Addenda

Addendum I Addendum II Addendum III Addendum IV Addendum V

Addendum VI Addendum VII Addendum VIII Addendum IX Addendum X

Addendum XI Addendum XII Addendum XIII Addendum XIV Addendum XV

Addendum XVI Addendum XVII Addendum XVIII

Addendum I

PERCENTAGE OF CHURCHES WITH 150 OR LESS; 100 OR LESS, AND 50 OR LESS AVERAGE ATTENDANCE IN THE FOURTEEN (14) DISTRICTS OF THE WEST OHIO AREA OF THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH

DISTRICT & number of churches	150 OR LESS AVERAGE ATTENDANCE	%	100 OR LESS AVERAGE ATTENDANCE	%	50 OR LESS AVERAGE ATTENDANCE	%
Athens (194)	142	73	134	69	109	56
Cincinnati (77)	36	46.8	30	39	17	22
Columbus North (59)	27	45.8	22	37	9	15
Columbus South (91)	57	62.6	46	50.5	16	17.5
Dayton North (80)	52	65	42	52.5	26	32.5
Dayton South (68)	35	51.5	28	41	13	19
Defiance (114)	80	70	64	56	31	27
Findley (91)	66	72.5	62	68	34	37.3
Lima (89)	57	64	50	56	30	33.7
Newark (106)	81	76.4	64	60.3	45	42.5
Portsmouth (154)	126	81.8	121	78.5	79	51.3
Springfield (104)	73	70	61	58.6	30	37.5
Toledo (73)	31	42	21	28.7	16	22
Wilmington (133) *	91	68	83	62.4	57	42.9
West Ohio Area Totals:	954	66.8	828	58	478	33.5

(Source: Journal 1 of the 2005 Annual Conference of the West Ohio Area of the United Methodist Church)
*Wilmington had 132 churches as of the summer of 2005 when the West Ohio Area sold the Cozaddale UMC.

Addendum II

Certified Lay Minister. In order to enhance the quality of ministry to small membership churches, expand team ministry in churches and in deference to and expression of gifts and evidence of God's grace associated with the lay ministry of early Methodism, the certified lay minister is to be recognized and utilized.

1.The certified lay minister shall preach the Word, provide a care ministry to the congregation, assist in program leadership, and be a witness in the community for the growth, missional and connectional thrust of the United Methodist Church as part of a ministry team with the supervision and support of the clergy person.

2.A certified lay speaker of a person with equivalent training as defined by his/her district or conference may be certified as a lay minister by the District Committee on Ordained Ministry after he/she has:
a) Been recommended by the paster of the local church where he/she holds membership and by vote of the Church Council or Charge Conference.
b) Completed courses relevant to his/her assignment including preaching and exegesis, the care of the congregation, and other courses as recommended by the General Board of Discipleship and General Board of Higher Education and Ministry in consultation with leaders in the annual conference, and other appropriate Agencies and organizations.
c) Demonstrated appreciation of the history, polity, doctrine, worship and liturgy of the United Methodist Church through service in his/her local church.
d) Been recommended by the District Superintendent after completion of appropriate screening.
e) Made application in writing to the District Committee on Ordained Ministry.
f) Appeared before the District Committee on Ordained Ministry for review and approval.

3.The certified lay minister is to apply in writing for recertification bi-annually to the District Committee on Ordained Ministry upon:
a) Ministry Review by Church Council or Charge Conference from the congregation of which he/she is a member.
b) Satisfactory completion of an approved Continued Education event, and
c) Recommendation of the District Superintendent.

4.The certified lay minister under assignment is to appear bi-annually before the District Committee on Ordained Ministry for recertification after:
a) Ministry Review by Church Council or Charge Conference where assigned,
b) Satisfactory completion of an approved Continuing Education event, and
c) Recommendation of the District Superintendent.

5.Transfer of Certification by certified Lay Ministers
A certified lay minister who moves may transfer certification to the new district upon receipt of a letter from the previous district's Committee on Ordained Ministry confirming current certification.

6.The certified lay minister is a lay person and as such is not eligible for support by equitable compensations funds or pension which are provided for clergy members. The local congregation is encouraged to provide appropriate compensation.

