Home > Our World > News > News Archives by Date > 2012 > January 2012 > News - January 2012
Will restructuring cut vital ministry?

 
Translate


Delegates consider legislation during the 2008 United Methodist General Conference in Fort Worth, Texas. In 2012, delegates will face varying proposals to restructure the church. A UMNS file photo by Mike DuBose.
Delegates consider legislation during the 2008 United Methodist General
Conference in Fort Worth, Texas. In 2012, delegates will face varying
proposals to restructure the church. A UMNS file photo by Mike DuBose.
View in Photo Gallery

5:30 P.M. ET Jan. 30, 2012

Plans to restructure The United Methodist Church’s 13 general agencies could imperil ministries that local congregations need and value, say agency executives.

“We need vital congregations,” said Gilbert C. Hanke, the top executive of United Methodist Men. “But we also need a vital general church at the same time to do what it is we as United Methodists are called to do.”

Hanke and 12 other members of the United Methodist General Secretaries Table released a statement Jan. 26 to respond to proposals that would consolidate agencies, shrink their governing boards and potentially slash their funding. The General Secretaries Table consists of the chief executives of the 13 general agencies.

The group’s statement urges 2012 General Conference delegates to “identify essential functions best provided by the general church system and support those functions through organizational structure, resource allocation, and churchwide action.”

General Conference, the denomination’s top lawmaking body, will meet April 24-May 4 in Tampa, Fla. Hanke, who is also a General Conference delegate from the Texas Annual (regional) Conference, and at least five other agency heads have issued personal statements sounding a note of caution about the restructuring plans.



Gilbert C. Hanke. A UMNS file photo.
Gilbert C. Hanke
A UMNS file photo.
View in Photo Gallery

What will the restructure affect?

One significant piece of legislation — the result of the multiyear Call to Action process — would consolidate nine of the general agencies into a new United Methodist Center for Connectional Mission and Ministry under a 15-member board.

The legislation also would allow the new center’s board to redistribute up to $60 million toward funding theological education, recruiting young clergy and laity, and fostering vital congregations.

The legislation does not specify where that total will come from, but agency executives expect either a majority or the entirety of the money will come from the World Service Fund, which provides most of the funding for agency work.

Agencies already face more than a 6.5 percent cut to the World Service Fund under the 2013-16 budget of $311.6 million, which the denomination’s General Council on Finance and Administration has submitted to General Conference. The redistribution potentially would represent another reduction of nearly 20 percent.

“That being the case, the essential functions of all general agencies will not continue,” Hanke said. “There is not a single one that can take that large a reduction.”

Under the restructuring legislation, United Methodist Men would be among the few agencies that remain a separate body. However, Hanke joined other agency executives in expressing concerns about what the redistribution of $60 million in general church funds could mean for the ministry his and other agencies provide.

United Methodist Men, for example, relies on the World Service Fund for 25 percent of its budget.

Without United Methodist Men, Lee Donley said his congregation and others would lack the resources for the men’s ministries and Boy Scout troops that help churches grow.

For example, he cited the commission’s Understanding Men’s Ministry program, which helped Oxford (Mich.) United Methodist Church, his congregation near Detroit, set up ministries that appeal to men ranging from Bible studies to service projects.

“I feel very strongly that if we don’t get more men in our church, we’re going to suffer for it,” said Donley, who was first drawn to his church by men’s ministry and is now president of the North Central Jurisdiction’s United Methodist Men.

But that program and other general agency resources could be in jeopardy, Hanke said.

Slightly more than a penny of every dollar given by local church members in the United States supports the ministries of general agencies through the World Service Fund, according to the General Council on Finance and Administration.

Over the decades, the downturn in U.S. membership and declining revenue already have forced general agencies to eliminate some staff positions and programs. The number of staff positions in 13 general agencies has decreased from 3,139 in 1971 to 1,384 in 2010.

The loss of $60 million means, “there will be fewer missionaries, fewer Sunday School resources, less advocacy for peace and justice, fewer scholarships and less assistance to the growing part of the church: Africa and the Philippines,” said Jim Winkler, top executive of the United Methodist Board of Church and Society.

