Duke Divinity Call & Response Blog

I wanted to post this to my facebook but I was afraid BoOM folks might see it and get mad at me...

...and our first commenter drives the point home.

Here's my concern.

Seems every candidate who is discouraged somewhere in process is convinced it is because they are "too smart, (and) too wickedly inventive." But it ain't always so.

When I see us turn down candidates who have no social skills, or who disparage any intellectual engagement with the Christian tradition -- then I'll be ready to listen to the way we clobber down real talent. But at the moment I'm hard pressed to think of anyone who has been discouraged in recent years, at least in my area.

How about encouraging people to write honestly, and let the chips fall where they will. Good exercise for the eventual practice of ministry, right? Because if they look at ordination as a way to "get over" the no-nothings on their committees, why will they ever stop?

The Anonymous responder before this post highlights a problem. They are absolutely right that some are not fit for ordination for various reasons and not just because a candidate is too smart. However, the dCOMs need to do a better job of discerning a person's character before leading someone on through 3 yrs of education and possibly tens-of-thousands of dollars of Educational Debt. If it's their education/ theology that is the issue then the University Senate needs to do a better job of discerning which institutions and courses are adequate.

The problem, in my humble opinion, is that the UMC is an organizational system that is asking for change. Yet, we continue to run potential clergy through a process that demands bending to the way the system is currently. The result is that the system will not change because only those who will perpetuate it as it is will be commissioned/ ordained.

I have great respect for the task of the varying BOMs and they have a daunting task before them. Our connectional system is made up of our clergy and if change is going to occur then change in our clergy only seems logical. Are the ones already ordained going to change? Hopefully, as the Holy Spirit leads them. May there be a change in who we ordain? Hopefully, as the Holy Spirit leads them.

Thank you Rev. Howell for this blogpost! It does give many of us in the process (even provisional members) permission to be creative. As a provisional deacon, I feel that I have been allowed to be more creative in my annual conference, just because that is what deacons are "supposed to do." I have become weary, and was just this morning thinking, that it seems that young clergy are being stifled. We say we want more and more young clergy, but when we do stand up, and try to create spaces and avenues to work which go against the status quo, we seem to be shut down, either before the process of ordination, or during the provisional process, and even for some, post-ordination (if they make it that far.) If the church is going to be the church, and if the church is going to say that they want more young people, then let us be creative! My favorite poet once said, "We have to create, it is the only thing that is louder than destruction." If we are not allowed to be creative, then more and more of us are going to leave for various reasons. The UMC is a wonderful church. I love her. But we have to start getting creative, and allowing ourselves, our candidates, our young clergy, our "crazy, eccentric" clergy to be creative and do things in a different way, or yes, we will die a slow death.

Maybe ordination candidates can take a hint from the Wesley brothers: let your "creative" juices flow after your ordination. To be sure, the Anglican Church (the United Methodist denomination is now in their shoes as the "Established Church"!) didn't take kindly to what their own priests' ideas were in terms of "being in mission," but in the end, their fruitful ministry turned the Church upside down and that mission was eventually affirmed by those cautious Anglicans (why else would a statue of John Wesley stand on the grounds of St. Paul's Cathedral, London?). Don't let a simple thing like ordination stop you from proclaiming the Gospel to all.

Thanks so much, James.

I've told a number of people that in the five or six years I was a candidate for ministry or a probationary minister, while clergy who took the time to know me were always encouraging and generous, all too often my experience of senior clergy was that they wanted to set up roadblocks that had very little to do with my skills or abilities and more to do with their stereotypes.

With my church's blessing, I studied law after finishing seminary. And in three years as a law student, dozens of lawyers reached out to offer chances to visit their firms, shadow for a day, talk about career decisions, or discuss the privileges and demands of the legal profession.

You'd think the market forces alone would lead the church to invest some energy in recruiting the best possible future clergy (which I see as being totally consistent with a theology of vocation). But no, quite the opposite.

