Bishop Mike Lowry

Among the various actions taken by General Conference was an overwhelming vote (originally on the consent agenda) to end guaranteed appointments for ordained elders in the United Methodist Church.  In brief, “under this new legislation, bishops and cabinets will be allowed to give elders less than full-time appointment. The legislation also would permit bishops and their cabinets, with the approval of their boards of ordained ministry and annual (regional) conference’s executive session, to put elders on unpaid transitional leave for up to 24 months. Clergy on transitional leave would be able to participate in their conference health program through their own contributions.  Each annual conference is asked to name a task force to develop a list of criteria to guide the cabinets and bishops as they make missional appointments.  The cabinets shall report to the executive committees of Board of Ordained Ministry the number of clergy without fulltime appointments and their age, gender and ethnicity. Cabinets also will be asked to report their learnings as appointment-making is conducted in a new way.” (Taken from UMNS, May 1, 2012)

I am always surprised by the amount of anxiety this issue seems to engender.  The involvement of the Board of Ordained Ministry in conjunction with the Cabinet safeguards against misuse based on gender, ethnicity or freedom of the pulpit.  It does assist in proper placement of associate pastors and general effectiveness accountability.  It places Elders in the same accountability relationship as Licensed Local Pastors.  In reality, it will have very little effect on most Central Texas Conference clergy and churches.  Denomination wide, there is an estimated excess of only 784 Elders across the whole connection!  When you couple this with a retirement tsunami that will peak in the CTC in 2018 (we are currently on the beginning edge of that huge wave), we will actually desperately need new clergy in the next 10 to15 years.

As we wrestle with our deep need to make mission field appointments, the challenge will be to make the proper fit between pastor, church and mission field.  Furthermore, the deeper pressure we are experiencing a clergy deployment system is being driven by pensions and health insurance.

So, relax, for almost all this will make little difference.  It will protect churches and clergy from deep ineffectiveness and aid making mission field appointments.

How is the United Methodist Church’s General Conference similar to the National Football League’s annual draft?  The answer is that, like the NFL, we won’t know for sure what we really have for a couple of years.

When NFL teams draft players, it usually takes a number of years before a team knows if a player really pans out.  Similarly, it is often (admittedly not always) difficult to discern the full implications of an action taken.  By way of example, in the 1996 General Conference comprehensive legislation on ordination of Deacons and Elders was adopted.  Sixteen years later we are still adjusting to those changes.  One change in 1996 was to adopt a 3-year probationary period.  By General Conference 2008, we had decided the residency period was too long and reduced it to 2 years.  Despite the best intentions (to raise the level of clergy competence), we made the process too complex and discouraged people from entering the UM process.

This is called the Law of Unintended Consequences. (The building of the interstate highway system and its adverse impact on small towns across America is considered a classic example of the Lw of Unintended Consequences.). Often the full consequences don’t unfold until we live with the new situation for a while.

As I write this, it is Friday morning, May 4th.  Currently we are wrestling with the budget.  We have already taken significant  action — stressed vital congregations, restructured the General Boards & Agencies, rejected a set aside bishop, created a new episcopal area in the Congo, gone through our continuing struggle on human sexuality, given annual conferences more freedom in creating their own  structure, done away with guaranteed appointments, reinforced mission initiatives taking the gospel into communist lands — the list goes on!  As General Conference draws to a close, it is important to catch our breath, pause for prayer, and remember John Wesley’s admonition:  ”The best of all is that God is with us.”

At recent meetings with other SCJ bishops as we looked forward to General Conference, Bishop Robert Schnase called our attention to agenda for the first (“general”) conference of preachers under John Wesley.  He noted a threefold purpose for such holy conferencing.  “The Methodists conferred on ‘1. What to teach, 2. How to teach, and 3. What to do, that is, how to regulate our doctrine, discipline, and practice.’”