Addendum III – A Suggested Covenant

SUGGESTED MISSION STATEMENT of the “Love United Methodist Church in “anywhere District”

We see our Blend/Teaching Parish as a new church with a focus on the preaching, teaching, and the sacrificial ministry of Christ. Our goal is to provide a rich variety of worship and educational experience in which Jesus as Teacher, Healer, Master and Savior helps folks make sense of the sojourn on earth.

We believe that the Divine system that supported Jesus is available to support each person in the faith journey. We exist as a new church to offer unconditional love and warm, supportive fellowship in the unity of the Body of Christ within the chosen worship center.

As a blend of a larger and several very small congregations, we are well suited to help meet the variety of spiritual needs of all types of families, singles and all of any age.

We approach worship in an ecumenical spirit combining elements of the joyous Wesley tradition with some of the inspirational liturgical elements of the Catholic, Lutheran, and other rich Protestant experiences. We are a congregation of the open door, open mind, and the open hand.

We also see ourselves as living out the traditional meaning of the connectional system of the United Methodist Church in which we are supportive of one another in the spiritual as well as the institutional aspects of the Body of Christ.

It is our intention to address the practicum needs of student pastors and the continuing education needs of the pastorate as well as the training of the lay disciples.

Addendum IV

PERCENTAGE OF 2004 APPORTIONMENTS BY CHURCHES WITH AN AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF: 100 OR LESS; 101 TO 249; AND 250 AND MORE IN THREE (3) REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICTS OF THE WEST OHIO AREA OF THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH

DISTRICT:

CHURCHES WITH AN AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF 100 OR LESS

CHURCHES WITH AN AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF 101-249

CHURCHES WITH AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF 250 AND MORE

DEFIANCE

39.85%

430,093/1,079,145

39.85%

41.65%*

18.5%

199,592/1,079,145

18.5%

PORTSMOUTH

49.1%

444,451/906,100

49.1%

35.6%*

15.3%

138,924/906,100

15.3%

WILMINGTON

30%

442,015/1,468,213

30%

30%*

40%

579,285/1,468,213

40%

* The percentage figures for churches with 101 to 249 average attendance were found by simply adding the first and third columns and subtracting the sum from 100%

NOTICE: The percentages of 39.5%, 49.1%, and 30% for the churches of 100 or less average attendance in these three representative Districts highlight the importance of mid size and smaller churches and their very significant share in the total apportionments for the West Ohio Area. These facts highlight the need of serious consideration of the idea of Blended/Teaching Parish.

To further confirm the need for serious consideration of Blended/Teaching Parish, consider the following by reference to Addendum (I):

In the Defiance District, churches with 100 or less average attendance (56%), provide 39.5% of the apportionments!

In the Portsmouth District, churches with 100 or less average attendance (78.5%) provide 49.1% or apportionments!

In the Wilmington District, churches with 100 or less average attendance (62.4%) provide 30% of apportionments.

Addendum V

There is a perception abroad in United Methodism that the larger churches are “carrying” the smaller churches in the payment of apportionments. This addendum and the following addendum VI prove that no one is “carrying” any one else!

The research was very carefully done as comparison was achieved between churches with 100 or less average attendance with the churches of 101 and more average attendance. For instance (see Addendum, VI), in the Toledo District the churches of 100 or less average attendance raised 21.4% ($291,881) of the total apportionments!

In the Athens District, where there are considerable more churches that are very small compared with most of the other Districts, and where there is a real struggle for survival, they nevertheless raised $387,758 (49.8%) of the total of $594,585. WE ARE CARRYING ONE ANOTHER! The planning now going into creating “cluster”groups (as part of the shift to 8 instead of 14 districts) of churches might help some, but Blended/Teaching Parish holds out far more hope to help stem the tide of closing of small churches. (Again, see Addendum VI)

Churches of 100 or less average attendance raised $4,721,880 in 2004 in Ohio West Area!! This is 27.5% of the total $17,172,024 raised!! WE ARE ALL “CARRYING” ONE ANOTHER! As one member said in a larger church after seeing this research, “We cannot afford to loose even one of these small churches!” Of course, implied in this comment is the increase apportioned to larger churches as the smaller churches close their doors. On the other hand, if you are a member of the small church you are often in a struggle to survive... and yet, despite this you and your fellow smaller churches raised 27.5% of the total apportionments.

