On Transitions and Appointments

As we move through our summer sermon series, "Questions Every Pastor Fears" (check out Ten Questions Every Pastor Fears by Belton Joyner, our inspiration for the series) we come this Sunday to "Why are you leaving us for another church? Don't you like us?"

Honestly, we in the UMC often do a pretty poor job explaining the appointment process, and just generally, well, our understanding of pastoral leadership and the relationship between a pastor and congregation. Any discussion of this central issue is usually relegated to the Sunday a pastor announces they are being reappointed (and subsequent Sundays when either the pastor or the beleaguered members of the SPRC have to calm the congregation who may have never, or rarely, been made to understand our system).

Such "emergency" discussions of the appointment process and the UMC's long-established itineracy system necessarily carry a heavy hand, as they are often packed with the required reminders to the congregation about breaking their relationship with the pastor (admittedly this is more difficult in some situations than other). In the Baltimore-Washington Conference, the following paragraphs (from paragraph 2412 in the conference policy manual) becomes the pastor and SPRC's mantra (both in print and in person):

i.    As of the effective date of a new appointment, a pastor shall immediately cease all pastoral counseling and pastoral visitation with members or member families in the previous appointment. Since appointments are generally announced several weeks in advance, each pastor has adequate time in which to affect closure and make appropriate referral to another for the pastoral care of members.
ii.    Pastors shall have a clear understanding with former congregations that they will not return to officiate at baptisms, weddings, and funerals, or do pastoral counseling or pastoral visitation in that parish. Pastors, active or retired, shall respectfully decline to participate in such duties when invited by members of a former congregation. Declining all such invitations is the responsibility of the previous pastor. The present pastor, at his or her discretion, may invite the previous pastor to return for pastoral functions. However, the present pastor should never be under any pressure to invite the previous pastor.

 When I announced my reappointment at my previous, and first, appointment, I was so focused on doing things the correct way, that I had nearly memorized these paragraphs.  I believe strongly in the wisdom of these instructions, while I also admit that there are different situations in which these are appropriately applied with some flexibility. However, I am also convinced (as I am sure any pastor is who has followed a pastor who hasn't really committed to moving on) that the departing pastor must, for the good of everyone, be pretty staunch in following these policies.

That said, our discussions, then, about appointments, often, I imagine, can sound harsh, sudden, and perhaps even cold to our congregation. This sermon is an opportunity, I hope, to change that a bit.

Here are some of my thoughts, then, on appointments, beyond the same old discussion...

Our system of itineracy is grounded in the very earliest Methodist practices. For many reasons (the reasons alone could be their own blog) John Wesley found it important to move his pastors frequently. The frequency at that time, and even for several generations, would shock us today (even as pastors and congregations alike still complain about short appointments). You have to keep in mind that the Methodist movement was largely lay-led, and at a time with many charismatic traveling preachers, this system allowed for Wesley to enforce cohesiveness and preclude any one, or a few, pastor from building their own kingdom. The wisdom of this cannot be lost on us today, even as we balance this against the knowledge that still, longER appointments promote greater growth.

Admittedly, while the early church had many traveling evangelists, many of the earliest leaders seem to have been local boys. This posed as many challenges as it did benefits. It is, one must admit, difficult for people to see that annoying kid they knew as a middle schooler as their pastor, and existing family dynamics can wreak havoc on a church. Local churches necessarily developed insulated theology and practice, which Wesley specifically wanted to avoid.

Today, appointments are made for many different reasons, the primary being a matching of the skills and personality of the pastor and the missional opportunity and personality of the pastor. One can easily imagine, then, too, that as any of these factors change or evolve, a previously splendid appointment may change also, and may given cause for a new appointment. For United Methodists, generally three voices are at play in the appointment process: the cabinet and bishop (I list as one voice because in our conference at least, whatever the behind the scenes dynamics, they speak with one voice), the pastor, and the congregation. Any (or all) of these three can indicate desire for a move, which can be requested for a variety of reasons, including:

1. retirement (obviously at the request of the pastor)
2. leave for any other reason (medical, study, etc., that otherwise requires the pastor to be removed)
3. life change (including family leave, need to move with spouse's job, or to care for parent, etc.; sometimes a major event in the pastor's life, like divorce, can also lead to a reappointment depending on the situation)
4. major conflict between congregation and pastor
5.  those already mentioned (personality, skill, missional opportunity); in truth this is the murkiest category...because much is often in the eye of the beholder (and sometimes the line between this and major conflict can be quite thin...other times not)
6. time (Yes, indeed, sometimes the mere passage of time can be a factor.  We are well aware of the dangers of leaving a pastor for TOO long in a congregation, so sometimes a pastor gets moved for that, among other reasons. At other times, there are watershed moments in a pastor's ministry that may be expected times for a move, like when a pastor moves from the probationary period to full orders after ordination. I would propose that a church ought to expect to have a new pastor only until that period ends, or for a year or so longer). As much harm as has been done by moving pastors too soon, I am convinced much harm as also been done by leaving pastors too long.

