i was chatting with the right reverend, chris perry, a couple weeks back about a lot of things. as always when we talk, i asked him about his progress at robinson springs united methodist church. as always when we talk, he asked me if anyone had firebombed my house because of my dirty little mouth on my blog. actually, he doesn't really ask that. but, he does ask me how i am feeling about things in general (he is nice like that) and how i am feeling about the church. this most recent conversation happened on the heels of blog-gate 2.0, version why can't kevin not say those words about cellphones and boring worship and george carlin or something like that. it's all a big ball of fuzz a few weeks removed. funny how i bet that seemed really important to some people in the moment. anyway, we got past blog-gate 2.0 and started talking about the church. he and i agreed that humc was in need of some serious victories. happy-stances that we could rally around, do together and feel good about ourselves for a little while. i mentioned that the halloween carnival was on the horizon, and, based on past experience, i hoped that the carnival would serve as just that. an event outside of worship where many in our congregation would actively choose to participate in some form or fashion, feel good about what will inevitably be a positive turnout and event, and wear a smile to church for a few weeks after. we are still in line to do those things. make the carnival happen. enjoy it and each other. smile for a few weeks after. use that positive to motivate us towards more positives. and i can't wait...
then this past sunday happened. nasty and i had already left the worship service sunday morning heading to atlanta when fonzie got on his skis. sarah called me just after we had said hello and good-bye to anniston, heading east on i-20.
"hey."
"hey."
"what's up?"
"i just wanted to tell you about harris' announcement/plea at the end of his sermon."
oh, god.
"go on."
"as he was finishing up his sermon, he came front and center, made sure everyone was paying attention to him and told us that if we didn't start filling up the pews on sunday morning, he was fairly certain the bishop was going to move him due to ineffectiveness."
...
alright.
i wasn't as much surprised as i was sad. sad that he felt like it had come to this. sad that, after having been with us for less than a year and a half, the powers that be in our conference were threatening (make no mistake either. the threats didn't just come down this week. they've been there for months) to remove him from this congregation because he had not steered us back onto (their) course fast enough for them. you see, humc, for those not familiar with the inner workings of our church or the united methodist church, is "asked" to pay a portion of their budget to the conference on the whole so that that money can be used for many, many connectional things. that portion is called apportionments. all churches are "asked" to find a way to meet 100 percent of their apportionment number, but if there is an honest effort being made towards the 100 percent, the conference will work with the church. huffman's problem is this. in the conferences eyes, it has been a really long time since humc has made an honest effort towards even 50 percent of our apportionment, much less 100. a couple years ago, the conference drew a line in the sand. no longer could united methodist churches be part of the connectional system if they were not willing to be true to the connectional giving. and huffman isn't true to the the figure we are being asked to contribute. not even close.
that doesn't mean we aren't working on it. not a finance committee meeting has gone by in the last year and a half where our connectional giving has not come up. we try and massage the money that we have to find ways to give more, but for us to make the letter of the number, we would have to make serious cuts to every section of the budget. that includes staff. which is where we are stuck between the biggest rock and our hardest place.
we love our staff. we can't cut one of them, can we? how would they buy groceries? and if we do, what potential does that give us to grow in the way our church hopes to grow in order to continue finding ways to minister to our huffman community as part of huffman united methodist church?
we love our building. in an unfortunate turn of events, our building now defines us. old. always on the border of being out of repair. seemingly more concerned with how we look on the outside versus what is going on inside. the maintaining of our old building is expensive. we can't cut there, can we?
and so, if we don't want to cut, if we don't want to redefine who we are or give up our building, we only have one choice. we have to grow. in number. and in "number". and by "number", i mean what is truly important to the bishop and our conference. the money we are expected to pay them. and that is all that matters. it's not our attendance that the conference cares about. it's our lack of connectional giving. it's money. it's what makes the
maybe the conference jumped the shark before we did, but don't be confused. we got on skis sunday right along with them. if i won the lottery today and gave every bit of it to humc and only asked that humc pay our connectional giving for the the next ten years in one lump sum, we would never hear from the conference again. well, we'd hear from them. they'd ask to use our building sometimes, but there would be no more pressure on our senior pastor or on our members.
