Clamping Down on Retirees in the UMC

Update: The 2020/24 General Conference did not adopt these petitions. The Ordained Ministry legislative committee overwhelmingly voted not to recommend them for adoption and they died in committee. I am grateful for the decision.

In October 2024, the Judicial Council issued a decision affecting the service of retired clergy. See Judicial Council Decision 1514.

As I looked over the petitions to General Conference, I was extremely disappointed to read the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry’s proposed revision of paragraphs 344.1.d and 357.6 in the Book of Discipline. The petitions seek to prohibit retired clergy from taking “paid or unpaid positions” in non-United Methodist churches without the approval of the bishop and the Board of Ordained Ministry. 

United Methodist clergy members shall not serve in paid or unpaid positions in non-United Methodist churches without the prior approval of the bishop and the Board of Ordained Ministry. 
- Proposed change to 344.1.d.

 A retired associate member or ordained minister wishing to serve a non-United Methodist church shall request approval from the bishop and Board of Ordained Ministry before beginning in a paid or unpaid position in a non-United Methodist church.
- Proposed change to 357.6

The relevant petitions are 20908-OM-¶344.1d, 20917-OM-¶357.6 and 20920-OM-¶359. 

On the plus side, this at least codifies what some bishops and superintendents have tried to impose on retired clergy without any foundation in the Book of Discipline, but that's the only positive thing I can think to say. It is wrong, and it is wrongheaded. I hope that General Conference rejects this change and maintains the current policy for retired elders. 

Ministry in Retirement

The church ordains elders to ministries of word, sacrament, order, and service - and deacons to ministries of word, service, compassion, and justice - and the call to ordained ministry does not end with retirement.  Authority to preach the word and administer the sacraments is inherent in ordination. Moreover, the UMC ordained me to be a presbyter for the whole church, not just for United Methodists. This is absolutely clear from 26 years of word and sacrament in a military setting where I ministered to Christians from countless denominations.

One of the blessings of the retired status is the freedom that it gives you to move fluidly among various forms of ministry in the wider church. Clergy in the retired status perform Christian ministry, take part in Christian service, and participate in Christian community in a wide variety of settings, and have done so since long before the disaffiliation crisis precipitated by the 2019 General Conference. Retirement gives you the flexibility to take on forms of ministry that might last anywhere from a few days to a several years. Your avenue of may occupy a few hours of work each week, or it can be a full-time job. You are free to follow the call of the moment. For retirees, the world is indeed our parish. We preach the gospel, teach the Bible, and administer the sacraments wherever God calls us. 

Currently, as a retired elder in full connection, the Book of Discipline requires me to 

  • Belong to a charge conference. 
  • Report my ministerial acts to the charge conference. 
  • Attend annual conference or write a letter to the conference secretary explaining my absence. 

While the Discipline is frustratingly silent about the legal details of clergy membership in a charge conference - and most congregations don’t seem to know or care about this relationship - my good standing as a member of the charge conference is a matter for the charge conference to determine. 

There is currently nothing in the Book of Discipline which restricts the authorities invested in me as a retired elder as there are for those on honorable location or leave of absence. The requirement to report my ministerial activities to the charge conference in retirement implies that they continue. 

Paragraph 357.6 currently permits the appointment of retired clergy, but does not require it. Obviously, retired elders require an appointment to serve as pastors in charge of United Methodist congregations. The bishops own those pulpits. Otherwise, the paragraph is permissive, not directive.

There is no requirement to report my actions directly to the annual conference or to seek its permission for my actions. The prohibitions of paragraphs 341 and 2702 continue to apply, but I am otherwise free to exercise my ministry as God calls within the scope of my ordination.

How are Retirees Currently Treated?

I previously served as the denominational endorsing agent for clergy in certain extension ministries and appointments beyond the local church. Many of our endorsed clergy, upon reaching retirement from the annual conference, continued to be employed in the settings for which they were endorsed. Some worked full time, others part time, still others on-call or under contract. The terms and conditions of their employment were fluid and changed over time.  While I encouraged those serving full-time or regular part-time to request an appointment, what I discovered was that very few were actually granted appointed status. Some bishops would not appoint retirees to any setting other than a United Methodist congregation. In other cases, appointment was optional. I am not aware of any case, however, in which a bishop claimed the authority to prohibit retired clergy from serving as chaplains, counselors, life coaches, spiritual directors, or CPE supervisors in retirement, or claimed that they could only do so under appointment or with episcopal permission. 

Many other clergy choose to serve as volunteer chaplains in retirement. Still other retired clergy serve as congregational coaches, subject matter experts in various fields, evangelists, and in other capacities that that take them into congregations both inside and outside the United Methodist Church. 