It is easy to get lost in the thicket of emotional issues facing the church: war & peace, sexual orientation & practice, restricting & Call to Action, etc.  In an earlier blog I called for an emphasis in prayer-filled and Holy Spirit-oriented preparation.  It is important, vitally important, not to lose sight of what matters most, the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Ultimately Conference is about mission and ministry; about guiding and equipping the church to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.  Amid all the noise, we need to keep the main thing the main thing!

The March 22^nd Quick Notes highlights an important resource which I commend to you strongly.  “Bishop Robert Schnase’s “Remember the Future: 30 Days of Preparation,” blog series begins [March 26].  The series of daily reflections in preparation for General Conference 2012 will be a blend of daily topics from leadership and institutional challenges to Wesleyan beliefs and more. About eight of the blogs through the series will have video clips included; all will include scripture and additional reading recommendations for those who want to know more. Go to ministrymatters.com to sign-up, read a description of the series and an introductory blog from Robert Schnase.

Recently I received a letter from General Secretary Moses Kumar of the General Board of Finance Administration. I pass on a significant portion of that letter. It is good, for which I give you and God thanks!

“The lingering effects of the recession have had differing impacts throughout our annual conferences and local churches in the United States. But through the power of the United Methodist connection, and as harsh as the reports are about the recession and unemployment, giving to the general Church apportioned funds through September, 2011 is up 1.1% or over $770,000.

“As we approach the end of 2011, we gratefully acknowledge that by the gracious giving of the people in your conference, there has been an improvement in giving year-to-date. Our prayer is that trend will continue so that the ministries throughout the connection continue to receive funds for ministry through the remainder of the year and beyond. During these times of financial uncertainty we can, as followers of Christ, acknowledge that God provides all we need. In his book Five Practices of Faithful Living, United Methodist Bishop Robert Schnase talks about the grace of giving. Among the reasons for giving graciously he lists ‘giving changes us.’

“As you consider your gifts to your local church, to ministries of your annual conference, and to global Church initiatives to ‘make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world,’ remember that all we have comes from God. When we support these ministries we are advancing the work God has called God’s faithful to do. Giving changes us. By giving, we can change our world.

Together in ministry,

A. Moses Rathan Kumar”

Recently a colleague passed on to me a summary of the Lewis Center for Church Leadership report on Clergy Age Trends.  You can get the report at http://www.churchleadership.com/.

 Among other highlights the report noted that ….

• For the first time ever, just over half of active elders are between age 55 and 72.
• The median age of elders is 55, the highest in history, up from 50 in 2000 and 45 in 1973.
• The percentage of elders aged 35 to 54 continues to shrink, from 65 percent of all active elders in 2000 to 45 percent in 2010.
• The number of young United Methodist clergy grew in the past decade
• There are more young elders, deacons, and local pastors than ten years ago.
• While fewer in number than young elders, young deacons and local pastors are growing in number faster than young elders.

The Central Texas Conference had the third highest number of young elders (under 35 in age) in the United States!  10% of our elders are under 35.  Forty percent are in the 35-54 age range and 50% are 55 and above.  The breakdowns for Deacons and Local Pastors are similar.  (Deacons = 12%, 38%, 50%; Local Pastors = 3%, 49%, 49%.  Don’t ask me how the additional 1% snuck into the Local Pastor numbers.  I don’t know.)

This is genuinely good news.  Thank God for the growth in younger clergy and in local pastors.  Those groups have and are blessing us and the church as a whole.  It also notes the challenge of the next few years as one generation retires and the age cohort of those currently 35-54 struggles to fill the gap.  There is much to think and pray about here.

            Last week I participate in a meeting of the “Leading Edge” group made up of the Senior Pastors of the 100 largest churches by worship attendance in the UMC in the U.S.  I wrote about it in my earlier blog entitled “Leading Edge.”  Out of that meeting came a number of actions worth prayerful consideration.

            When asked what are the top changes needed in the UMC, the Senior Pastors noted the following six (in order). [Senior Pastors ranking is in bold; my comments are in italics.]

 #1. Improve quality of church leadership – inspire passionate and effective leaders.  This is the critical need!  It is one of the four focus areas of the United Methodist Church.  It will necessitate dramatic rethinking of what effective leadership looks like in the 21^st century (i.e. a post-Christendom church).