Where did changes come from?

At least one agency executive, however, is not wary of the restructuring proposal or the funding changes.

Neil M. Alexander, the president and publisher of the United Methodist Publishing House, has been a leader throughout the Call to Action process that led to the legislation. He also signed on to the General Secretaries Table statement.

“While the (executives) do not all agree on either one analysis or a number of proposed improvements, the General Secretaries Table wanted to be sure that United Methodists know that we share common commitments around core values and the specific affirmations found in the statement,” he said.

Under the Call to Action legislation, the United Methodist Publishing House and Board of Pension and Health Benefits, as agencies supported by fees for service, would remain as separate bodies.

The Council of Bishops and the Connectional Table, which coordinates the denomination’s ministry and resources, initiated the Call to Action after decades of declining U.S. membership.

The U.S. membership has decreased by 29 percent since 1968, falling from 10.7 million members to fewer than 8 million. The average U.S. member’s age is now 57. After two independent studies, the Call to Action Steering Team concluded that the status quo of a shrinking and aging U.S. church is “toxic” and unsustainable.

The Call to Action report exhorted the denomination to redirect its attention, energy and resources toward fostering and sustaining an increased number of vital congregations. Agency executives, in their statement, affirmed that goal.

Another group, the Interim Operations Team, devised the recommended changes, and the Connectional Table drafted the legislation.

“These proposals can certainly benefit from additional work to perfect them,” said Alexander, the executive coordinator of the Interim Operations Team. “At their essence, the proposals call for intense and concentrated focus on vital congregations, new approaches in leadership, changes in how we deploy resources and unified governance and administration of program agency work.”

Other concerns

The potential funding cut is not the only change that worries some agency executives about reorganization proposals.

The Rev. Larry Hollon, top executive of United Methodist Communications, is troubled that the proposal puts communications in an office of shared services. That office includes the work now done by the General Council on Finance and Administration, the United Methodist Commission on Archives and History and information technology departments across the agencies.

“The ability to project the church’s voice into the wider public conversations about faith and values is critical today,” Hollon said. “In fact, it is a responsibility of our call to be faithful disciples. Paul, in his letter to the Philippians, admonishes us to bring the light of the gospel to a culture of darkness. The communications function of The United Methodist Church is about supporting disciple-making.”



Barbara A. Boigegrain
Barbara A. Boigegrain
View in Photo Gallery

The Methodist Federation for Social Action, an unofficial progressive caucus, has submitted legislation for an alternative reorganization that preserves most agencies under their own, smaller boards.

However, the group’s proposal also creates a Center for Resourcing of Operations that combines the roles of the General Council on Finance and Administration, United Methodist Communications and the United Methodist Board of Pension and Health Benefits.

That combination of agency functions could pose a liability risk to the denomination’s finances, said Barbara Boigegrain, the pension board’s top executive.

“If the (board) is merged with other entities in the church under a common board, the opportunity for legal action impacting all church financial assets is much greater,” she explained.

“The temptation to lower conference contributions to the pension plans in favor of more immediate missional and programmatic priorities increases dramatically. Today, in the public sector, we see the result of mixing public priority and authority over the pension funds in the severe underfunding of many state and public pension plans.”

The Rev. Robert J. Williams, the chief executive of the Commission on Archives and History, likewise would prefer his agency to remain separate with its own board.



The Rev. Robert Williams. A UMNS 2008 file photo by John Goodwin.
The Rev. Robert Williams
A UMNS 2008 file photo
by John Goodwin.
View in Photo Gallery

One of his concerns is that “the proposals concerning the structures of the general agencies lack any evidence to support claims that the church will be better off or that more vital congregations will be created. It is simply an effort to cut the budgets.”

Action already being taken

Both Hanke of United Methodist Men, and Thomas Kemper, the top executive of the United Methodist Board of Global Ministries, point out that the agencies have already taken steps to respond to the Call to Action.