And, yes, some retirees serve non-UMC congregations. Clergy coming out of extensions ministries, in particular, develop non-UMC relationships that might lead them to serve in this capacity. Other retirees live near non-UMC churches with needs for pastoral leadership. As I understand it, prior to the disaffiliation crisis, it was not uncommon for retired clergy to serve in non-UMC congregations without episcopal interference or involvement. 

Maintaining the status quo makes sense to me. The conference no longer has a requirement to appoint retirees; it doesn’t owe them a place to serve. Neither does the retiree owe the conference any debt of service. The United Methodist Church is not harmed in the least by retired clergy providing services to others. It steals nothing from the United Methodist Church for a retiree to serve in any non-United Methodist capacity. The conference has no legitimate interest in the inner workings or decisions of non-UMC organizations which might choose to employ retired clergy, either on a paid or unpaid basis. The retiree’s setting in life requires the flexibility the status quo provides. It also and provides the retiree with unique opportunities that those serving under normal appointment don’t have. 

If it’s not broken, don’t fix it.

The Ambiguity of "Positions"

Both paragraphs 344.1.d and 357.6 concern appointments, so you might expect that the new prohibitions concern only ministries to which one could conceivably be appointed. The Judicial Council might determine that to be the case, but that’s not what the proposed amendment says. It says, “Paid or unpaid positions.” 

What, exactly, is a position and what did GBHEM intend to prohibit by including “unpaid” in the text of the petition? 

Bishops can interpret that broadly to include guest preaching, conducting training classes, or even weddings or funerals. It might even include teaching a class, serving on a committee, participating in service projects, or participating in prayer groups if they are sponsored by non-UMC congregations. 

Given what is prompting the proposed change, the criteria for approval is likely to change from “is this a valid Christian ministry for which there is a need that the applicant can fill” to “this doesn’t help those other guys, does it?”

It also appears that GBHEM wants to preclude United Methodists from taking any role in the judicatory of other denominations, regardless of episcopal approval. The petition on paragraph 357.6 modifies final sentence of the paragraph, so that retired clergy “may serve only on United Methodist conference agencies.”

Stuck in a Bureaucratic Morass

The proposal requires a retiree to obtain the approval of both the bishop and the Board of Ordained Ministry prior to beginning a paid or unpaid position in a non-United Methodist church. This requirement is unworkable for many appointments. It would be a nightmare to extend it to activities that do not require appointments. 

I watched this first hand as the endorsing agent for the denomination. When people applied for endorsement as a chaplain or a pastoral counselor, I asked the applicants’ bishops if, in theory, they would appoint the individuals if suitable employment was found. Endorsees could act on that promise, but employment still often preceded actual appointment. When the Board of Ordained Ministry is involved, extend the timeline by months. I applied for my previous job with GBHEM in September 2017, was hired at the beginning of October, began work at the beginning of November, and received word that my Board of Ordained Ministry approved my appointment at the end of January. And this was a case where Board approval was not actually required, since this was an appointment to an agency of the church (344.1.a). 

Now add forms of ministry that do not include appointment or maybe even employment. Quick decisions are required. Opportunities are fleeting. The Board of Ordained Ministry, with its expanded workload, takes even longer to decide. The proposed ministry endeavor could begin and end before the Board of Ordained Ministry even has a chance to look at the request. 

In the real world, opportunities for ministry employment do not fit this kind of timeline. Opportunities present themselves. People apply and are offered employment. Work begins when the employer needs work to begin. The church bureaucracy catches up.

If approved, the petition will become a law that will frequently, of necessity, be broken, and one that will be selectively enforced. 

What GBHEM is proposing is more of the hidebound, moribund processes that have handcuffed our denomination. It doesn’t multiply ministry; it precludes many forms of ministry from ever coming to birth. When Bishop McAlilly chaired the denomination's Endorsing Committee, he lamented that the church put so many roadblocks in the way of Christians performing ministry. He was right.

Equity

The petitions, as written, only apply to retired clergy serving in congregational settings. It leaves other clergy untouched. 

In one sense, it is unfair to those called to congregational ministry in retirement. Why should these settings be treated differently than other forms of ordained ministry performed by retirees? Why are there more restrictions and more hoops to jump through?

