by Steve | Jan 19, 2011 | Magazine Articles
By Eric LeMasters
Bishop Bruce Ough, president of the United Methodist General Board of Global Ministries (GBGM), put it bluntly: “What a lousy time to be a bishop.”
The United Methodist mission agency, faced with negative budget projections in the coming decade, is considering substantive cuts in both programmatic and administrative sectors in order to maintain what it regards as its “core competencies.” This year’s GBGM Annual Board Meeting convened in Stamford, Connecticut, to discuss, among other things, the possibility of a dramatic downsizing of the Board from 89 directors to a potential 30, and a revision of its Theology of Mission Statement and its associated Mission and Vision statements.
GBGM has been very active in humanitarian causes throughout the world, particularly in disaster areas such as Haiti and earthquake-stricken Chile. The Board reported significant progress in its anti-malaria program in Africa, “Nothing but Nets,” where the UM Church is widely acknowledged as being “front and center” in the effort to eradicate the disease from the continent.
Regardless, the agency has seen falling giving rates accompanied by a widespread mistrust of its resourcefulness and relevance.
“It’s difficult to live in a time of ferment and upheaval,” Bishop Ough said. “Especially when it seems our very identity or ministry context are the targets of the analysis and discussion taking place.” This upheaval brought home the need to “bite the bullet on the size of this board,” he argued, to provide more nimble and effective governance and to cut administrative costs. He further stated that studies have shown that the “best practice for non-profit boards is to have 12 to 24 members, and for the boards to meet four or more times a year.”
In the past, the Board has held up to 180 directors.
How and where these cuts should be administered was the subject of contentious debate. The proposals, outlined below, were handed out for discussion among members. They included:
• Creating a Board composed of 30 members. [This figure was put forward by Bishop Ough; the Board recommended a cut that would result in no less than 30 and no more than 45.]
• Dramatically cutting the number of bishops on the board.
• Identifying and utilizing different categories other than geographical boundaries (jurisdictions) to determine representation.
• Developing and utilizing a system of rotating membership among geographical regions (jurisdictions and central conferences) to ensure broad participation over time.
• Utilizing a portion of the administrative savings resulting from a smaller board to creatively engage constituencies and partners beyond Board members in shaping the direction and work of the Board.
• Populate the Board in such a manner that individual directors could “represent” more than one constituency, such as having a portion of the Women’s Division representation be UM Women from the Central Conferences.
After the executive committee’s report, the board approved a measure to “prepare at least three models, describing function, financial implications, composition, and committee structure of each model presented,” based on the proposed board size range.
Challenging the Mission. An engaging debate emerged surrounding the new draft of GBGM’s Theology of Mission Statement. The original, written in 1986, has seen several updates over the years, and at the board’s spring meeting was set to be revised along with other foundational goals.
Thomas Kemper, elected this spring as chief executive of the General Board of Global Ministries, introduced the strategic planning meeting during the second plenary session. The board approved the strategic planning process in April, with the aid of the Novak Consulting Group, to reassess the organization’s direction along with its Theology of Mission and the accompanying Mission, Vision, and Values statements. In his address, Kemper described the newly revised Theology of Mission Statement as “very Wesleyan, and comprehensively Christian.”
Julia Novak, head of the consulting group, first presented the results of an “environmental scan” conducted throughout the summer. This scan entailed gathering opinions from hundreds of UM congregants (labeled “stakeholders” throughout the session) to shed light on GBGM’s perceived direction and relevance. Many of the perception issues, it concluded, could be distilled to a public relations problem and “poor customer service” rather than a fundamental crisis of mission.
The content of the Theology of Mission draft, which was not permitted to be reproduced by the press, was swiftly challenged by several board members when it came time to discuss the changes.
“How can we bring more of the meat of the gospel and Christianity into our strategic planning?” a director from Pennsylvania asked. ”We have been talking about this for so long that … it is sounding redundant, repetitive, and empty. When was the last time a room like this ever knelt down together and came before God as one body, prostrate before God, begging for forgiveness and direction? When is the last time there was a Holy Spirit Moment, when a group of people who love the Lord could actually come out of here filled up again?”