“We have sometimes been depicted as intransigent, that we don’t want to change,” Hanke said. “But that’s not true; we have already changed.”

He points out that even before the Connectional Table devised its restructuring legislation, most of the agencies were developing their own legislation to shrink their boards by some 266 members. Hanke said his and other agencies have increased interagency collaboration and now meet and provide training online more to curb costs.

Kemper, a German citizen and the first top executive from outside the United States to lead a general agency, said he recognizes the strengths of the global United Methodist Church as well as the need for change. His governing board, the largest of the agencies, has voted to cut its membership by two-thirds.

“I pray that the 2012 General Conference will take wise and careful actions that will greatly enliven our whole church and result in greater numbers of more vital congregations everywhere,” he said. “The general agencies receive a relatively small percentage of what United Methodists contribute annually to the church, but in whatever configuration, these organizations are connective tissue within the denomination — necessary and vital.”

*Hahn is a multimedia news reporter for United Methodist News Service.

News media contact: Heather Hahn, Nashville, Tenn., (615) 742-5470 or newsdesk@umcom.org

Commenting Rules

Comments will not appear until approved by a moderator, which will occur at least twice daily.

Please keep your comments brief. Avoid personal attacks and do not use inflammatory or demeaning language.

See our Comment Policy for more information.

Glad you liked it. Would you like to share?

Sharing this page …

Thanks! Close

Comments for this page are closed.

Showing 10 comments

  • Bob 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    Change is always difficult. It is especially hard to unerstand the need if you believe you work is important and meaninful to something as important as our Great Church. It is however evident that we as Methodists need to review where we ar and how we arrived at a place so different from our visions of growth. A loss of 3 million members over a period of 40 plus years is a sure sign that some things must change. Please let us all pray for guidance from The Holy Spirit as we plan for our growth. Perhapa we would do well to remember Matthew 28:16-20 as we plan our futur.

    show more show less
  • RevDLM 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    I am a second-career pastor and I worked for a major corporation in the 1980's (a government contractor).  We had our cost cutting and restructuring as did our government counterparts--all in the name of cutting beauracracy.  Sadly the only thing that survived was the beauracracy.   The missions of the work we did as well as what the government did is a thing of the past. Yet today they are really making much progress in this work in China, Japan and Europe.  In the US, the research is nill but the beauracracy is still in tact.  That is because WE LOST SIGHT OF THE MISSION!  I fear our church is making the same terrible mistake.  What happened to Follow Jesus, Make Disciples, Transform the World?  We should look at how to do this rather than how not to!

    show more show less
  • halehawk 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    As a retired pastor, I have nothing to lose by saying honestly that what we have here is a power grab by wealthy, large church pastors who see very little need for the expertise of boards and agencies, and who view small churches and the boards and agencies an inefficient waste of resources. If the current proposal is adopted, I predict that a handful of large congregations will become the main resourcing stations for other congregations in the area. The current pastors of these  smaller congregations will be "let go" when their metrics don't measure up, and pastors chosen by the large church pastors will be installed in those churches as proteges of the "successful" pastors. I am appalled by the disguised greed I see operating here. 

    I have submitted a petition to general conference concerning equitable compensation that would help me swallow the new structure more easily.  My proposal changes our definition of equitable compensation by adding the idea of a MAXIMUM compensation level and creating a proportional compensation RANGE for clergy.  You may read my petition at http://hollyboardman.wordpress...

    Greed is at the root of this war.  I have trouble stomaching the new proposal as a result.

    show more show less
  • dan bowman 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    Just as important as whatever decisions that the GC makes is that we must understand why agencies grew to the bloated level that they did and that leadership must embrace safe guards to make sure it does not happen again.  Bureaucracy tends to give birth to more bureaucracy and it is too expensive a mistake for the UM Church to make again.  