In another sense, however, it sends exactly the wrong message to those who serve outside of congregational settings, both active and retired. It says that extension ministries are unimportant and can be ignored. That’s a message that the denomination already sends to clergy whose service takes them beyond the local church. Ask a chaplain sometime whether they’ve ever heard the words, “Why did you leave the ministry?” In the history of Methodist chaplaincy, I found that question going back as far as World War II. During my career, I’ve been told that extension ministers only needed to report to the conference once per quadrennium (the Discipline says, annually), that we didn’t need to attend district clergy meetings, that we didn’t need to meet with the DS (but the congregational pastors did). On the conference level, I heard "Let's shorten the required annual meeting between extension ministers and the bishop to a breakfast at conference with time for introductions, and then shorten it again to a stand-up with coffee and mingling." Was the conference being kind by letting me off the hook, or was it telling me that my ministry didn't matter all that much? What I heard was the latter.  

We are going to tell retirees who minister in congregational settings, in any way, and for any length of time, that we are going inject ourselves into how they use their retirement time. We can't trust them to make their own decisions. To the rest we will say, meh, do what you want. Frankly, it's insulting to both groups.

As a basic principle, there should be no difference for retired clergy serving anywhere outside the United Methodist connection. The rules should be the same for everyone. All elders have the same authorities by virtue of their ordination.

A Momentary Lapse of Grace

The proposed change codifies what some bishops have tried to impose on their own authority in the last few years. Given the context, it's impossible to see it as anything other than a direct response to the disaffiliation crisis. Disaffiliated churches and retired clergy who might dare darken their doors are the targets of this action. I'm sure that many will tell themselves that it's about the principle of accountability. From my foxhole, it sure looks like it's about power and control. The need to control, in turns, arises out of the pain and anger of the moment. This unfortunate turn toward autocracy is understandable, but it's still wrong.

The proposals change the fundamental nature of the relationship between retirees and the conferences. The annual conference takes the place of the charge conference as the primary point of contact and accountability with the retiree. The relationship shifts from one of trust and grace to one of micromanagement and control. The change would be permanent. The pain and anger, I hope, are temporary.

In Summary

The petitions are:

  • Unnecessary
  • Dangerously ambiguous
  • Practically unworkable
  • Inequitable
  • An emotional response to anger and pain

General Conference should reject these petitions.

Popular posts from this blog

The Beatitudes and Wesleyan Piety

Of the 44 sermons John Wesley wrote to be doctrinal standards for the Methodists in England, 13 were expositions of the Sermon on the Mount, which Wesley believed prescribed the practice of true religion. Three sermons were on the Beatitudes. Wesley interpreted the Beatitudes within the framework of 18th century evangelical piety, specifically the Wesleyan understanding of full salvation. To be fair, Wesley’s approach to the Beatitudes had a long history. The Church has commonly interpreted them in terms of personal piety and individual salvation.  Wesley did recognize some of the eschatological aspects of the Beatitudes. Those who find comfort in clinging fully to the promises of God will still mourn “the sins and miseries of mankind. They ‘weep with them that weep.’” The meek will not only inherit life oriented around God in heaven, they will also inherit the promise of Revelation, “the new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” God will acknowledge the peacemakers to be ...
Read more

On the Installation of a Pastor

2 Timothy 4:1-5 Timothy was not a pastor of a local congregation, but rather Paul’s apostolic legate. He was Paul’s representative in the oversight of the churches that Paul founded. Still, much of what Paul has to say is applicable to the pastor we are installing today.  For the Pastor So, to the new pastor, the apostle says this. Preach the word. Teach the faith. Evangelize the world. Do the work of ministry, a word whose basic meaning in Greek is service.  Preach. Teach. Evangelize. Serve. These might be called global tasks of ministry. They would be included in any list of pastoral responsibilities, and I have no doubt that your new pastor excels in them But Paul reminds Timothy that preaching, teaching, evangelizing, and serving are not abstract tasks that one can do by oneself. One does not preach to the wind or teach an empty classroom. There are people on the other end of our preaching, teaching, evangelizing and serving. In the words of Jesus. The whol...
Read more

Agree to Disagree

Image
What would it look like for Christians to agree to disagree in a manner consistent with what John Wesley called " The Catholic Spirit "? Let me begin with a small experience with the Catholic Church. The Corpus Christi Procession My wife and I stopped downtown for lunch after chapel on Sunday. On the way out of the city after lunch we had to stop the car to allow the passing of a Catholic parade in honor of Christ's transubstantial presence in the Holy Eucharist. The procession celebrated the Catholic feast of Corpus Christi , or the Solemnity of The Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ . As the procession passed by us, I hopped out of the car and grabbed these photos with my cell phone. A cross-bearer leads the procession. Beneath the canopy, a monstrance contains the consecrated host, the "substance" of which Catholics believe has become the body of Christ. The bearer of the monstrance is wearing a humeral veil so that he doesn't have to touch the ...
Read more