Bishop Peter Weaver from Boston affirmed this declaration by citing Philippians 2:9-11, which helps underscore the centrality of evangelism in the church’s mission for the world: “Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
“I find the theological statement an improvement, but not yet quite there,” Weaver said. “I yearn for a clarion trumpet call. This theological statement, I believe, reflects some of the lukewarm-ness of the church. The clarity about making disciples of Jesus Christ—the phrase isn’t even in our theology of mission. The word ‘salvation’ is not even in the Theology of Mission.”
“Let us not forsake, in the time of doing all the tremendous things we are doing, the gift of the Bread of Life, the One who I believe is Lord and Savior,” Weaver continued. “And that language is not even here. I believe that we need to be bold enough to say it in our Theology of Mission somehow.”
“Stable” Financial Position. General Treasurer Roland Fernandes presented the organization’s financial position at the first plenary session. The reports presented what it termed a “relatively stable” position, much due to significant budget cuts in 2009—though the agency has still been largely operating on a deficit for the past four consecutive years. The year 2009 ended nearly $13 million in deficit. Lower projected giving rates prompted more pessimistic planning for the 2013-2016 budget period. Total GBGM spending in 2009 was over $149 million. Total revenue was almost $137 million. Total net assets as of August 2010 were $350 million. In 2009, the largest income source was the World Service apportionment at almost $28 million. Advance Special Gifts accounted for over $22 million. United Methodist Women provided $16.6 million.
Chief executive Thomas Kemper also addressed tightened administrative spending. This year GBGM brought its staff to 288 both at home and abroad, and has downsized to fit three, rather than their previous four, floors of their headquarters in New York City. He also revealed that they were exploring the possibility of future board meetings convening at that location, due to “the likelihood of a smaller board of directors” and to promote improved “interaction between directors and staff.”
Seventeen missionaries were commissioned on the second day of the board meeting. In Kemper’s report during that morning’s plenary session, he related the number of international missionaries as “holding steady at around 225, Church and Community Workers [missionaries serving in the United States] at 50, and Hispanic/Latino plan missionaries in the low 20s.” Kemper made note of the steady decline in missionary support over the past two years, calling it “a troubling trend, made potentially more serious by the likelihood of a reduced allocation from World Service apportionments in the next quadrennium.” All told, there are 714 missionaries worldwide over whom the board has full or partial financial responsibility.
Eric LeMasters is a research associate at the Institute on Religion and Democracy in Washington, D.C.
by Steve | Jan 19, 2011 | Magazine Articles
By Heather Hahn
The United Methodist Church in Africa is growing, but the number of trained and licensed clergy is not keeping pace.
In addition, money allocated for African theological education has been slow to filter down.
General Conference, the denomination’s policy-making body, approved the Africa Educational Initiative in 2008. The United Methodist Board of Higher Education and Ministry, the Board of Global Ministries and United Methodist Communications agreed to provide $2 million to support the initiative.
The initiative calls for each of the 12 African bishops to receive $100,000 for scholarships and logistical support to educate clergy in each episcopal area. But so far only $20,000 has been distributed. Liberia Bishop John Innis used those funds to send four students to Africa University in Mutare, Zimbabwe.
“We’ve been slow to get off partly because we haven’t received many applications and partly because the applications we have received haven’t been complete,” said John Lesesne, the higher education agency’s chief financial officer and interim top executive.
A great need. During the Council of Bishops’ gathering last week, Lesesne met with the African bishops to urge them to take advantage of a simplified application form. He also encouraged the bishops to use $520,000 originally designated for an endowment to support immediate education needs.
The higher education agency is also developing resources in the three major languages of the continent, English, French, and Portuguese. Plans call for the development of professional and institutional associations for theological educators on the African continent.
The need is great, church officials said.
“We have a number of congregations with untrained pastors,” said Mozambique Area Bishop Joaquina Felipe Nhanala. “Most of the churches in Mozambique are led by lay people, and those leaders need theological training. It is important that those leaders be prepared to teach the gospel in a good way.”
Being in true connection. In Liberia, Innis said, most of the area’s 900 pastors have at least a bachelor’s degree in theology. Liberia also has Course of Study schools where pastors in rural areas can receive training.