Often, there is some combination of the above factors, and of course there may be other reasons, but I think most fit under these basics.

The most interesting of these is, of course, number 5. Number 6 is perhaps interesting, but not terribly complicated. Number 6 can be best understood by listening to songs like The Lion King's "Circle of Life." That's perhaps a bit flippant, but not far from the truth.

Okay, number 5. I will touch on these broadly, as they are, in addition to reasons for reappointment, also the same criteria used for making appointments. Here goes:

PERSONALITY
For me, this covers a range of personal traits and behaviors. It also includes the pastor and congregation's theological approach and leadership expectations. You may be surprised to learn that there is actually a form that includes a lot of this "personality" information that the cabinet uses for each pastor and congregation that is "on the table."

Perfect appointments cannot always be made, and it must be admitted that appointments are a lot like arranged marriages--some inherently better or worse than others, but all what the parties make of them. But these factors are considered, weighed (for example, a pastor's view on homosexuality may be a more intense issue for one pastor than another, and the same for a congregation; it would be foolish to put a conservative pastor in an activist liberal congregation, but the same pastor might do well in a range of churches other than activist conservative ones--so there is a range). In addition, as far as it is possible (and this depends on how much the cabinet knows pastors and churches) there is effort made to match styles in an effort for growth. A large, corporate-structure church probably shouldn't receive a casual, anti-hierarchical senior pastor (would be less of an issue for an associate, perhaps, but still an issue).

There are a lot of other personality factors, but I think you get the idea.

SKILL
Ideally, the pastor's greatest skills match with the congregation's greatest needs. Now, that is not always possible, and we do expect:

• pastors to have basic competency in the range of pastoral responsbilities, including but not limited to: administration, preaching, teaching, pastoral care, etc.
• congregations to support their pastors in their talents, sometimes including introducing new programs (though a wise pastor does so carefully)

Here, you see, skill is also related to personality, especially in as much as you consider leadership style both a skill and a factor of personality.

Also, there may be very specific needs a congregation has for a pastor, whether a senior or an associate. Perhaps the associate is responsible for leading the youth. Not all pastors have that skill. Perhaps the senior pastor serves essentially as the executive director for a specific outreach ministry of the church (ex. a shelter)...not all pastors have those skills.

MISSIONAL OPPORTUNITY
The basic questions here are "Where is God calling this congregation to go?" and "Where is God calling this pastor?" Maybe a pastor and congregation have had a fruitful relationship, but the next steps for the congregation are ones that pastor is not well suited for. Wise pastors are often the first to see this and then share their insight with their denominational leaders and their congregation. Congregations have life cycles (as of course do pastors) and it is now a well-established fact (though still disliked by some) that most pastors do not have the personality or skills to guide a congregation through all life cycles. Some pastors can start new things well. Oh to have more of these pastors! Others are good at nurturing early seeds. Others are talented at maintaining growth. Still others can help a congregation break through to a new plateau. Others are gifted at guiding a congregation into a new form of life (merger, closure, etc.).

Sometimes the congregation's vision and the pastor's vision are just different. This can be something that changes over time, so that a previously well-aligned appointment becomes in need to change.

Those are just some of the factors. I think this blog is long enough as it is! But you get the idea. The same principles that guide pastoral appointments guide other human relationships, and so are not entirely foreign to us.

Process and Systems

Okay, so I get that systems aren't very exciting. In fact, systems are difficult to set up (at least good, thought-out ones are). But I am a firm believer in the importance of good systems.

Now, let's get this truth out on the table: systems can be evil. But I am convinced that this is not an inherent trait of having a system, but rather how it is used. Systems can keep people oppressed, hide laziness in bureaucracy, on and on. BUT it is always the people involved that make a system that way. One can only conclude that having a good system only allows them to do those things more consistently and efficiently.

