I have to admit, I am worried about the removal of guaranteed appointments. I am a young, white clergywoman who is in my sixth year of my ministry. My first appointment was a very difficult church. It was wrought with dysfunction and was closed in 2009. I wonder if a few of the most destructive members had enough wherewithal could, under this system, complete sink my vocation as a clergy. What is even more frightening is that I served that church as a provisional elder. They had more opportunities to critique my “effectiveness” because the ordination process requires it. But while I may be afraid of what this new decision means for our future, the same situation where my first church closed makes me feel hopeful too. Throughout it all, I was completely supported by District Superintendent and Bishop. Even though I was crucified, they never abandoned me. This is a perfect example of how my “effectiveness” could have been challenged. After all, the church closed. Isn’t that what we are all afraid of? Like the rest of us, I am processing the implications of this decision. For that manner, we will all be processing and living into this decision for at least the next four years… together.
Sign up for our newsletter!SUBSCRIBE
Conference offers guidance on apportionment alternatives
California-Pacific Conference leaders advise churches on giving options including withholding or redirecting apportionment contributions in protest of 2019 General Conference.
Leaders pursue plan for new US structure
Despite concerns the homosexuality debate will engulf the plan, the Connectional Table is submitting legislation to create a decision-making body on U.S. matters.