Home > Bishop > Bishop's Office > In Step with Bishop Jones

In Step with Bishop Jones

Click to view the archive of the Bishop's articles

Itinerancy is biblical, practical

Published: 6/29/2009

Symbols and rituals shape our lives and identities in powerful ways. The reading of appointments by the bishop at the end of Annual Conference re-minds us all of the nature of United Methodist ministry. We are a connectional church with an itinerant ministry and itinerant episcopacy.

Sometimes people have asked why we take the time to read the name of each local church and the people assigned to serve them. I am always happy to hear the question because it becomes a teaching moment to re-member who we are. After the two Kansas Area Annual Conference sessions, I have once again heard the question because people say that the decisions have already been made, and people who don’t know can get the news in other ways.

Why do we take the time to do it?

The first point is a general one about ritual and identity. Note that I have hyphenated “re-mind” and “re-member.” When we perform rituals, we often reinforce our self-understanding. There are powerful forces offering us different ways of thinking about our lives and our purpose.

When we perform rituals, we once again shape our minds in the highest and best ways possible. When we pray, God not only listens to our requests, but God’s grace re-minds us of who we are and whose we are. An act as simple as saying “thanks” before a meal shapes our lives. Reading appointments—even if there is no new information in them—has a similar function on our ecclesiological identity.

However, there also is what the scholars call a “performative function” in the reading. The appointments are not fixed until the bishop reads them. Just as the recital of vows at a wedding is the culmination of many promises made, people are not really married until the ceremony is performed. It is in the reading of appointments that people are actually sent to serve those churches.

A second point has to do with why United Methodists use an appointive system for matching clergy with congregations and mission fields. A biblical answer is to talk about the apostolic nature of ministry. Christ called disciples to follow him, and the leaders were called apostles.

“Apostle” means one who is sent. The earliest Christians did not wait for the rest of the Roman Empire to come to them and ask how to be saved. They sent Paul, Barnabas and many others out to preach and gather people into congregations.

When Francis Asbury was challenged to show why Methodist bishops were true bishops, he argued that our itinerant general superintendency was more apostolic on the biblical model than the diocesan episcopacy of other churches.

But let us talk about the practical advantages of itinerancy. Some churches, notably the Roman Catholic, regard their bishop as the real pastor of the church. The priest is the bishop’s assistant, who leads the congregation in the bishop’s absence. This allows the priest and bishop to have very long tenures in the diocese and church. But all of the power resides with the bishop. In most Roman Catholic dioceses, the bishop owns all local church property personally.

In other congregations, notably Baptist and non-denominational churches, the congregation is seen to be an independent church. They determine their own doctrine and ordain anyone they choose. Connections with other churches are weak. They hire and fire their own pastors. Many of them have long intervals of interim pastors when there is a change, and many smaller churches have great difficulty in attracting a new pastor. In addition, the congregation often experiences conflict with each other as they try to decide questions like, “Should we fire the preacher?” or “Should we hire this pastor?”

I have been told that at any given time, one-half of Presbyterian churches in America do not have a regular pastor. At any given time, there might be two or three of the 690 United Methodist churches in Kansas that are in that kind of transition.

United Methodist clergy offer themselves for service to Christ through the United Methodist connection. They make sacred promises to go where they are sent and collectively take on responsibility for leading the mission of the church in the geographical area that is their annual conference.

Thus, when I read the appointments and lead in prayer for the churches district by district, it is an opportunity for each clergy person to re-member and pray for those mission outposts. If someone is serving in one part of the conference, he or she should care deeply about the missional effectiveness—in biblical language, “fruitfulness”—of the churches in all other parts of the conference.

When the cabinet and I are deliberating about appointments, the primary question we are asking is, “What appointments will maximize the missional effectiveness of all the churches in Kansas?” For every Christian church, someone has to be asking that question. Our United Methodist way is to give that responsibility and authority to the bishop and the cabinet, in consultation with appropriate clergy and congregations.
I think over the last 225 years in America, we have been remarkably successful in comparison with other Christian bodies. I believe our system of itinerancy is biblical and practical. My job is to help make sure the system functions at the highest possible level.

All of us need to understand our connectional identity and the itinerant nature of United Methodist ministry and re-commit to living that way to the glory of God for the sake of God’s mission.