instead of sunday's service being about god, it was about money. it was not about worship. it was about attendance that, in theory, would make our bottom line look better. it was not about church. it was about business.
i don't blame harris for doing what he did. everyone has a boss. if his boss was god, we'd be fine. we'd be in good and the right hands. his boss is not god, though. it's our district superintendent. and his boss is our bishop. and our bishop is pissed at huffman because he thinks that he's sent us his best of the best and, in his mind, we keep burning down the forest.
"it only takes a spark to get a fire going.
and soon all those around can warm up in its glowing
that's how it is with god's love
once you've experienced it
you spread the love to everyone
you want to pass it on"
you may not like the methods with which i have chosen to articulate my love for my church on this blog. i get that. you don't like my potty mouth. i totally get that. you think i am stubborn. hardheaded. demanding. unwilling to submit. "always right". guilty as charged.
that being said, please get a copy of sunday's service if you missed it. listen to harris' plea with this post and your past experience with the church and this church as context.
i don't hate you, huffman. i hate this broken-ass down system and how we have fed this ugly beast for as long as we have.
getting butts in seats isn't what church is about. getting people to give their money to our conference is not what church is about. if people coming to our church or opening their wallets to give to a cause or a group outside of themselves happens as a result of god's love, then great.
god's love was not what sunday was about.
it only takes a spark.
war harris. and war humc.
7 comments:
It is my opinion that the Methodist church changes preachers WAY too much. I grew up Baptist and only had 2 preachers the whole time I was there. The first one left because he retired. I think the Bishop and the higher ups do not have any idea of what goes on in the churches. They just look at the money situation and then move preachers around to try to "fix" the problem but it only makes things worse. They need to leave us alone. Our previous pastor created a mess and it is now falling down on Harris' head. It is not his fault and I think if they would just leave us alone we could do God's work. Why does it have to be so complicated? I have already told Chris that if Harris goes, I go. I am tired of all of the politics and do not think you can go forward when the preachers keep getting reassigned. Not only will I leave HUMC, I will leave the Methodist church altogether. This is not how you "grow" numbers.
Melinda Golden
Just to be fair and clear about this - 95% (at least) of clergy moves are clergy initiated. They always blame the bishop because they don't want to feel like a bad guy, or make the church feel like they are "deserting" them and the DS and Bishop are usually willing to take that rap. Basically, the pastor stays until either 1.) He feels like he's getting no where and wants a way out or 2.) The pastor sees it's a "good" year to move (i.e. a good shot at a higher salary and/or "better" church) and jumps. They always play the "I don't want to move but the Bishop is making me" card. Having spoken with quite a few bishops and DS's lately, as well as studying the statistics, the UMC is actually right up there with all other denominations now in looking for long term appointments. I'm on my 5th year at RSUMC, which never would have happened 20 years ago. So, let's not completely blame the system.
That said, Bishop Willomon is at the forefront of this "effectiveness" movement so I don't necessarily doubt Harris' statement. I'm shocked that he would hear it after less than a year. I've never heard of that before. I, too, am getting very frustrated at pouring tons of money into maintaining a system to the point where my own church has no money for ministry. But, I believe the "system" is on the verge of some big changes. I think / hope / believe / pray that some shake-ups will happen at the next General Conference that will move us in the right direction.
Thanks, Chris and Melinda.
Chris, one of the reasons I love talking to you about this stuff is that not only have you been a major part of HUMC in the past, but you are still working for "the system". Your perspective is invaluable when I try and separate myself from where I am to try and discern a bigger picture.
I, too, believe (in theory) in our system. But, our system is run by humans, humans just like myself. As you are always prone to saying, "If it weren't for "Christians", there would be a heckuva lot more Christians."