The funny part is that I was a better minister than I am a lawyer. And yet I identify proudly as a lawyer now, and encourage young people to consider my profession. When I talk to young ministers, my attitude is different. I encourage them to see district and conference boards of ordained ministry as an obstacle and an aberration -- say what you need to get through -- so that the church will not lose the benefit of their energy and wisdom in its service.

The mention of creativity leads my mind to art. In that vein, the great artists, poets, musicians, and literary figures know what rules they are breaking, and do so intentionally (much as you did when you jaywalked). But somewhere in an artist's history, he/she learned the basics of the color wheel, lines of perspective, 4/4 time, etc. Somewhere in the pastor's history, he/she too must take classes in the basics, on bible, church history, theology, etc. Every pedestrian should start by using the crosswalk, only then will they learn how not to endanger anyone. So where is the proper place for testing of minimum standards? That is the question. Seminary? BoOM? I don't argue your point calling for more coloring outside the lines in the parish. But, I still value someone somewhere asking me to articulate the difference between my contextually based theological practice and my making stuff up because it's cool.

Great conversation - I guess I'm not referring to people with questionable training or a kooky creativity, but rather those who are quite sound theologically, and often sharper about Christianity's intersection with real life than those of us jaded by ministry over the decades, who find the process demoralizing, who look unsafe because they weren't raised Methodist, or didn't follow the MYF-WesleyFoundation-from a known church, saying all the right things, I'll never question authority type of track - The people I would nominate to be the next generation's leaders: they are the ones who are emailing me today saying Right on. I guess that's what troubles me.

This is a fantastic post. I am not UMC, but in my experience at Duke, I have found creativity to be treated by the institution as more of a hassle for the policy-makers than a gift for the edification of the church.

Interestingly, this has been more true of my experience with Field Education than in the classroom. In fact, it has been my professors and teachers who have encouraged me to explore--and creatively name-- what it looks like to be part of God's work in "reconciling all things." (Consider Dr. Jennings's "case studies", Dr. Hall's "one word exegesis" papers, Dr. D.Campbell's caution against the "demonic types of extrinsic motivation" that abound in the school, and well, pretty much everything that Chaps does...)

Paradoxically, it has been those charged with helping students make their first foray into the life of ministry that have been the least willing to explore new *particular* ways of being the church. The ones "on the ground" so to speak, have been the ones least attuned to the fine texture of our lives! (Again, this is merely one perspective-- and it is from a non-UMC'er at that.)

If theologians are those navel-gazers who deal in irrelevant "theoria", and ministers/administrators are the ones oozing practical wisdom, you would never know it in your interactions with those respective professionals.

Thus, Dr. Hauerwas's observation: "That the manager has become characteristic of liberal politics should not be surprising, but I continue to be taken aback by the preponderance of such character types in the ministry."

I can't help but wonder if the future minister's creativity isn't squished out in the classroom-- but rather in the process that constitutes the "other half" of the MDiv degree.

Thanks again for your words.
-Matt

PS- I apologize if I hijacked your helpful sentiments, and applied them to a particular instance in a way that was unhelpful. Your observation stands even if my comments are off-base!

James,
I interview with the board this week. I have been feeling really aware of what a hard thing it is for all of us. We (candidates, BoOM, colleagues, church members) want God's best for our church. We don't always know or agree on what that is or how to get there.
When I look at my provisional colleagues in the conference in which I serve (on loan) and in the conference in which I am interviewing, I see people who love Jesus and want to serve well and faithfully through the UMC. Each one of us has some amazing strengths and some pretty remarkable shortcomings. We've heard and and answered a call to give of ourselves, and so here we are.
I have received (and, I admit, mostly followed) the advice that this is not the time to go out on a limb. But I will present who I really am. If asked, I will share my hopes and dreams for myself and for our ministry together as a church. I will not try to rile anyone up, but I am also not planning on dumbing things down or looking safe. If the board (as a representative of the church) decides to accept my offer of service and recommend me for ordination, it should know what it is getting. If there are areas where the board feels I still need to grow, I will work on them and return.
One of the gifts of my time as a provisional elder has been the opportunity to confront and work through my fear of the board and the process. I trust that God will continue to raise up God's people for God's purposes, and I sincerely hope that we in the UMC will be wise enough, faithful enough, maybe crazy enough, to roll with it.