In addition to the actual money amounts raised by each district as found in addendum VI on the following page, it is also important to find the average rate of paying on the apportionments by the churches to further dispel the perception that the larger churches are carrying the smaller in apportionment obligations.

The chart at the bottom of this page does just that. To clarify this research, let us use the example of the Cincinnati District where we see in the following Addendum VI that the smaller churches contributed 15.9% ($288,409) toward the total of the $17,735,086 raised by the District. The question arises: How are the churches, who raised 15.9% of the total, rated at an average giving of 74.2% as indicated in the chart at the bottom of this page?

The answer is explained in this hypothetical example:Two churches with 100 or less average attendance gave as follows: Church A—paid 50% of the apportioned amount of $2,800 or $1,400; Church B—paid 90% of the apportioned amount of $2,000 or $1,800. The total paid by A and B would be $3,800 with an average rate of 70%. Now, two churches with and average attendance of 101 or more gave as follows: Church C paid 100% of the apportioned amount of $28,00; Church D paid 30% of the apportioned amount of $30,000 or $9,000. C and D paid a total of $37,000 with and average rate of payment of 65%. Thus we see how it is possible as in the Dayton South District, the smaller churches paid at a higher rate that the larger churches. (Again, see Addendum VI.)

A COMPARISON OF AVERAGE RATES OF PAYING ON APPORTIONMENT OF CHURCHES OF 100 OR LESS WITH CHURCHES OF 101 AND MORE AVERAGE ATTENDANCE

DISTRICT	100 OR LESS AVERAGE ATTENDANCE	101 AND MORE AVERAGE ATTENDANCE
ATTHENS	69.7%	96.2%
CINCINNATI	74.2%	75.7%
COLUMBUS NORTH	76.4%	96.1%
COLUMBUS SOUTH	69.2%	78.6%
DAYTON NORTH	69.6%	80.7%
DAYTON SOUTH	70.3%	56.8%
DEFIANCE	57.6%	72.3%
FINDLAY	67.5%	58.8%
LIMA	85.3%	90.4%
NEWARK	72.8%	84.7%
PORTSMOUTH	70.8%	83.4%
SPRINGFIELD	74.8%	83.9%
TOLEDO	83.5%	53.0%
WILMINGTON	79.8%	81.2%

Addendum VI

PERCENTAGES PAID ON APPORTIONED AMOUNTS BY THE FORMER FOURTEEN DISTRICTS OF THE OHIO WEST AREA IN 2004 AND A COMPARISON OF THE PAYMENTS BY CHURCHES OF AN AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF 100 AND LESS WITH THOSE OF 101 OR MORE

DISTRICT

TOTAL DISTRICT APPORTIONMENT AND AMOUNT PAID WITH PERCENTAGE (%)

TOTAL PAID BY DISTRICT CHURCHES WITH AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF 100 OR LESS WITH PERCENTAGE (%)

TOTAL PAID BY DISTRICT CHURCHES WITH AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF 101 OR LESS WITH PERCENTAGE (%)

ATHENS

$777,916 (TOTAL PAID: $594,585 (76.4%)

$387,758

49.8%

$206,810

26.6%

CINCINNATI

$1,814,986 (TOTAL PAID: $1,735,086 (95.6%)

$288,409

15.9%

$1,446,677

79.9%

COLUMBUS NORTH

$1,845,634 (TOTAL PAID: $1,849,909 (100.2%)

$203,081

11.0%

$1,646,838

89.2%

COLUMBUS SOUTH

$1,381,815 (TOTAL PAID: $1,381,815 (95.4%)

$331,548

24%

$986,061

71.4%

DAYTON NORTH

$1,454,845 (TOTAL PAID: $1,449,447 (99.6%)

$275,556

18.9%

$1,173,891

80.7%

DAYTON SOUTH

$1,449,563 (TOTAL PAID: $1,234,864 (85.2%)

$210,198

14.5%

$1,024,666

70.7%

DEFIANCE

$1,079,145 (TOTAL PAID: $933,799 (86.6%)

$430,093

39.9%

$503,706

47.7%

FINDLAY

$1,035,846 (TOTAL PAID: $1,021,173 (98.6%)