I hope you are right about the future direction of the United Methodist Church.
Melinda, I am so sorry that you are frustrated. I completely understand your sentiment. Let's hope that something great happens and we can not only hang onto Harris for a while but build some positive momentum for "all the world" to see.
I really have a lot of hope for the UMC. It's definitely not always perfect, but I think it's better than whatever else there is. I'm not a "company man" (though I sound like one). I'm a Jesus man, and I think the UMC can do a lot of good for God.
I misread your post the first time. I thought you said less than a year. If it's been longer than a year and no movement yet, I can understand why there might be some concern. There is a LOT of talk among bishops right now about clergy effectiveness and how do you measure that. I think a lot of folks think that some clergy have used the guaranteed appointment as an excuse to be lazy. Some probably have. So, we're all struggling to figure out what is faithful and fruitful. That's the kind of discussion that's going to be had at the next General Conference and, hopefully, will help the conferences and local churches work better together and not seem so antagonistic towards each other.
Well, it's me again...ole blog-gate. I was wondering, do the DS, bishop, all those higher-ups even consider what HUMC does with some of its (the congregation's) money that doesn't go into a collection plate? I mean, things like that halloween event; after all, many people will spend money - and time - contributing to the community. Oh, and then there is that other thing....BHN. Members support that financially..oh, and that time thing again. And let's not forget how we support the local schools. Last time I checked, that took money too. And there is that angel tree that is coming up very soon. More money that will be joyously spent to help those less fortunate. Those are just four things that people (seat-sitters) spend money to support. IF all that money were givn directly to the church (via the collection plate), then that connectional thing could be met...BUT would that be the right thing to do? Maybe the connectional receivers need to look at their budgets and make some cuts, trim some of that fat that they have. Everybody has a boss, so maybe somebody should go to the next level and COMPLAIN - with facts and data. Just a few thoughts.
This is such a tough issue. On one hand, yes, we should absolutely be involved in our local community. I think that is a given. Like Harris pointed out a few weeks ago, if you are doing good works, you are simply doing what is expected of you. I liked it. It felt true. On the other hand, if it is possible for us to combine resources and do something major, that is something not many denominations do, and it CAN be great. But a lot of times the UMC doesn't really do a good job explaining the why behind certain things, and so they are left seeing a system that is hyper-bureaucratic without any knowledge of the intentionality of the system.
I've seen/been involved with some of the ministries connectional giving supports, and it is worthwhile stuff that very few churches in the conference could do alone. However, we don't fascinate people with that sometimes. We just tell them they are supposed to give and pay their apportionment. As my old pal Shane Claiborne would say, the issue doesn't have flesh on it. We don't get to see the full harvest reaped from the projects the conference sponsors. We need to a better job with the relational stuff, and that will go a long way towards improving how our "system" works. Just my blatant attempt to have some hope. I agree with Chris for the most part. We have the capacity so much more than many denominations, but that connectedness can also make things more tense many times.
you guys are funny, Church must have money to operate. All this "GOOD" that may or may not be done is just a side line the business is money. You can not keep up a Hugh building and have free or near free programs without money, And of course you can not have a support origination such as the north conference UMC without money, So here is how it goes 1 you need new members 2 these new members need to have money 3 these new members, if they have money and give it, they run the show (on all boards and committees) so how do I get new members with money, I need a good show, one that reflects the times not the old warn out songs and recycled messages of the past but new up lifting praise and worship music like down at good old (well put in any name of a successful church these days on with over 500 members)so you have to ask your self can you change format and attract people with money from your neighborhood and take a chance the existing members will not leave or do you keep what you got and ride it our till the Bish shuts her down and closes the doors. face facts with the current format you will not get new members from this changing neighborhood. Also if by some chance a new person comes to visit try to as least say hi I know it will be hard because "if they are not in the click then they must be a misfit!!" ironies is so ironic
Post a Comment