Amen...the BOM would deny John the Baptist given the chance.

Thanks James,
One year I refused to fill out one of the year end reports to just see what would happen. No one even noticed!

There is fear. Fear that those who feel called to ministry and attend seminary will know more, be smarter, have a better grasp of theology, will ask "Why not?" instead of saying "We never did it that way before, so we won't do it that way now," may run faster, jump higher, and might be empowered to leap tall buildings in a single bound.

And so the newly initiated must be held in check until those charged with choosing who is worthy to serve the people of God through ordination have determined that the newly minted have all the standard beliefs sharply in focus, carved in rigid detail, and thus will not be easily discernible from their forebears so that when they stand next to older renditions minted in the same way, no one can tell the difference between the two generations, and nothing can change. Lex creendi, lex orandi, and all will be right with the world.

After all, the High Priests and Scribes felt that way about Jesus, but they needn't have worried. Jesus was a conformist. He was carved of the same stuff as the Pharisees, wasn't he? He didn't stand out from the background of the traditional Judaism of his day and time, did he? He turned nothing inside out, or upside down because he went along to get along: it was easier that way. That was his stock-in-trade, his signature, his stamp on history. Right?

Thank you so much for writing this! I too am afraid to put my name with my story.

Everywhere I turn I am affirmed in ministry: from my church, through service on several Conference committees, through publication in denominational literature, from leadership in my District, from presenting workshops in multiple districts, from my RIOM leaders, from my pastoral coach, and from the many pastors I work with in many different arenas. Yet, I do not interview well and cannot seem to pass the Board of Ordained Ministry. I am middle of the road theologically. I am not out doing crazy things other than loving people in the name of Jesus.

These people who know me only from an hour or two of video and a two and a half hour interview get to say yay or nay about my ability to minister and the fruit of the ministry God does using me as a humble instrument. The process doesn't feel biblical or even practical in many ways. The people on the Board don't know me and don't try to.

People who walk alongside me on a long term basis affirm me and the BOM doesn't seem to see any of that.

I am working with a coach, so hopefully this year I will interview more effectively. But is an interview really the best way to make sure the best pastors are serving churches?

And what are the statistics of who gets deferred by the BOM? Most of the ones I am aware of are female and most are second career.

Some are more conservative than others, a euphemism for less open to permitting females in the pulpit, a shame in this day and age, but nevertheyless a telling thing about who's on first. And I won't sign my name, either, because anonymity permits honesty.

As a clergy of a fear-filled conference embroiled in the predictable debates and "good-ole' boy" patriarchy, we decided to recruit, invite, and encourage our newest class of ordinands to kick up some dirt, throw some furniture, and to grab a microphone to stand up against the way we've perverted the gospel to utter boredom. What happened at this event-- because our youngest clergy didn't know they needed to be afraid-- was nothing short of a miracle. Old clergy and lay folk cried because they'd never seen anything like it in the forty plus years of irrelevance called "Annual Conference." Please, dear God, send us a few more trouble-makers!!!!!

Hmm...I didn't grow up Methodist, but now I wonder: should I ask James Howell to proofread my BOOM papers or not? ;)

I served on the BOM for 8 years, and my prayer is that the current board members will take their roles seriously but temper that with good old common sense and compassion. I also vividly remember my time with the board and was so terrified knowing that my future rested on that hour and a half on interviews!

