We are easing our way into appointment season and several of
you have remarked to me, privately, that you’ve been eagerly awaiting my
updates. While I’m honored that my comments and info-sharing has become a
significant part of your celebration of this important season in the church
(well, if you’re a church geek), I have always done so quite amateurish. In
recent years, the bishop, cabinet and conference staff (esp. Melissa Lauber and
her Communications team) have done a wonderful job, if I may say so, pre-empting
me. I am quite pleased for this to be the case. In past years, I had gathered
and shared information that I found to have been public knowledge already, but
which was not yet shared on the conference website. The Conference got wise to
this, and appropriately so, decided they would be better able to manage this
info by simply putting it out there. No one asked me to stop posting, they just
started posting with such frequency as to make any effort on my part, well,
redundant.
Nonetheless, like many of my colleagues, I do from time to
time hear bit of info before announced, but these are often not even public
yet, and I would not share that info in any forum anyway.
So, I got nothing. And I don’t anticipate posting updates, because,
well, the conference is doing quite well themselves. I for one am also glad
they stopped publishing the paragraph write ups on the churches and pastors.
Those were always more entertainment than informational. Because really, if you
want to know what’s going on at a church, yes, check stats (I know, I hear a
groan from the peanut gallery) and ask people who know that church or pastor.
Even that only gets you a small picture. But it’s better than the glossy images
those paragraphs painted.
So, in this, my first (and I expect last) post of this
appointment season, rather than share any inside info on appointments, I
thought I’d revisit a topic of previous posts and explain a bit about
appointments and how they’re done.
ITINERACY
One of the distinctive characteristics of the United
Methodist Church is our system of itineracy (ministry candidates, REMEMBER THIS…also
remember: episcopacy—having bishops, and connectionalism).
Itineracy is the system by which United Methodist clergy are
assigned to local churches or other church positions (the latter could include
denominational leadership, except the role of bishop, which is an elected
position). And yes, you heard me correctly, ASSIGNED. Why yes, indeed, this
works much like the military. Ordained elders serve “at the pleasure of the
bishop,” and part of our ordination vows include a commitment to go when and
where the bishops send us. This generally means only within the bounds of a
single annual conference. Our annual conference is the Baltimore-Washington
Conference, which includes most of Maryland (minus the Eastern Shore and far
Western MD), part of the panhandle of West Virginia (Berkeley, Jefferson and
Morgan counties), and all of Washington, DC. Oh, and Bermuda. Seriously. We’ve
got two churches in Bermuda. Because we’re that awesome.
It is possible to change Annual Conferences, but usually the
pastor has to initiate this (this would happen, say, if a pastor had a need to
move for a spouse’s job, or to be closer to a sick parent, they didn’t like
their home conference and wanted a change, etc.). You’re not guaranteed to be
allowed to switch conference. You are, however, if an ordained elder, guaranteed
a full-time job in a local church or other church role. This has created some
problems and there have been attempts to get rid of the guaranteed appointment
policy, but as of now, it stands.
Itineracy has its critics, and rightly so. In the past there
were maximum limits for a pastor to stay at one appointment (an “appointment”
is where a pastor serves—this could be one or more churches, or a staff
position). The earliest appointments generally consisted of many churches. Like
5, 6 or more. Pastors were constantly travelling. Those early Methodist clergy
rode hard and died young. Their horses probably did too. Those first
appointments lasted a year, maybe two. Later, as clergy got more settled and
some served fewer churches at a time, and some (GASP!) only one, they may have
been able to stay four years. As far as I am aware, four years was the last max
limit. After that they removed a hard limit, though many churches even today
have had few pastors longer than that. Small churches often, though not always,
tend to have pastors for fewer years at a time. Larger churches tend to have
pastors longer. Again, this is not always true, and there are so many exception
so as to make this statement maybe not even a fair generalization, but I think
it’s truer than not.