$403,359

39.9%

$617,814

LIMA

$943,688 (TOTAL PAID: $929,688 (98.5%)

$296,582

31.4%

$633,369

67.1%

NEWARK

$1,412,480 (TOTAL PAID: $1,358,244 (96.1%)

$353,692

25.0%

$1,004,552

71.1%

PORTSMOUTH

$906,100 (TOTAL PAID: $897,552 (99.1%)

$444,451

49.1%

$453,101

50.0%

SPRINGFIELD

$1,055,561 (TOTAL PAID: $1,016,296 (96.3%)

$412,873

39.1%

$603,423

57.2%

TOLEDO

$1,363,929 (TOTAL PAID: $1,363,929 (100%)

$291,881

21.4%

$1,072,048

78.6%

WILMINGTON

$1,468,213 (TOTAL PAID: $1,405,631 (95.7%)

$392,399

26.7%

$1,013,232

69.0%

Addendum VII

CHURCH CLOSURES IN THE PERIOD 1976 THROUGH 2004 WEST OHIO CONFERENCE

DICTRICT	NUMBER OF CHURCHES IN 1976	NUMBER OF CHURCHES IN 2004	TOTAL CLOSURES 1976 THRU 2004
ATHENS	186	152	34
CINCINNATI	74	61	13
COLUMBUS NORTH	55	50	5
COLUMBUS SOUTH	88	75	13
DAYTON NORTH	80	69	11
DAYTON SOUTH	67	59	8
DEFIANCE	114	94	20
FINDLAY	89	81	8
LIMA	88	77	11
NEWARK	107	100	7
PORTSMOUTH	153	133	20
SPRINGFIELD	102	85	17
TOLEDO	72	64	8
WILMINGTON	129	113	16
TOTALS	1404	1213	191*

The closure of 191 churches in the period 1976 through 2004 represents a 13.6% loss of congregations. In a few cases, the losses may be caused be the uniting of two or more congregations into one. However, most of the closures were very small churches.

Addendum VIII

THE LOCAL PASTOR

Introduction: In Addendum II is a complete copy of the material for becoming a Certified Lay Minister in Paragraph 271 of the Book of Discipline of the Uniter Methodist Church. We chose this idea since the General Conference created this path of pastoral leadership for “...small membership churches...”

However, some United Methodist may want to consider the path of Local Pastor.

The Local Pastor is authorized to perform the ordinances and sacraments of the church. The path to the license is more demanding. Many have been using this road to leadership who are still in their active work life. It also can become a spring board to full ordination.

Requirements to Earn a Local Pastor License: (See the Discipline paragraphs 310, 311, 315, and 316.)

The following are some of the highlights of this path to pastoral leadership:

Examine your understanding of God, grace, the fruits of the Holy Spirit as listed in para. 310:1-3)
Contact pastor or district superintendent if heeding the call to servant leadership to learn of the process to license for Local Pastor. (see paragraph 310, 1 and 2) This step includes the completion of the Candidacy Guidebook with the mentor.
A review of one's personal gifts for ministry including notarized statements of the purity of character in issues of felonies, sexual misconduct, child abuse, etc.
Progress of candidates annually in the various stages of Conference studies and reports to the district committee on ordained ministry.

Addendum IX

March 1, 2007

I just received the 2006 Ohio Conference Journal and was shocked to discover the following:

In the two year period of 2004 to 2006, 24 more churches closed their doors!

This represents an average of 12 church closings each of those two years.

We noticed in Addendum VII that 191 churches were closed in the 28 year period from 1976 to 2004. This is a yearly rate of 6.82 closures.

To Summarize:

191 closures 1976 to 2004 (6.82/yr.)

24 closures 2004-2008 (12/yr.)

Notice that the rate per year increased from 6.82 to 12/yr.

This is an emergency. Our beloved church is bleeding. Let us give renewed study and prayer for the obvious need of Blended/Teaching Parish or some similar model.