AMEN

I have continuously heard a lot of criticism of our ordination process from all quarters, however, my own experience (ordained in 2010, Louisiana Conference) did not feel particularly stiffling or anything like that. We had to attend a few meeetings a year for 3 years in which a sermon or theology paper was discussed (usually, not in too much detail). But for the other 355 days of the year the process had very little to do with the ministry I was actually doing on the ground, and certainly didn't do much to "smother creativity" in what outreach projects we attempted or anything like that. Though I've heard the BOM in this conference is less "adversarial" than in some other places.

Among the people with whom I went through the process (my ordination class and those a year ahead and behind us) only a handful did not make it through. One often neglected to turn anything in and often skipped meetings (maybe the "run across the grass kind of guy?"), one was extremely awkward in social settings and found it difficult to interact with others and was having real trouble with the actual work of a pastor (here is one the DCOM should have discouraged before he went to our most expensive seminary for 3 years, but I guess we are too nice for that?); a couple people were asked to defer a year because of theological concerns but were eventually ordained to be sure. I didn't see the process as asking anything unreasonable of us, and the many of us who made it through represent all sorts of different thinkers, personalities, and styles. I also enjoyed getting to know my collegues much better because we had to attend the events together. On the whole it was as positive an any evaluative experience could be.

However, I can think of one person that really seemed to me to be creative, energetic, and out of the box, who withdrew towards the end of the process - I don't know the details of his discernment of course, but I couldn't help but think if he had only stuck it out a few more months he would have been done with the process...and it seems that somehow the process and "the way we UMs do things" in general (slowly) really was a stumbling block for him, and that really is sad to me.

I too enjoy cutting across the grass, but I believe that the process showed me what yard I should be in. The whole process was a growing experience in my life and I have no problem inviting those I mentor to honestly open themsevles up to it. Will some folks be hurt? Yes, but that happens in ministry. Will some folks be asked to wait? Yes, but we don't get everything that we want in ministry. Will some folks write about the "bad system" in blogs. Yes, but the best ministerial way we can help the system is provide candidates with preparation for it...not rail against it in some faint hope that we're going to make things better by keystroke. In my experience, folks who take it seriously and who accept it as a learning experience do just fine...and often they serve healthy churches who are cutting across the grass as well.

James offers excellent insight. The future of parish ministry will demand an encouragement to "cut across the yard" of innovation and spontaneity, and bypass the sidewalk of tradition. Being a life-long Baptist, having served Baptist parishes for 35 plus years in the "moderate" realm of Baptist life, I envy my brothers and sisters in those traditions who at least have "standards" by which to select and ordain. Most Baptist church, which are in the free church traditon, don't. Thanks, James, from a thoughtful Baptist to a thoughtful Methodist.

Well, yes, Rev. Howell. Absolutely correct. In my view, the church's needs have outgrown that suit of clothes and we are still requiring people to fit into them to be chosen. Ordination processes need a "What Not to Wear" intervention.

As a "follow-the-rules" type of person, I tend to stick to the crosswalks and stay off the grass. A year or so away from the BoOM process, I am already very aware of what constitutes jaywalking and exactly where the safety patrol will be located. However, as much as we within the church rely on tradition, without innovation I fear we are doomed. Thanks for your insight.

I shall make my affirmative comment once I go before the board for full connection next year. For now, that should be enough.

I don't disagree w/your comments about the system. I do question how you define creativity. I sometimes disregard the crosswalks and break the rules, but that doesn't mean I'm a creative person. Maybe I just think I'm too good to have to follow the rules.

If you've gone or are in seminary, I doubt any systematic theology professors would accept "creative" answers to assignments. You are taught to engage with theology in a certain way and to write about it. What's the big deal about doing similar writing for the ordination as you would do for any seminary class?

I think the commenter is correct who wrote indicating "I do question how you define creativity. . . maybe I just think I'm too good to have to follow the rules." Creativity is such a highly subjective description.