In those early years, laity largely ran the business of the
local church, and clergy really only had more training than them in areas of
preaching and teaching. Today’s clergy, however, have a seminary degree, and in
addition to Biblical and theological training, also some training and
experience in leadership, management and other areas so as to be professionals
in their field.
It is becoming increasingly known that pastorates longer
than 4 years have a great deal of benefit, in ideal circumstances, for both
clergy and congregations. Under our previous bishop, I think the guidance they
shared was aiming for a minimum of 7 years, average of 10, and max of 12. Now,
those of your with experience in local churches will easily find fault with
these (or any) numbers. But I do think it’s fair to say there’s a minimum
amount of time a pastor needs to be at a church to really get any momentum to
move forward, and there’s clearly a length of time that is TOO LONG. The too
long can entail the pastor and congregation getting too comfortable with each
other, the church becoming too closely identified with the pastor, or the
pastor ceasing to continue to grow as a professional in their field.
Itineracy shares the wealth and yes, sometimes spreads the
dysfunction. Those things apply both to clergy and congregations. And yes,
sometimes good, effective pastors and congregations are matched and it is the
chemistry, not either themselves per se, that doesn’t mesh.
There are lots of theological and historical reasons for our
system of itineracy. I like it. I think for its weaknesses it gives us a great
deal of blessing and strength. It’s totally cool, too, if you disagree. You
just probably should not be a United Methodist pastor if you do disagree.
Because you’ll be miserable. And make the rest of us miserable with you.
THE APPOINTMENT PROCESS
Appointments are generally made in late winter/early spring,
to be effective July 1. This varies a bit across annual conferences, but it is how
it has always been, in my experience, in our annual conference. There are two
key groups of information, and a third that is more casually gathered, which
begin the bishop and cabinet’s work on appointments. First, all clergy
anticipating retirement are supposed to give the bishop sufficient
notification. I think the deadline is December 1. Clearly the churches these
pastors serve will need new pastors. Second, all clergy AND local churches (via
their Staff-Parish Relations Committee, or SPRC) must complete a form also due
December 1 saying whether they (clergy) want to stay where they are or
(congregations) want their pastors to stay. They’re asked to give some brief
reasoning for whatever they choose.
These forms are called “advisory forms.” They advise. They
do not direct. If you ask for a move it doesn’t mean you will get one. If you
ask to stay, it doesn’t mean you will get to. I guess in theory that might be
true about retiring, but I’ve never heard of that not being granted. I’ve heard
of the advisory forms not being followed. Now lest you think the bishop and
cabinet are sitting somewhere just trying to be jerks about this, there are at
least (and probably more) four things they’re trying to balance all this stuff
with:
1.
God’s guidance. Yes, they pray. They take their
work seriously. We’re all counting on the role of the Holy Spirit in this.
2.
The finite nature of the world (and the finite
number of churches and pastors). Sometimes the math doesn’t add up. There’s
nowhere to move someone, or nowhere better. Or no pastor better.
3.
Sometimes you’re wrong. Or at least other people
(mostly the bishop and cabinet) think you are. Sometimes a pastor needs to push
through a difficult situation. Sometimes a congregation has just the pastor
they need, and they need to learn to work with them. Sometimes you’re needed
more somewhere else. Sometimes #1 and #2 (above) just get in the way.
4.
The ten million other conditions upon appointments.
Not all of which can be met all the time. What pastor wants or needs a
parsonage vs. housing allowance. What churches have a parsonage vs. housing
allowance. Where a pastor’s spouse works. Or whether their kid is one year shy
of high school graduation. Or how close a particular appointment is to the
medical specialists the pastor of their loved ones needs to see frequently.
You get the picture. Easy to throw stones. We all (well most
of us) probably have. And I’ll go out on a limb here and say sometimes they get
it wrong. Or sometimes they get it right and there are still pieces that don’t
fall perfectly into place. Sometimes things happen. People change.