Addendum X

PERCENTAGE OF CHURCHES IN THE OHIO WEST AREA WITH AN AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF 25 OR LESS. (From the 2006 Conference Journal)

DISTRICT	NUMBER UNDER 25	TOTAL CHURCHES	% OF TOTAL CHURCHES
Athens	57	146	39.0%
Cincinnati	9	54	16.7%
Columbus North	2	51	4.0%
Columbus South	8	52	15.4%
Dayton North	7	51	13.7%
Dayton South	3	51	5.9%
Defiance	12	91	13.2%
Findlay	16	82	19.5%
Lima	13	74	17.6%
Newark	18	100	18%
Portsmouth	48	148	32.4%
Springfield	11	83	13.3%
Toledo	4	60	6.7%
Wilmington	26	110	23.6%
Total OWA	234	1113	21.0%

NUMBER OF CHURCHES IN THE OHIO WEST AREA WITH AN AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF 50 OR LESS. (From the 2006 Conference Journal)

DISTRICT	NUMBER UNDER 50	TOTAL CHURCHES	% OF TOTAL CHURCHES
Athens	105	148	70.9%
Cincinnati	14	54	25.9%
Columbus North	9	51	17.6%
Columbus South	26	52	50.0%
Dayton North	27	51	52.9%
Dayton South	12	51	23.5%
Defiance	34	91	37.4%
Findlay	33	82	40.2%
Lima	32	74	43.2%
Newark	44	100	44.0%
Portsmouth	77	148	52.0%
Springfield	35	83	42.2%
Toledo	12	60	20.0%
Wilmington	54	110	49.1%
Total OWA	514	1115	46.1%

Another disturbing fact: The West Ohio Area lost 289 churches from 1976 to 2006. (From the 1976 and 2006 Conference Journals.) This represents a loss of 20.6%

ADDENDUM XI
(Fall 2007)
CLOSING OF SMALL CHURCHES INCREASES UNABATED

I
   In 1975 there were 1422 churches in the Ohio West Conference. By 2006 the 2007 Journal reported 1164 churches. This meant the closing of 258 churches, the great majority being small congregations.

   I find no words to describe the nature of this preventable tragic loss of these “backbone” congregations of United Methodist Church. It is reasonable to assume that the picture is about the same across our beloved church in America. These churches established the presence of Methodism across our land and now we are allowing them to die without even a wimper!! Please study our website:
WWW.SMALLCHURCHJOY.ORG
   Four models are described to give a great future for even the smallest of these congregations. Please give special attention and prayer to the section on pastoral leadership.

II
A Comparison of Churches in 2004 with an Average Attendance of 50 or Less with 2007

   In 2004 there were 514 churches with an average attendance of 50 or less. (See Addendum X) In 2007 there were 533 churches in this category, or 48.7% of total churches. This represents an increase of 6.3% increase of churches in this category.

The following are the figures for the number of churches with an average attendance of 50 or less in the new Districts of the Ohio West area in 2007:

DISTRICT	NUMBER OF CHURCHES	NUMBER WITH 50 OR LESS AV.ATT.	PERCENT OF TOTAL
Captial Area North District	102	30	29.4%
Capital Area Sourth District	126	42	33.3%
Foothills District	187	142	75.9%
Maumee Watershed District	112	10	35.7%
Miami Valley District	160	60	37.5%
Northwest Plains District	176	71	40.3%
Ohio River Valley District	131	38	29.0%
Shawnee Valley District	170	110	64.7%

ADDENDUM XII

BLENDED PARISH FOR NON METHODIST CHURCHES

The United Church of Christ (UCC) had similar losses of churches during the same period of time as the losses experienced by the United Methodist Church across America. I do not have figures for other Protestant Congregations but one can assume that the picture is similar to The United Church of Christ and the United Methodist Church as shown in previous Addendums. I have seen similar closing of small congregations in the Presbyterian Churches. One could also safely assume that in all cases the great majority of closings are those of small congregations.

The models of blended parish suggested in the vision of four models comes directly from the United Methodist Book of Discipline. However, the organizational pattern therein, is one that can be used by any denomination regardless of its polity. The common element in all four models is the rotation of pastors and committees around the blend of one or more small congregations with a larger congregation. Each church regardless of size has equal representation on all committees, boards, and councils as is true in our own U.S. Senate. In reflecting on these four suggested Models, any denomination would be able to translate the concepts to their particular polity.

For instance a group of one, two, or three smaller Presbyterian Churches blended with a larger Church would work very well. I have seen a situation in Columbus, Ohio where that would have saved the closing of an historic smaller church.