SO...if systems can be bad because of their consistency and efficiency, then I am also sure they can be both consistently and efficiently (and effectively) good. And I think it is worth it to think not just about what we intend to end up doing, but indeed how we plan to do it.

So, my work this summer has largely involved what I call my "summer projects." Summer doesn't exactly slow down, but the pace is different, and for me, it provides an opportunity to work on systems--work that is much more difficult when our church schedule is running at full tilt.

So this summer my summer projects involve working (or continuing work) on many different systems at Calvary, including congregational care, weddings, young adults, worship, communication, confirmation and training.

The trouble with systems work is that it rarely bears immediate fruit, and only a very few initially see the value of creating or reworking the system. A good system, though, saves time, allows for more to be done, provides for consistency and structure that empowers people to be involved. A good system is a glorious thing to behold.

It is pretty easy to spot a situation or process that needs a better system. Conversations usually expose some function that people have this nagging sense just isn't working as well as it should. The absence of a good system (as opposed to the presence of a good system that isn't being followed, which, in reality, is the same as not having a good system--as in, it doesn't matter if no one does it) is usually indicated by people involved not really understanding how decisions are made, whose responsibility different steps are (and thus an absence of accountability) and often a general feeling like things are not handled fairly (when people don't understand the process and see things handled inconsistently, they will naturally feel it to be unfair, no matter the intentions).

For those of us who work on systems, our life's dream is to leave things better than we found them, with systems that outlast our presence in a situation, and to make everyone's lives a bit easier, clearer, and just, well, better.

So off I go...with my flow charts and analyses and meetings, hoping to get a few good systems rolling...

Thoughts on Pregnancy

So I'm now in my 21st week of pregnancy, and I haven't really blogged about it. I guess I should, seeing as how many people have entire blogs about their pregnancy--I come across many of these when I google pregnancy questions I have.

But still, I'm not sure what to blog...I doubt anyone wants a running account of my doctor's visits (our parents get that, and they are perhaps the only ones remotely interested), and at any rate, I don't think everyone needs to know every detail. I've Facebooked a picture of the curtains I'm making for the nursery, but that hardly seems in keeping with the tone of this blog, and to be honest, I don't have the time or energy to keep up a purely-pregnancy blog (heck, I don't think I do a great job keeping this one updated!).

So at any rate, here are a few thoughts, mostly random ones, as an interruption to the normal business of this blog...to which we shall return after this, with minimal pregnancy interruption...

1. There is a seemingly infinite number of ways to stress out a pregnant woman. These include, but are not limited to: the midwife/doctor ordered a follow up test, the hint of possible problems which leads the pregnancy woman to google the complication (this never ends well), someone making ANY comment related to the pregnant woman's weight, etc.
2. I'm not trying to eat like a rabbit (I have increased my eating) but I don't need to be reminded that I'm eating for two. Afterall, both of us are not full-grown adults.
3. I've been reading through childbirth, breastfeeding, baby care books, and have learned a lot. I've also ordered DVDs on those topics for my husband, because at this rate, that's all he'll have time for!
4. Best book so far? Baby Bargains. We used their wedding book for our wedding, and we've found this book, combined with a Consumer Reports subscription (a necessity for new fathers in my husband's opinion) to be an awesome resource. It has saved us a lot of money by helping us figure out what to spend money on and what not too. Biggest surprise? For cribs, it doesn't get much safer or better quality and value than Ikea's Leksvik crib. Now we just have to find time to put it together...
5. It IS possible to convince your husband to use cloth diapers. Now we'll see how things goes once the rubber hits the road, but chinese prefolds and snappis in hand, we're ready to go...Well, after I sew a few more diaper covers, that is...
6. If you buy your husband a few prospective father books, he'll eventually read one of them, especially if it has a cool title that calls to his desire to be a cool dad. Many thanks, Mack Daddy.
7. My sister apparently thinks she needs to single-handedly cloth our child (which she is quite excited about since it means buying little girls' clothes). I have tried to dissuade her. My husband sees no problem with it.
8. Having to buy maternity pants was not nearly disturbing as when, just recently, even my regular t-shirts didn't fit right.
9. Finding out and letting people know the gender of the baby has not, as I had hoped, stopped my mother from asking what we are going to name the baby, even though we have said we aren't going to tell. I think she thinks she will outsmart me if she keeps asking, like one day I'll forget I meant not to tell her. She may have a good strategy there, but I am on to her...
10. Each time I am sitting in the midwife/doctor's office waiting room, always with my husband in tow, I am reminded what an awesome guy I've got!
11. Having a sick dog (all better now) is somewhat good training for having a baby. Lesson I learned? My husband wakes up much easier than I do. I think this bodes well for my post-birth sleep, but perhaps not as well for his...
12. Anticipating maternity leave over Advent and Christmas makes me very productive. Two of four worship services for Christmas Eve? Nearly at final drafts.