Congregations change. Appointments are a lot more like arranged marriages than
we might think. And there’s good and bad to be said for that.
The third moving piece are conflicts within local churches
and amongst clergy and congregations. These pieces unfold throughout the year,
and these (along with sudden severe illnesses or deaths) are what force
mid-appointment-year moves that later play a role in the process. My father had
just begun (like 3 days in) to another year at his appointment when he died
suddenly. Retired pastors (as was done in that case) are usually brought in to
finish the appointment year in such a case. But really, any of us could be
moved. Any day. To anywhere in the conference. It has happened.
THE TIMELINE
I already explained that this process, in our annual
conference, begins late winter/early spring. I don’t know when the discussions
begin (and whether there’s an informal vs. formal phase) but for sure the
formal phase, the point where the appointments start getting made, is early
February, give or take.
Usually the churches pastors are retiring from are filled
(and announced). These create what you may hear called “lines of move.” By
that, we mean, Pastor A retires from Church 1. Church 1 now needs a pastor so
Pastor B is appointed FROM Church 2 TO Church 1. Now Church 2 needs a pastor so
Pastor C is appointed TO Church 2 FROM Church 3. On and on. The last pastors to
be appointed will tend to be newer pastors or Local Pastors (pastors who are
licensed but not ordained and who generally though not always serve smaller or
part-time appointments). The last churches to receive pastors will generally
(though not always) be the smaller churches. Since the whole thing is like some
combination of dominoes and chess, it has to be done step by step. And this
takes time.
So…let’s say the cabinet and bishop decide on an
appointment. Pastor B is going to Church 1. Now the District Superintendent
gets to work. The DS calls Pastor B. The DS tells Pastor B that they are
receiving a new appointment and tells them a bit about the church. Pastor B can
ask some questions. What the DS says next varies depending on the Bishop and
DS. Pastor B may be told to pray about it, and let the DS know their
willingness maybe the next day. Or, the DS can say basically this is it. And if
you’re Pastor B and you’ve got an issues with it, you need to speak up quickly.
But really, you serve at the pleasure of the bishop. I know of appointments
which have been reconsidered, and changed. But I also know of some which were
not. I know of pastors who would ask for reconsideration under certainly
circumstances. And I know of some who would not. So let’s say the pastor is on
board. Next they have to have a meeting with the SPRC of Church 1 (where they
are going). The DS calls the chair of the SPRC of Church 1 and tells them to
(and usually when) schedule a meeting. Church 1 usually knows they’re getting a
new pastor, because either theirs is retiring, or theirs has already been
appointed elsewhere in that cycle. The DS also calls the SPRC of the church
Pastor B is leaving. They have to meet too, to learn their pastor is leaving,
and also to talk with the DS (usually though not always) about the process
going forward for them, and anything else they want to share with the DS about
who to appoint to them. Note that at this point, sometimes their next pastor is
already on the deck in the cabinet’s mind.
And so it goes. The meetings are held. If either the pastor
or church has major issues, it’s shared with the DS, but really, that meeting “sets
the appointment.” It will generally be announced the upcoming Sunday, as long
as both SPRCs have met.
There is a great deal of consultation in this process, of
the bishop and cabinet asking for information, The thing is, if you (as a
pastor or congregation) only wait till appointment season to make sure your DS
and the bishop know about you and your church, you’re not going to be able to
convey all that. It’s important that you stay in communication and regularly
share with your DS about you so that at appointment time (because sometimes you’ll
be or receive an appointment when you least expect it) you’re not just another
pastor or church. DSes have a responsibility to learn this information, but you
also have a responsibility to share it. The bishop and cabinet are not wizards
or mad scientists. They can only work with what they know, and you have a role
in that.
So, there is much more that could be said, but I’ll leave it
there for now. If you have additional questions, post as a comment and I’ll try
to answer or find the answer. Otherwise, I think this will be it for me for
this appointment season…at least online… J
Grace and Peace.
Sarah