The idea of rotation of pastors is not a particularly "Methodist" idea. It is an idea practiced in business all the time. The writing of the covenant and the commitment to a model is an activity of the Holy Spirit and indicates our basic motivation to really care for the folks in the smaller churches.

The offer to speak to your committee, board, or congregation is our privilege and opportunity in the ecumenical vision of our efforts for smaller churches.

Blessings always, Donald F. Kelley, retired elder of the Ohio West Conference of the UMC

________________________________________________________________

Addendum XIII

A PROSPERITY PRAYER FOR

SMALL CONGREGATIONS

WE COME TO THE THRONE OF GRACE ON BEHALF OF THE SMALL
CONGREGATIONS IN OUR AREA.

WE PRAY THAT THEY WOULD REMAIN NOT ONLY VIABLE BUT WOULD
PROSPER BECAUSE OF THE AMAZING POWER OF YOUR HOLY SPIRIT.

WE COME TO THE THRONE BELIEVING IN THE PROMISE OF CHRIST WHO
SAID, "...I TELL YOU: WHEN YOU PRAY AND ASK FOR SOMETHING,
BELIEVE YOU HAVE RECEIVED IT, AND YOU WILL BE GIVEN WHATEVER
YOU ASK FOR." (MK11:24)

WE ASK THAT YOUR HOLY SPIRIT WILL RAISE UP LAY PASTORAL
LEADERSHIP FOR OUR BELOVED SMALL CONGREGATIONS. WE
PRAY THIS IN FAITH BELIEVING AS WE CLAIM THE PROMISE OF CHRIST.

WE ALSO PRAY FOR THE LARGER CHURCHES THAT THEY MAY BE
INSPIRED WITH A VISION TO HELP THE SMALL CHURCHES IN THE
PROCESS OF ENCOURAGING LAY PASTORAL LEADERSHIP THROUGH
THE LOCAL PASTOR LICENSE OR THE CERTIFIED LAY MINISTER
PATHWAYS.

WE PRAY THIS IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, THE SON, AND THE
HOLY SPIRIT.

AMEN

Addendum XIV

PERCENTAGE OF CHURCHES WITH 25 OR LESS

AVERAGE ATTENDANCE
(WEST OHIO CONFERENCE - 2008)

Capital Area North District - 18 of 99 churches ............................18.2%
Capital Area South District - 15 of 126 churches...........................11.9%
Foothills District - 68 of 187 churches..............................................36.4%
Maumee Watershed District - 6 of 111 churches............................. 5.4%
Miami Valley District - 19 of 160 churches.....................................18.5%
Northwest Plaines District - 32 of 173 churches............................18.5%
Ohio River Valley District - 12 of 128 churches.............................. 9.4%
Shawnee District - 62 of 174 churches.............................................35.6%
TOTAL CHURCHES IN THE OHIO WEST AREA WITH 25
OR LESS AVERAGE ATTENDANCE - 232 OF 1158 CHURCHES.....20%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PERCENTAGE OF CHURCHES WITH 25 OR LESS
                                   AVERAGE ATTENDANCE
                              (EAST OHIO CONFERENCE - 2008)

Canal District - 11 of 80 churches.....................................................13.8%
Firelands District - 12 of 81 churches...............................................14.8%
Mahoning Valley District - 9 of 71 churches...................................12.7%
Mid Ohio District - 23 of 85 churches.............................................. 27.0%
North Coast District - 10 of 68 churches..........................................14.7%
Ohio Valley District - 29 of 86 churches..........................................30.2%
Southern Hills District - 46 o 100 churches.................................... 46.0%
Three Rivers District - 29 of 75 churches.........................................38.7%
Tuscarawas District - 7 of 81 churches............................................. 8.6%
Western Reserve District - 8 of 63 churches....................................12.7%
TOTAL EAST OHIO CONFERENCE CHURCHES WITH 25
OR LESS AVERAGE ATTENDANCE - 184 OF 800 CHURCHES.......23%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our beloved small congregations of the United Methodist Church will continue
to be vital and inspiring centers of worship and fellowship. This will be assured
by the organization of models of cooperation suggested in paragraph 206 of the
2008 Discipline.