Innis plans to use the balance of his allotted theological funding to help 22 students attend a master of theology program at an Episcopal university in Monrovia, Liberia, and help other students complete their education at Saint Paul School of Theology, a United Methodist school in Kansas City, Missouri, and Oklahoma City.
But in East Africa, which includes Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, and Uganda, some of the people who lead congregations have not even completed elementary school, said Bishop Daniel Wandabula. The East Africa bishop hopes to launch programs where church leaders can receive basic Bible education.
Ultimately, the goal is to have church leaders who can minister in their contexts but still have a solid understanding of Wesleyan teachings, Wandabula said.
“To be in true connection, we need to share the same theology,” he said.
Lesesne expects providing the infrastructure to educate African church leaders will require more than $2 million. He hopes to obtain more funds from the 2012 General Conference.
“We have to be able to tell our story,” he told the bishops, “because the need is so great.”
Heather Hahn is a multimedia news reporter for United Methodist News Service.
by Steve | Jan 19, 2011 | Magazine Articles
By Linda Bloom
A United Methodist pastor has the right to determine local church membership, even if the decision is based on whether the potential member is gay or lesbian.
Annual (regional) conferences cannot limit that right or ask the church’s top court to set policy, the United Methodist Judicial Council ruled during its October 27-30 meeting.
“The General Conference is the only body authorized and able to resolve the issue for the Church,” wrote Jon R. Gray in a concurring opinion on one of the October cases. The General Conference is the denomination’s top legislative body and meets every four years.
The council declined several requests to revisit a decision allowing a pastor to bar a gay man from joining his congregation. In one case, the denomination’s top court ruled that the Northern Illinois Annual (regional) Conference did not have the authority to interpret constitutional language to prohibit pastors from denying membership based on a person’s sexual identity.
When the court denied requests for reconsideration at this meeting made by the Northern Illinois and Arkansas conferences, Judicial Council member Ruben T. Reyes noted in a concurrence that the council had previously taken “a second hard look” at the decision in April 2006, based on 12 briefs and more than 2,000 pieces of communication. “There should be an end to a controversy,” he wrote.
But the issue has been an unceasing source of debate within the church for the past five years.
Defining church law. Judicial Council Decision No. 1032, from October 29, 2005, related to the case of the Rev. Ed Johnson, who had been the senior pastor at South Hill (Virginia) United Methodist Church until he was placed on an involuntary leave of absence by the Virginia Annual (regional) Conference. Bishop Charlene Kammerer upheld the action.
Johnson had refused to admit a self-avowed, practicing gay man into membership in the church.
Decision 1032, based on Paragraphs 214 and 225 of the denomination’s law book, The Book of Discipline, said the paragraphs are “permissive, and do not mandate receipt into membership of all persons regardless of their willingness to affirm membership vows.” The ruling meant that the pastor in charge of a local church has authority to determine a layperson’s readiness for membership.
The pastor returned to his pulpit after the court’s decisions, but the case’s impact extended far beyond Virginia. Various annual conferences and other groups have protested the ruling, while others have supported it. General Conference legislation filed in response to the case did not pass in 2008.
The Northern Illinois, Arkansas and Minnesota annual conferences asked the Judicial Council to reconsider the decision.
What annual conferences cannot do, the court ruled, is define church law, as the Northern Illinois Annual Conference did when it passed legislation this year on church membership and sexual identity based on its interpretation of the church’s constitution.
During the Judicial Council’s October 28 oral hearings, representatives for the Northern Illinois Conference argued that other parts of church law—namely Article IV of the denomination’s constitution—supersede the previous Judicial Council decision when it comes to matters of membership.
Jennifer Soule—an attorney for the Reconciling Ministries Network, which filed a brief in support of the conference’s petition, and who described herself as a lesbian—said they believe Decision 1032 “authorized unconstitutional discrimination based on homosexual status.” The network is an unofficial United Methodist organization that advocates for full inclusion of all people, regardless of sexual orientation, in the life of the church.
“All laws of the church are subjected to the constitution and, specifically, the guarantee of inclusiveness,” she argued.
