Itineracy: Practicing What We Sing

Dear colleagues and friends:

Later this month, I will observe the 42th anniversary of my ordination as a deacon. And since that day, I have not chosen any of my appointments. Each of them came as a surprise to me, approached with a mixture of eager anticipation and sheer terror. Over the years, when I became worn out, tired, depressed, or disgruntled I frequently applied for teaching or administrative positions for which I thought I was far better suited: (translate: "get me out of here!"). However, I was always the number two choice for professorships of Christian Education or Field Education at two of our seminaries, and my desires and dreams didn't materialize. Thank God. It took me a long time to realize that I was engaged in exactly what God had in "mind" for the church and for me. I was trying to lead the Spirit of God, while God was waiting for me to be led elsewhere by the Spirit.

Those who know me well wonder what the Spirit was doing at my appointment as a district superintendent. Me, too. This is a ministry of service to which no reasonable woman or man aspires. I can witness that it is not exactly what we imagine when we view it from "the outside." I was looking toward retirement this summer, but the Spirit was leading me elsewhere.

At this time of year "The Spirit is leading me elsewhere" has great significance for both United Methodist clergy and lay persons. When either the anticipated or unexpected phone call comes from the district superintendent, clergy size up the appointment. If clergy are pleased with the church to which they are appointed, they'll usually acknowledge that the Holy Spirit is leading them elsewhere. However, if the appointment does not honor their expectations for salary, status, or location, clergy may well ask the question, "Is the Holy Spirit leading me elsewhere, or is it just the Bishop and cabinet?"

It's in our human nature for clergy to follow the way of the world rather than the Spirit. As our skills and effectiveness grow, we become confident that recognition and reward will follow, just like in other professions. We desire larger and more prestigious appointments. We yearn for more salary and recognition. We want to receive what we deserve.

For many years effective clergy could expect to climb the "ladder," with each succeeding appointment bigger and better than the last. But the ladder has been sagging for the past few years and is now horizontal or even turning upside down.

Since the recession of 2008, more and more churches are unable to afford the compensation package for an elder or even support a full-time pastor. For the most part, salaries are not going up anymore. In addition, in many areas of the United States there are far fewer large churches today than 10 or even 5 years ago. "Going to a larger church" now means, more than ever, growing the church we're in! The truth is that Spirit will lead us elsewhere, but it may very well not be where we want to go, even if we have a great track record.

The flip side of our current appointment reality is our reluctance to acknowledge that United Methodism has a "sent ministry," not a "called" ministry. Just as Jesus chose and then sent the disciples out in ministry, so United Methodist clergy are sent out not for our own convenience or comfort but to accomplish the mission of the church. We promise to go where we are sent rather than where we think we are called. I'm under no illusion that the Cabinet always makes perfect appointments. But if a church is not the "size" we think we deserve, do we automatically discount the possibility that the Spirit is working?

The trade-off has always been that elders would be "guaranteed" an appointment. (Although, I think the word 'guarantee' is not in the Discipline). The report of the Commission for the Study of Ministry said that security of appointment "limits the ability of the church to respond to the primacy of missional needs." The petition passed at General Conference has modified the appointment process by allowing for less than full-time appointments for elders and creating a transitional leave status for elders who do not receive an appointment. This action by the General Conference simply reinforces the fact clergy no longer have a ladder where each rung will go higher, higher. It will be a true test of our mettle and faith.

Ministry is ultimately not about our wants and desires. My 42 years of service evidence that reality. Nor is it about advancement or job security. Ministry is about bringing in God's kingdom on this earth. It's about feeding the sheep and growing the church wherever we are appointed. Ministry is about giving ourselves away by sharing grace, salvation, shalom, and social and personal holiness. It's about practicing what we sing:

  • "Trust and obey for there is no other way"
  • "Where He leads me I will follow; I'll go with Him all the way"
  • "Take up Thy cross if thou wouldst my disciple be; ... for only those who bear the cross may hope to wear the glorious crown"
  • "Soar we now where Christ has led, following our exalted head; Made like him, like him we rise, Ours the cross, the grave, the skies"

The Spirit is constantly leading us elsewhere, whether we are clergy, laity, local churches, or a denomination. The Spirit leads us to fish on the other side. The Spirit leads us to change our mindset about what "success" means for a disciple of Jesus Christ. The Spirit leads us to creatively and expectantly go. The Spirit leads us to a radical trust in a God who lovingly shapes and molds our resistance into joyful obedience and sanctification.

When the Spirit leads us elsewhere, will we say, "The system failed me," or will we joyfully affirm, "God has never failed me yet." Will we bemoan our fate, or will we confess with confidence, "Lord, we are able; our spirits are Thine; remold them, make us, like thee, divine." Will we fold up our tents and curse God, or will we pitch our tents wherever the Spirit leads and bear fruit for the kingdom of God? Will the charge to which we're sent be an affront to our self-understanding, or will we see our appointment as a sacred charge to keep, knowing and believing that we are sent as a blessing to fulfill God's purposes? The Spirit is leading me elsewhere.