Addendum XV

Addendum XVI

Please give careful attention to this research compiled by John Southwick, Director of Research of the General Board of Global Missions:

See totals below: 23,851 United Methodist Churches with a membership of 200 or less, have an average attendance of 40!!! Total churches in USA = 34,467. (34,467 X 69.2% = 23,851)

Please compare West and East Ohio Conference figures with those for the United States.

This should alert us to the very serious challenge facing our beloved UMC.

This research was printed in "New World Outlook", the mission magazine, of the UMC. It comes from the Jan/Feb 09 issue.

Addendum XVII

Preface to “The Iinterant System of the United Methodist Church in America
A Position Paper by Donald F. Kelley, Retired Elder.

September 25, 2009

1.) This Position Paper was sent to several UMC leaders by the author before the writing of this Preface. One pastoral leader was concerned that the author might be misunderstood as having some kind of personal agenda. A careful reading makes very clear that his only concern is to have the UMC examine what has happened in the use of the itinerant system. The author was desirous that the Position Paper purpose be clearly understood: To show how a brilliant itinerant system seeding churches across America is, in most cases, no longer serving God’s United Methodist Church. That purpose seeks to show that the unintended creation of STARTER (small churches) is not an event caused by anyone, but caused by the system, which has for many decades been a salary increase system. HOWEVER, We are all grateful for A wonderful itinerant system which provides continuing leadership for churches served by the ordained when death, illness, sabbaticals,etc., make moves necessary. These events do not necessarily have salary increase as a factor.

2.) A pastoral leader said after reading the Paper, “…that more and more of our appointments were driven by leadership skill.“ This most sincere comment does not include the overriding concern that quality of pastoral leadership is being sacrificed because of the System. It is very encouraging to note that the length of pastorates has increased to about eight and one half years from an average of six and one half years in 1975. The bishops have made good their pledge to try and increase the length of pastorates of the ordained. However, while the author dreams of much longer pastorates, it is not length of years alone which will increase quality of leadership. Mentorship of the first appointment of full or probationary members of conferences by an experienced and caring elder is of critical importance. We are inspired by the new ordained and those who will be ordained with seminary training. But guidance is needed for this first appointment in what to do and what not to do with the church expectations and traditions. TOO LONG HAVE WE APPOINTED MEN AND WOMEN WITHOUT helping then in common sense people skills. Getting off on the right foot is most important and seminary training may not make that certain. One on one with the superintendent and pastor is a fine idea, but far short of a month by month helping hand. (NOTE: In the first para, line 8 we find that other Conferences do not have an ordained person as the Adm. Assistant. It was not intended to imply that the Superintendent did none of the one on one’s)

3.) Providing mentorship for first appointment is our best hope of longer pastorates where the maturing pastor finds his or her leadership tending to a longer pastorate, an exciting future, learning from mistakes, and a matching experience of the congregation. It would be natural that salary increases would then be part of that longer, maturing pastoral leadership. The mentoring of Shared Ministry for lay pastor leadership in small congregations or in that lay persons own church is a fine model for bishops to use in providing help for the first appointments of the ordained or probationary pastor. That Shared Ministry plan was written by Julia Wallace of the General Board of Discipleship.

Addendum XVIII

Part I

The Itinerant System of the United Methodist Church in America
A Position Paper by Donald F. Kelley, Retired Elder
September 25, 2009
INTRODUCTION:

I love the United Methodist Church. It has nurtured my spiritual journey. My journey started when a high school friend invited me to attend the Epworth League in 1944 at the North College Hill Methodist Church. I was making an adjustment to a new school having just moved with my family from Holden, MA. This was the start of my journey to ordained ministry as I took turns in leadership roles in the North College Hill Church. This Church is now called Northern Hills UMC in the Ohio River Valley District of the West Ohio Conference. This District is one of eight new Districts created in 2007 from an original fourteen. It is unfortunate that the distance between pastor and superintendent has been increased by this change. We need to pray for our superintendents as they seek to be pastor to these larger Districts in the Ohio West and East Conferences.

Each of these new districts is organized into cluster groups. In the ORV District these vary from 6 to 15 churches each. These can be creative and are most helpful for pastoral fellowship, discussion, and support. The cluster leader is chosen by the district office in most cases and agenda(s) is suggested by the district office on issues of vital importance to the UMC. Local mission and outreach to needy communities are inspiring examples of cooperative efforts seen in these cluster groups in the ORV District.