 #2. Simplify administrative structures of General Church – reduce apportionments.  Amen!  This will require both General Conference and Annual Conference action.  It will also face deeply entrenched interests often protected by The Discipline.

 #3. Develop a common message or clear theological message as UMC with a clear process of spiritual formation.  Theological pluralism has led us to lose our Wesleyan roots.  Recovering a vibrant Wesleyan Christian orthodoxy is a necessity.  I see reason for real hope in this area.  The Holy Spirit is blowing a fresh wind through us.

 #4. Strengthen the role, authority, and leadership of the Bishops.  Please note:  This is what the Senior Pastors voted for!  Everyone is in favor of bishops have greater authority and exercising more leadership as long as what we (bishops) do agrees with them.  When our leadership and authority go in a different direction, we are often greeted with cries of “how dare you!”

 #5. Local church pastors be positive, hopeful and encouraging to others in the denomination.  This is a task that must be place squarely on the shoulders of local pastors.  Holy Scripture commends us:  “Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an account of the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and reverence.” (I Peter 3:15-16)

 #6. End guaranteed appointment.  This will take General Conference action.  It must be made with appropriate provisions for safe-guarding ethical imperatives.  Sooner or later we will economically be forced to take this action.

(more…)

Last Friday afternoon (continuing until noon on Saturday) I participated in a fascinating meeting that has remained on my mind and be lodged in my prayer life. (The previous 5 days were spent meeting as a part of the Council of Bishops (COB) in Columbus, Ohio.) I am still not sure what the name of the group I was meeting with is. The gathering consisted of the President of the Council of Bishops, the General Secretaries of the various United Methodist general church commissions and agencies, the Presidents (Chairs of the agency or commission’s board) of those agencies (some of whom are bishops), the four Focus Area lead bishops (I hold the position for “New People in New Places and the Transformation of Existing Congregations – commonly referred to as Path1), and leadership from the Connectional Table.

The purpose of the meeting was to examine potential reduction/realignment of general church agencies; coordinate budgeting and finances; examine the impact of the global nature of the church related to our current and possible future structures. That is a lot to engage in! Thirty or so dedicated and committed people wrestled hard with preliminary considerations of this huge task. I was impressed with the dedication and seriousness with which the group went about its work.

One of the issues that surfaced is the relationship of the Four Areas of Focus (Leadership, New Places for New People and Transformation of Existing Congregations, Poverty, and Eradication of Killer Diseases) with the disciplinary mandates. Disciplinary Mandates are those items that The Discipline of the United Methodist Church mandates (orders) that the general agencies engage in. I had the privilege of visiting with Erin Hawkins, General Secretary for The Commission on Religion and Race, at a break and she conveyed to me that her agency had some 34 or 35 disciplinary mandates. Hers is one of the smaller agencies. It doesn’t take a genius to know that we have vastly over legislated the church’s work. How does the existing “to do” list converge with our missional priorities? Discernment of convergence (Holy Spirit driven!) is a major task before us! We are far from agreement on this most basic commitment.

What we could agree upon is our mission. The United Methodist Church exists to “make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.” We had ready agreement that mission should drive are alignment and budget. From that came the necessary corollary that we should align and budget in a manner that is outcome based. In other words, what alignment will best produce the outcomes we are after in “making disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world?”

The huge question that drives off such a conviction of mission and determination to be outcome driven is: what are our shared core values and what are the outcomes we should measure? So, if you have read this far, here is where you come in. I would like feedback on 1) what four or five core values should drive this mission process, and 2) what are the key outcomes we should be seeking.

I want hear what you think. Please, short concise answers to 1) what four or five core values should drive this mission process, and 2) what are the key outcomes we should be seeking? If you can’t put it on a postcard, it is too long. I promise to read all ideas but, due to other time restrictions, will not be able to respond to any individual. Instead, I will share group feedback with you in a later blog. Thanks for the help!