2020_010_A
Support the Café
Search our site

Is the clergy deployment system broken?

Is the clergy deployment system broken?

by Donald J. Muller

I want to suggest that one of the reasons for the decline and continued decline of our Episcopal Church is a broken clergy deployment system. I think our church needs to examine this system. I want to pose this because I don’t hear anything about it in the discussions around the decline in membership of the Episcopal Church. Let me name some of the issues that I see:

The prohibition of an incumbent rector/vicar being involved in the profile and/or search process;

The lengthy interim periods between rectors;

The necessity of calling an interim priest/rector and the things they do;

No one to advise the clergy who are in the calling process;

The lack of clarity in the transfer of pastoral care and leadership to the new rector

I have been a priest for 29 years, a curate for two of those, and rector of four churches for the remaining years. I believe that no one knows a parish better than the current rector (if they have been there for at least three years – maybe five). The bishop may have been in that parish once or less a year, and rarely has a Diocesan staff person been on site. Parochial reports which tell some of the story of a congregation and almost never examined in detail. The Vestry members rotate on and off. I am now serving my fourth parish as Rector over the 29 years of my ordained ministry. Each of the parishes I‘ve served has had an interim period between my predecessor and myself of 18 months to over two years. Twice I’ve followed long term Rectors who have retired and twice I’ve followed priests who have gone on to other parishes. The interim period between them seems to be no different. In all four cases, my predecessor had absolutely nothing to do with the transition. Yet, those four priests knew the parishes better than anyone in the Diocesan office, or even in the parish itself. None of the Vestry members currently serving were in that position when I was called five and a half years ago. I am now the one who knows this parish best, my knowledge should at least be used in the process of putting a profile of the parish together.

Over the course of my ministry I had observed first hand and second hand the lengthy interim periods between Rectors. In some cases the long time between rectors was intentional by the Diocesan Office because of the long tenure of the previous rector. At other times the process just takes too long. I think this is a detriment to the forward movement in ministry for the congregation and for their overall self worth. Sunday worship attendance shrinks and doesn’t seem to recover. I know from my work in evangelism that when people start disappearing on Sundays mornings unless they are recovered very quickly they drift away and do not come back. I’ve heard that the length of the interim is proportional to the time the last rector was in place, that congregations need to grieve the death of that pastoral relationship. My experience as a pastor, over 29 years, tells me that the grief process has no certain time line. It matters not whether a person dies suddenly or over a long period of time – each individual family member grieves in their own time and in their own way. This is true in congregations, as well. If a congregation is healthy why not get a new rector/vicar in place as soon as possible so that the ministry trajectory remains forward? There will be parishioners who will leave because the new rector is not the old one. There will be those who leave because they were very attached to the old one. But most are more likely to stay around and see what the new priest will be like, if the time period is short.

I understand that there are various understandings about what interim priests do (rectors – I don’t like that term, because interims do not have the Canonical authority of Instituted Rectors). Some believe they should expose the congregation to the great breadth of the Episcopal tradition that they are not now experiencing. Some believe they should continue the ways things have been going and give most of their attention to pastoral care. There are interims who delve into every system that exists in the church to expose its faults and fix them; to remove persons in charge of ministries; to challenge the way “things have always been done.” My experience has shown me that real change happens with people we trust. A quick fix on the surface might be accomplished, but not a lasting deep down kind of change. Why not have Sunday supply priests who might also be on call for pastoral care or give one or two days a week for that purpose? The congregation then doesn’t invest in that priest.

Most Dioceses are very good at giving the vacant congregation advice in the calling process. Some have consultants, either paid for by the Diocese or the congregation, that give advice throughout the process. The consultants have extensive knowledge about the calling process and the particular process of that Diocese. Unfortunately, they don’t know the parish except as presented by the parishioners they interact with, and they don’t know the clergy who will be seeking a call. The clergy seeking another call have no one to advise them or care for them in the process. They are not experts in the process themselves. Perhaps they have been to CREDO and have had their CDO and resume shaped with expertise there, or the Diocesan Deployment Officer of their Diocese has helped them. But in the process itself, no one talks to them about the process; no one asks how they are doing; no one tells them anything until they get a letter saying they are out of the process or continuing, or that they have been called. This is frustrating for clergy, can lead to self doubt, loss of self worth, etc. It is also very hard for clergy to participate in a search process while still investing themselves fully in their present position and yet trying to be responsive to the parish that they are interested in or that is interested in them.