THE ITINERANT SYSTEM OF THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH

Yes, I love the United Methodist Church and that love is centered on every leader and every person in our Beloved Church. That love has only increased as I have observed the serious problems of decrease in membership, and the plight of smaller congregations closing at alarming rates. This paper is about the itinerant system and not people. The kingdoms of this world have only one choice, love or fear. I have chosen love.

After spending six years as the fulltime pastor of the Goshen UMC, the superintendent wanted me to take a church in another district. My PPR had voted to keep me on by a simple majority!
I asked the superintendent why such a move knowing what his answer would be. “You will get a salary increase.” I replied, with some emphasis, “Leave me here and I will receive higher salaries.” This had already been the case. I had wonderful spiritual growth groups going and other exciting events. I was seeing the start of something beautiful and always in my mind was my memory of those congregational churches in Massachusetts where I heard my parents and grandparents tell of the beloved pastor emeritus who had blessed the community with fifty years of service! It was mutual blessing because these were, by in large, pastors who did not “shoot themselves in the foot!”…My guide, of course was the Christ, the Supreme Master who taught love only and a good measure of common sense. John Wesley, among other sublime thoughts, also taught the need of common sense. He called it “reason.“ There is the need now to use common sense as we recognize what has happened in our use and misuse of the itinerant system:

Historically, the itinerant system was used by John Wesley to seed small congregations across this great land. It is exciting to study the system that established a dynamic and effective pastoral presence everywhere! You could hardly go through any village or open farmland without seeing a Methodist Episcopal Church! It is also a very valuable system to deal with the death of pastors, family issues and those who continue even today to shoot themselves in the foot by simply not using common sense.

Part II

Today the itinerant system is using us. The salary increase system simply is not working. Would the business world continue using old systems that do not achieve their goals? We have pastorates of rather short duration considering that it takes a number of years for pastor and people to really begin working together for the obvious goals of maturity in the faith journey.

How can real maturity happen if the need for spiritual maturity is embraced by a salary increase system? The system tends to create smaller churches because we use a particular church as a STARTER CHURCH for the new pastor, sometimes with the help of the minimum salary provided by the conference. This is fine, but this STARTER CHURCH is used to send the new pastor up the salary system and the people know that they won’t have this pastor very long. And so the STARTER CHURCH becomes the smaller and smaller church. I have seen it happen time and again. No leader or member is to be blamed. It is not the fault of a bishop or anyone else. IT IS THE SYSTEM. IT WAS A BRILLIANT SYSTEM. NOW IT IS USING US. IT COULD BE A BRILLIANT SYSTEM AGAIN IF WE USED IT FOR SPIRITUAL GROWTH IN LONGER AND LONGER PASTOR APPOINTMENTS AND DISTRICT ASSIGNMENTS. This is, I recognize, a broad generalization. But it contains a great truth we must embrace: Real Unity for the reason of mature spirituality and a new cooperative system that reduces competition among churches should be our goal.

When thinking about small churches we continue to believe their size has to do with social/economic change issues such as folks growing older, young moving out,etc. This is only a part of the picture. The UMC defines a smaller church as 200 members or less. Research by the Global Board of Ministries of all churches in America of 200 members or less indicates that the average attendance of these churches is 40. While this is an average, these churches tend to be starter churches for new pastors. Instead of including them in some kind of cooperative arrangement, in most cases they end up being on their own because of our allowing the System to use us instead of us using it. And so the decline process begins. We have all seen it through the years. . Now the big push is for the larger congregations. We are one in Christ, not small and large! If we read our Discipline, we find ways for larger and the smaller in the Cooperative Parishes. It is happening. See the Greater Leipsic Multi Site :Parish in the Northwest Plains District. (srpastor@fairpoint.net) See also the Iowa Blend in the web site: (smallchurhjoy,org) Also, we have claimed the promise of Jesus as we have prayed The Prosperity Prayer for more lay persons hearing the call of God’s Christ in following one of the two pathways to pastoral leadership in small congregations: The Local Pastor License and the Certified Lay Minister written by Julia Wallace.

Home Four Models Addenda Recruiting Pastors Contact Us Authors

Addenda