        

    show more show less
  • JJMalick 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    "The church doesn't DO mission. The church IS mission."  Alan Kirton-2000.  I honestly understand that  revenue is falling, the number of healthy churches is declining, and some cutting of budgets and possibly agencies is necessary. But, like the rest of the 'people' in the pew, I don't want it to be something that constricts the ministry of the church. We are and always have been missional.  What will happen to the least and the lost if agencies cannot reach out to help because the Board they are under gets cut?  The name of the game is not who gets the axe, but rather who are we, the church, going to be in the next four years. If we are not fervently involved in mission, discipleship, witness and outreach the church will fall. And, where is our faith?   

    show more show less
  • danielhixon 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    It seems that the restructuring will of course cut out some ministries that are currently happening.  And of course they will be seen as "vital" to somebody.  But as I understand it the point to what we have been doing over the past few years is to focus our efforts and our resources around those areas of ministry that we as a corporate body feel will have the maximum impact for the cause of Christ and the health of the church.  The truth is we have to make hard decisions sometime, and somebody's job or somebody's favorite church program will be cut.  I myself am concerned about potentially losing some of the good (especially online) resources that the Board of Discipleship puts out, but if that's what is needed for the church's mission, that is what we should do...

    show more show less
  • Billy K 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    I am concerned that cutting boards to very small numbers because of travel costs, etc in effect makes these agencies exactly opposite of what the studies showed was the problem with these agencies.  A Board that has general representatives from a wider swath of the church is more representative from bottom to top.  A board for a General Church agency that has a very small board is very much making a centralized, top down agency that is not as representative.  It will of course mean that it can change and adapt faster but the pitfalls are that it puts in the hands of a small few the ability to steer agencies with out much opportunity for correction by the body so if the leadership is able to get their people in  (left, right, or other) then the ship could be steered away from who we are without really representing the most United Methodists.  There need to be some kinds of checks and balances.

    show more show less
  • KLMunson 2 comments collapsed Collapse Expand

    I am concerned that we're not hearing more about the role of technology.  Weem's and Rendle's work points to what is possible but I don't see it incorporated into the plans.  The current umc.org website is frustrating to navigate or search and Cokesbury.com is the epitomy of "siloed."  Local churches need to be connected to each other as well as denominational resources via a flexible, user friendly, robust communication system.  Seeing that in the plans would give me a good deal more confidence.

    show more show less
  • RevDLM 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    KL,
      I agree that using the technology is a must but before we can use this technology we must make sure it is avalable in all areas of the world (not to mention US).  You can find where I live just by looking at any Cell Phone coverage map on the spaces not covered!  For us the cost of being connected is somewhat more steep than most.  Moreover, I work with the UMC in the D. R. Congo.  They have another challenge altogether--no power to operate any equipment.  So the work that needs to be done is much more than optimizing web sites.  I fear that if GBGM is eliminated or reduced any further, the UMC in the D. R. Congo will struggle even moreso than it already is!

    show more show less
  • Creed Pogue 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

    The regulatory agencies should be first on the chopping block since they aren't missional.  They don't bring new disciples.  Eliminating GCRR and COSROW would save $3.6 million a year.  We should ask whether we should spend the same amount on GBCS as the SBC spends on its Religious Liberty Commission even though the SBC is double our size.  Bringing that to a two-thirds level would save another $896K a year.  Is anyone asking to merge with us at this point?  Instead of leaving Christian Unity as a separate line item and increasing Ecumenical Representative travel, we should reduce the line item for GCCUIC to $500K, reduce Ecumenical Representative travel to $100K a year, reduce the line items for conversations and relations to a total of $100K, reduce the WCC contribution to $525K and the NCC one to the same $525K and instead of increasing the Ecumenical Office in the COB it should be decreased to $25K a year for total savings of $1.11 million.  Those three areas would save $5.606 million.

    show more show less

Reactions

Ask Now

This will not reach a local church, district or conference office. InfoServ* staff will answer your question, or direct it to someone who can provide information and/or resources.

Phone
(optional)

*InfoServ ( about ) is a ministry of United Methodist Communications located in Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 1-800-251-8140

Not receiving a reply?
Your Spam Blocker might not recognize our email address. Add this address to your list of approved senders.

Would you like to ask any questions about this story?ASK US NOW