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.