioneer’ Pioneer. obtaining appointment ministerial classification.” Service a the State Selective May F.Supp. headquarters at 40. the board wrote 12: Duecker, W.D. In United States v. 22, 1968], [Apr. appointment tried Wis. 67-CR-78 his Since [defendant’s] judge not effec- tried was before same who Pioneer Minister a case, supra, report Wit- he did not Hestad tive until after Minister, the lowest classifi- Witnesses sect low Pioneer “Within the Jehovahs’ Study by recognized Service Con- the Selective a Book cation [defendant] he exemption.” stages System
ductor,
be-
for ministerial
several
a classification
the Wisconsin State
lective
ness was
entation”
to in ColonelWeeks’
Mississippi
tional
based
board
note
document, to indicate that
he was
commented:
standard
summary of a local
Headquarters
S.Ct.,
IV-D classification
This
Servants
“lesser” rank are
Supreme
member
pencilled
tion is
whether
the selective
tional chart
themselves with
ror
act
particularly
charged
Registrants
At
structure
individual basis
cide whether a
and should
if
a local board
dividual activities
error which
could
It
considerable
so,
standard,
5, supra,
official had
invalidating the classification.
upon
upon
meeting copy of
on the
best,
Service to state
chart,
States, supra,
consider,
what it
and what
acquitted. A
“pioneer
Court
by
and Pioneers
inquired
appropriate, should
quite
with the аdministration
annotations
boards
of various
the General
sort
ask a
which was
holds
must be
had
in Exhibit 3
99 L.Ed.
those
titles
theory
forbade
or an
is.
reasonable
service
danger
marked
not.
to be classified
according
board
minister.”
and clerks. See
regard
of defendant whether
brought
particular
majority
memorandum
accompanying text.
guesswork that the
called
religious title
did
However,
directors, referred
carefully avoided.
representative of
religious groups,
reflected
appeal
Also
meeting
at 441:
are
U.S.
consider
Counsel
circumstances,
organizational
Congregation
system, and
both to the
would be er-
upon to de-
part
to the
same
Sicurella
entitled
prejudicial
opinion
hold.
classifica-
The court
organiza-
organiza-
those
their in-
acquaint
there
thought
showed
clerk’s
of
“pres-
to the
those
foot-
and,
For
Se-
conscientious
Accord: United
the Board was
F.2d 855
F.2d 409
registrant,
The Ninth Circuit held:
Shepherd United
(9th
recommend
appeal
pass on
been
beliefs
*17
theocratic wars.
would be much influenced
hand,
regularly performed. While it
presume
Justice
a classification after
appeal
observe
exclusively
tаining the
disregarded
strong probability
statement
sumption
board,
dence one
Stepler,
[the fact that the local board
[*****]
theocratic
Department
argued
exempted
Shepherd
Cir.
least,
Department of
Department’s recommendation,
prompted solely
recognize
we cannot
do
we have alluded.
no
opposed
rate,
board’s action here
(2d
recommending that
(1955).
relating to
1954), rehearing
is sufficient upon relied in fact Department advice erroneous Justice. present more case cries reversal Shepherd, strongly where the board than evidentiary arguably considera- acted credibility that tions demeanor independent ad- the erroneous legal principles in The erroneous vice. part inextricably present case action, relating the Board’s classifi- do to effect Robertson’s Pioneer certificate cation the Vacation majority say was considered which the part of all Board as the facts be- fore it. should be reversed.
This conviction can consider Board then all legal correct standard evidence under a accordingly. classify Robertson then can take whatever is its law propriate course.
Therefore, respectfully I dissent. MARTIN, Plaintiff-
Harold Patrick Appellant, KING, George Marshal of the Town of J. Vista, Defendant-Appellee. Buena
No. 264-69. Appeals Court of United States Tenth Circuit. Nov. notes text. Omer, ing immediately given by Daniel Colonel order resolve possible, why quickly Service this matter as Counsel Selective General System, urgent get young Direc State was it so at a conference May, great report, 1959.5 man to what was the tors urgency? from an of a letter Also he discussed ficial of Jehovah’s Witnesses Well, go. A. he was overdue Coving Hayden 1958 memorandum Q. possible Was it the Board memorandum states ton. ColonelWeeks’ trying informa- to head off this Regular Pioneers “it is felt” that Special being pioneer— about his requirements meet the Pioneers No, sir, gave A. him Regulations 1622.43 of the get certificate, they pioneer time to IV-D classification but: gave him some time. appointment “Vacation Pioneer Q. Now, in these documents temporary, it does not meet the Society ceived the Watchtower requirements of a the definition record, in his did it what show the Selec- IV-D respect to the amount of he had time regulations.” tive Service