Where is the Spirit leading you?

By: Terry Harter On 5/14/2012
Topics: Ministry, Appointments, Itineracy, Leadership

Comments

1. Al Simonson wrote on 5/14/2012 1:42:05 PM
I applaud Terry's words. The cross has neve been easy and if one reads the letters of Paul and and especially the pastoral epistiles we read words of conflict and struggle and disappointment and spiritual warfare. Except for Judas and John all of the other 12 apostles were martyered. I too have struggled and seriously condsidered leaving pastoral miistry but I have found Jesus Christ to always be faithful. At times I have read portions of Foxes Book of Martyrs to remind me of God' ability to give grace to those who are willing to pay the price of obeying Jesus.
2. Linda Richard wrote on 5/14/2012 4:13:57 PM
2. While I agree with Terry at almost every point, what is changing now is the promise of adequate financial support for individuals and families. I too have always gone where needed. I have served some of the, if not the smallest churches in the Conference. But I could choose if I could afford not to be paid a full-time salary. I once received $40 a week for an appointment. And that was less than 10 years ago! I too am willing to go where I am needed- but what if we can't live on what is offered? Terry-I'd be willing to bet you will never have to serve a less-than-full-time appointment unless you so desire. I want to be faithful too, but instead of focusing on how to strengthen smaller congregations or do more effective ministry in communities; we are planning for decline by allowing very part time appointments.
3. Charliam Renner wrote on 5/15/2012 11:52:58 AM
I appreciate Terry's words, and I do not disagree with what is shared. I grew up in a sister denomination that functioned within a Call System. I saw good pastors at growing churches doing wonderful ministry be voted out with no place to go because a particular family or two didn't like how their "power" was being diluted due to increased membership. As I became a part of the United Methodist Church and prepared for full-time ministry, it was expressed as a trade off. Due to being appointed and not called, I would not have the freedom to stay or go as I personally felt led; but I would always have a place to serve. The congregation also entered into a similar scenario--the congregation does not vote for a pastor to stay or go, but will always have a pastor. And yet, however, I am hurt that what I understood as a "covenant" has been broken. I am also hurt that the only aspect of the covenant said to "limit the ability of the church to respond to the primacy of missional needs" is the clergy's appointment. Is this truly the only part of the "covenant" that limits our ability to respond? I am also concerned (as are so many) about the lack of younger UM clergy. I still struggle with the correlation that was expressed at Covenant Keepers that somehow removing a guarantee of appointment but retaining itinerancy will encourage called young people to fulfill that call within the United Methodist Church? I continue to go where I am sent. I continue to be thankful for the privilege to serve my Leader & Forgiver, Jesus the Christ via ordained ministry. Just a little hurt and confused about how the process and recent General Conference decisions came about.
4. Howard S Bell wrote on 5/22/2012 7:35:57 PM
I'm sorry, but I must offer some words of disagreement. While there is so much talk of revitalization, and new milleniums and such, we still function in a 200 year old paradigm the I am not sure is working. I do believe God can and does use us where we are. Besides, if all this stuff is true, then why do District Superintendents never leave the Cabinet to go to a 5 point parish somewhere? Why do some pastors stay forever in larger churches? While I believe the "ideal" is wonderful, I believe there are politics involved. I believe that it might be time for the UMC to look at becoming a "Called/Sent" Church where clergy and local churches have more input into the system. Alls it takes is a few persons to carp and groan to the DS enough and "The Spirit has discerned it is time for a move..." When in reality the majority (usually silent) are caught off guard. I think it is time for the Clergy to be able to have some choice of where they'd like to serve. I think it would be good for local churches to go 'searching' and confer with the District Superintendent and Cabinet about choices for a new pastoral appointment.
5. Linda Richard wrote on 5/22/2012 8:52:42 PM
As a Clergywoman, I cringe at the thought of a call system. And in general the appointive system has worked well for us. I have found that churches who do not think they would want a woman as a Pastor are not only able to accept one appointed there but they can flourish. The cabinet can open a door that wouldn't be there otherwise. Once the church and pastor are given a chance God can produce a very positive season of ministry. But many churches would not be willing to give a woman a chance if they had to choose.
6. Randy Robinson wrote on 5/24/2012 2:26:43 PM
The most recent edition of Circuit Rider magazine (for UM clergy) includes an article with this title: Theology for a Bad Appointment. It provides excellent commentary on both Terry's article (above) and the various comments which follow. Fascinating!
7. jim wheeler wrote on 5/27/2012 7:23:55 PM
i like red crayons, but they just can't color a blue pond. hmm, i suppose i can color a red pond, but then i'm told ponds are blue, or sometimes green. maybe i won't draw a pond. how about a nice sunset!
8. Sheri Renner wrote on 5/31/2012 11:14:49 PM
The Circuit Rider article "Theology for a Bad Appointment" is excellent! I found it online... well worth reading and hearing.....
News