When a new Rector is called, the official investing of them with the powers and authority of the office of Rector (Institution) generally doesn’t happen for several weeks or even months. Some Dioceses don’t even schedule it until a priest has been in place quite a while because of such bad experiences in the calling of new rectors. The interim priest was there the week before and now there is a new priest. But other than the introducing of the new rector to the congregation by the warden or vestry member there is nothing official shown to the congregation. Almost twenty years ago I was asked to serve as the chaplain at a “Change of Command” of a Coast Guard based in Beach Haven, NJ. It was an interesting experience watching one Commanding Officer hand over all authority to another with the entire base bearing witness to the change. Would it make sense for us to have the incumbent hand over the keys (or the other symbols of the office) to the new Rector in person? It would make it very clear who the new Rector was. Would it make sense for the Institution (Celebration of New Ministry) to be the first worship the new Rector was at with the Bishop, Archdeacon, Dean, etc. presiding and preaching? It almost seems an afterthought for it to happen months down the road.

Perhaps it time to have some evaluation of how we do things now, to examine congregations from two years before a vacancy through two years after the call of the new priest. I wonder what we would find in terms of congregational strength and vitality, Average Sunday Attendance, financial health, etc.

The Rev. Canon Donald J. Muller, D. Min

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

24 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
C. Wingate

My parish has been through more than its share of transition problems: we are now going through another search, having had one rector who left and was replaced by someone who had problems with the vestry among others, and then a long interregnum ending with a priest-in-charge who, unintentionally, set the parish into a competition between worship styles. He also is now gone, and the parish has a decidedly burnt-out feel. And with each change we’ve lost a bunch of people through conflicts. I have to question how many parishes really have the kind of institutional stability to weather an interim who feels he has to “shake things up”; my experience, as one of the stubborn ones, is that parishioners feel they are taken for a captive audience, decide they can’t buck the rectory, and quit.

Leslie Scoopmire

The search process takes entirely too long, but I have seen some pitfalls with the new streamlined process whereby the Diocesan office gives a parish a list of a few names, and boom! the parish has to pick from that list.

I do like the hand-off idea, too.

Murdoch Matthew

I might have said more precisely, “The process in the diocese of New York recently has seemed to result in the Ordinary, in effect, choosing his successor.” I glossed over the process in favor of what looks like the outcome.

A controlling bishop can heavily influence selection of a coadjutor. Delegates to the electing convention know that they’re going to be dealing with the Ordinary for two more years — as will the coadjutor. It makes sense to choose someone compatible — even someone suspected of having the Ordinary’s approval. Great if you’re looking for continuity, not promising for a fresh start.

Richard E. Helmer

…in the diocese of New York recently, seems to have allowed the Ordinary to choose his successor…

Murdoch,

Please forgive what may be a naive question, but I am unsure if you are making a political statement here, or an unintentional misrepresentation of process. While ordinaries can call for the election of a coadjutor in The Episcopal Church, they cannot choose them.

Murdoch Matthew

Bill Carroll questions “calling a priest in charge with option to become incumbent.” Is this anything like the bishop coadjutor situation, which, in the diocese of New York recently, seems to have allowed the Ordinary to choose his successor.

Gary and I been through two interim ministries. In the first, the people-in-charge decided not to hire an experienced interim pastor and went with a relatively green curate. The people-in-charge have remained in charge. The interim period in our neighborhood parish has lasted for a decade. Suspicions are that the previous bishop was working to close the place; the new bishop has taken an interest and provided better leadership. But the decade has taken its toll — attendance is down, finances are shaky.

The problem isn’t just parish disorganization: Eric Bonetti is probably right in saying “declining enrollment primarily is a function of shifting social mores and shifting demographics.” We haven’t really answered the question “What is the church for?

In any event, a long interim looks to me like madness, a bureaucratic idea that complicates a personal process. No matter how much navel-gazing is done, the new rector will bring a new point of view and change the dynamics. I’m against clericalism and for lay leadership, but the Episcopal system doesn’t seem to work without someone in charge.

Facebooktwitterrss
Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café