The Rev. Gayle Felton, the primary author of the 2004 denominational statement on Holy Communion, also argued on behalf of the Northern Illinois Conference.
“We believe that the church is in the business of making Christians,” Felton said about the present-day denomination. “To do this, it must baptize and then shape.”
But the Rev. Thomas Lambrecht, a Wisconsin pastor representing Good News, an unofficial United Methodist evangelical caucus, said the conference was trying to ignore the parts of the Book of Discipline with which they disagree. “What we have here is the case of an annual conference deciding what the constitution means,” he said.
Lambrecht argued that annual conferences are not empowered to legislate or regulate church membership or the duties of the pastor, so the Judicial Council did not have jurisdiction.
Judicial Council decided that the Northern Illinois Conference did not have the authority to take such actions. “An annual conference is not permitted to devise and define its own policies or rules relating to the conditions, privileges and duties of church membership,” the council said. “Such efforts violate the Discipline and are unlawful.”
The council also ruled it did not have the authority to answer another Northern Illinois request to decide whether an action by the 2008 General Conference “supersedes” Decision 1032 because it does not relate directly to the business of the Northern Illinois Conference.
The 2008 General Conference amended Paragraph 225 of the Discipline, replacing the word “may” with “shall.” The revised sentence reads: “A member in good standing in any Christian denomination who has been baptized and who desires to unite with The United Methodist Church shall be received as either a baptized or professing member.”
In a concurring opinion, William B. Lawrence agreed the council did not have the authority to issue an official pronouncement, but said he does believe that action of the 2008 General Conference did “at least in part” supersede the earlier Judicial Council decision. Fellow council members Katherine Austin Mahle and Susan T. Henry-Crowe joined him in that opinion.
Split opinion. The fact that the council believes it “lacks jurisdiction” for reconsideration, as ruled in a decision on a Minnesota Conference petition, does not mean that all council members support the 2005 decision. Gray, who wrote a dissent when Decision 1032 was issued, said he still believes the case “was wrongly decided.”
But Gray does not “look favorably” on continued requests for review or reconsideration, he wrote in a concurring opinion.
“Efforts to nuance or explain away the meaning of Decision 1032 through conference policies, resolutions or sophistry do nothing to achieve the true goal of clarifying the issue of inclusive membership for the Church as a whole,” he wrote.
Everyone has a stake in this case, said Beth Capen, a council member who originally dissented on Decision 1032. She pointed out that “the implications of the case potentially affect every annual conference, clergy member, and lay member in the connection.”
Linda Bloom is a United Methodist News Service multimedia reporter.
by Steve | Jan 19, 2011 | Magazine Articles
By Frank Decker
If you are a pastor, perhaps you remember how people began treating you differently when your identity changed from “student” to “minister.” You began to notice that the types of parties to which you were invited were tamer and the jokes people told in your presence had a more stringent filter. And, the moment you were introduced as “Reverend” certain masks seemed to appear. I remember the very week, over 30 years ago, when that unwanted barrier arose, and have been wrestling with that tension ever since. Over the years there have been many times when I have wondered how different my witness would have been had I pursued the secular vocation of my choosing and served Jesus in that context.
I suspect most people in mainstream Christianity view ordination and pastoral ministry as the apex of the ministerial calling: that thing that one does if he or she is “called to the ministry.” And yet, ironically, the “minister” label is an aid to the spread of the gospel only in places where Jesus has already been made known. In other words, missionally speaking, the title of “Christian minister” is, in my opinion, rarely helpful and often a distraction. In fact, when I travel to frontier mission contexts, primarily in Asia, there are times when I’ve found it more helpful to identify myself (truthfully) as a “cross-cultural trainer” or an “administrator.” On one visit to some fish farms, I was even advised by my Muslim host to indicate that I was a “tilapia taster.”
This begs the question, has the professionalization of ministry facilitated this irony, this dilemma?
Sometimes I find myself envying folks like my friend Jay, who seems freer to move into peoples’ lives without the identity of “minister.” Jay and his wife are preparing to serve through The Mission Society in the Muslim world. His profession? He owns a heating and air conditioning repair company.