So, those are just a few random thoughts...onto other things now. Like that monstrous to-do list...

On Racism and Church Leadership Today

Okay, I'm still kind of worked up about a Facebook posting by one of my (now former) Facebook friends this morning. If any of you are also friends with her, you know who I mean, but many if not post of you are not, so this will sound vague, but it raises some issues I want to address here (I've already posted a comment on the status them removed her from my friends list).

The woman is question is someone I came to know through conference activities. She has a local and regional leadership position with youth, in a different town. As it turns out, she was baptized by my great-grandfather, Elmer Andrews. We have had a decent working relationship till now, I felt. She has posted a lot of very political things on her Facebook, which I personally find unfitting for someone in pastoral leadership (she is not a pastor but has a ministry position) but as she is not a professional clergy, I simply "hid" her from my news feed so I didn't have to read it (I don't mind political postings, it's ones filled with invectives that I block--don't worry, I haven't blocked people just for political reasons!).

Today, however, the tone of her status made it impossible for me to ignore--though in fact I would not have seen the post if my husband had not pointed it out to me.

In her post, she described her frustration with the Hispanics at a local state park. Now, I understand frustration, but I do not condone the mean and ethnic-directed tone of her remarks. I am certain (for I have seen it) that any ethnic group is capable of poor manners, whites absolutely not to be excepted. She berated the behavior of the Hispanic visitors to the park, repeatedly reminding her Facebook audience of their ethnicity. She also made the remark I have, unfortunately, heard before, about being upset at hearing so much Spanish.

Okay, let me just say this now. Saying this to me is a sure way to make me question your decency and intelligence. And, honestly, to personally offend me. Now I get that not understanding someone's language is difficult. I lived in Greece for four months. I have often (including till today) hosted people from Korea. It is very difficult to not know the language. But you know what? We've all been (or our families have been, if we've not been fortunate enough to travel or live internationally) in that situation.

I noted in my reply to her status that I was personally offended because my own ancestors spoke German and were shunned for that. In fact, our church, the United Brethren, was kept out of the Methodist Church for YEARS because at first we did not speak English fully. Another commented remarked it is about ASSIMILATION (her caps). Bull$6!#. My ancestors did not speak English at first, but after several generations they did. The same will likely be true for current Hispanic immigrants (even if we assume the goal should be such uniformity that exists hardly anywhere else in the world--are we less capable of navigating these challenges than many third world countries?). We have the privilege of hosting a program at Manidokan put on by a non-profit that promotes cultural awareness and positive life choices for Hispanic youth. Some do not speak English well, but as I have learned, many of those are newly arrived in the US. Many first generation youths, not to mention second generation (as was the case for my German ancestors) speak both English and Spanish quite well.

I don't want to address the political issues here, of which I know there are many. I do not feel that basic hospitality and accepting that the world does not revolve around us, is a political issue. It is an issue of graciousness and love. Interacting between cultures is not easy, but there are many issues that affect our interactions--economic status and age are also major issues, amongst a whole litany of others.

The truth is that things are never simple, and that is why I quickly lose respect for people who try to make them so. Yes it is easier to vilify or insult an entire ethnic group. But that only displays laziness and ignorance.


All that said, we will all disagree. But those of us in leadership in the church are particularly called to be cautious of expressing our own views in a way so as to offend our brothers or sisters. That an opinion can be shared without being offensive is certain. This same woman could have expressed frustration in such a way that no one took her comments as racist. Unfortunately, she chose not to do so. And that shows not only her unfortunate views, but also, and perhaps more glaringly, her poor judgment in posting them given her position. Some will respond, "Shouldn't she be able to say whatever she wants?" Well, yes, if she wants to be perceived in that way, but I disagree with the assumption that we ought all to share every thought we have in the very way we first have it. Navigating that challenge of self-editing is a skill that comes with maturity. Unfortunately, maturity is not an inevitable by-product of the passing of time.