According to Jay, “Our missionary training pointed us towards visiting a mosque, which then led to invitations by our new Muslim friends to attend several of their community events.” As Jay began to relate his story, I thought of the contrast between his incarnational approach of going out and visiting people in their mosque and the image of a church committee sitting around a table trying to figure out how to get more people to attend their worship services.
Jay explains how his vocation is a great asset. “It was definitely my work that presented the best opportunity to know Muslim families. The first Muslim man I met was Abu. When I was in his house repairing his furnace, I started asking questions about Islam. I was asking because I genuinely wanted to learn more about his faith and his Pakistani upbringing. We had a great conversation, and before it was over I asked him if non-Muslims were allowed to visit his mosque. He eagerly offered an invitation for me to visit there. I was then introduced to the leader who is in charge of the mosque. We quickly became friends. Finally, one of the men suggested that I pin a stack of my business cards to the bulletin board in the mosque. This has provided for me an introduction to many Muslim homes, pre-approved by the imam. And many constructive conversations about faith and the Lord Jesus have resulted.”
So, am I advocating that if the Lord is calling you to ordained ministry, you should desert that call, or that we should ditch the idea of the ordained ministry altogether? By no means. And I don’t think I missed God’s calling by following the path of ordination, either. However, what I am saying is this: As the Body of Christ, let’s own the fact that after 2,000 years of church history, about a quarter of the world’s population has yet to even hear the gospel. In response, let’s behave as if we really do believe in the priesthood of all believers, viewing the professional clergy not as perched at the summit of ministry, but rather as vital equippers living in the base camp, enabling those who can find their way into peoples’ homes and lives because they can fix their furnaces better than they can preach a sermon.
After all, the light of Jesus is sometimes more likely to advance into new places clothed in overalls or a nurse’s uniform rather than a black robe.
by Steve | Jan 19, 2011 | Magazine Articles
Déjà vu at Claremont
President Jerry Campbell of Claremont School of Theology is quoted in the September/October 2010 issue of Good News as dismissing evangelizing other faiths when he says Christians have “an incorrect perception of what it means to follow Jesus” This is an old argument, some 80 years old. In 1932, Re-thinking Missions by William E. Hocking of Harvard was published. It was the thinking of many in the liberal denominations. In general, the thinking was that missionaries were a mistake, because there was nothing really unique about Christianity to bring to other faiths. This thinking was successful in the missionary programs of liberal denominations. But God be praised, the Church in China and in Africa ignored Hocking and his colleagues. After 80 years, shouldn’t we expect something better than old discredited ideas from our seminaries?
Douglas W. Rettig
Viola, Illinois
Drifted from our roots
I am one of two members who have been attending our local United Methodist church since birth. We’ve attended longer than any of the present members. I can cry myself to sleep about the condition of the United Methodist Church—how it has drifted from the Wesleyan tradition and the roots our forefathers planted. There are a number in our congregation who have left the church to find spiritual food and feel a part of the church family. It’s disheartening to see United Methodist membership declining.
Thank you so much for your efforts of renewal within the United Methodist Church.
Name withheld
Beginning to wake up
I am 89 years old and I have been a Methodist since birth. It is sad what has happened to our church. Fortunately, my local church is still faithful.
I do think that through the efforts of Good News, people are beginning to wake up.
Thanks.
Mr. and Mrs. Bernard J. Bartels
Snyder, Texas
Can do so no longer
I have recently de-activated my United Methodist membership due to theological differences with a very liberal pastor. Per your advice, I hung in there a long time, but I can do so no longer.
Name withheld
An encouragement
I have been negligent in sending some money but I do want to keep Good News coming to me. I am a member of a small UM church and it seems with each pastor assigned to us the messages become more liberal and generic. The church is proud of its good works but not concerned with spiritual growth and at times it is very discouraging.
To know, through reading Good News, that there are still some genuine, born-again believers in the United Methodist denomination is an encouragement.
I am 80 years old, on a limited income, and at present taking chemo treatments for abdominal cancer but my God is faithful and sustains and keeps me.
Keep working for Him.
R.D.
Kansas
