On the Commissioned Elder and Provisional Member of the Annual Conference
and the Sacrament of Holy Communion in The United Methodist Church
Concern for Sacramental Integrity
and the Sacrament of Holy Communion in The United Methodist Church
Concern for Sacramental Integrity
A number of incidents while I served three years as a probationary member of the United Methodist clergy covenant as well as since I have been ordained have provoked this response. As I served in campus ministry, I was asked many times to guest preach in local congregations, and on some of those occasions, I was asked to lead the congregation in celebrating the Sacrament of Holy Communion. On each of those occasions, I declined to do so because of my own personal regard for the integrity of the celebration, and to comply with the Discipline of our Church. And yet, that should not have had to be a personal decision. It should be reinforced by clergy colleagues and certainly by superintendents. Unfortunately, my story is not unique: I continue to hear similar stories which deeply disturb me. Many clergy seem unaware of current authorized practice. At the risk of taking something on which is far above my pay scale, let us review...
Disciplinary Provisions
This issue is one which has plagued Methodism from its early days. The official teaching document adopted by the 2004 General Conference, This Holy Mystery, reminds us that:
"[John] Wesley was convinced that there could be no sacramental ministry without ordination as elder. This conviction ultimately determined his decision to perform ‘extraordinary’ ordinations himself...Under the terms of the Book of Discipline, several groups of people are authorized to preside at Eucharist in the charges to which they are appointed.... "
(This Holy Mystery: A United Methodist Understanding of Holy Communion, as recorded in The Book of Resolutions of The United Methodist Church, 2008, Resolution #8014, p. 991.)
Among these groups of people will be found the commissioned elder/provisional member, as illustrated by the current Discipline:
"A provisional member preparing for ordination as an elder shall be licensed for pastoral ministry (¶ 315). "
(The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church—2008, ¶ 326.2.)
"Provisional elders...may be licensed by the bishop to perform all the duties of the pastor (¶ 340), including the sacraments of baptism and Holy Communion...within and while appointed to a particular charge or extension ministry. For the purposes of these paragraphs the charge or extension ministry will be defined as ‘people within or related to the community or ministry setting being served.’ "
(The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church—2008, ¶ 316.1.)
Theology of Commissioning and Ordination
These two paragraphs indicate the source of authority in a local church that is given to commissioned clergy and provisional elders: it stems from their license for pastoral ministry. Though their identity as clergy stems from the act of commissioning, they function as a licensed local pastor. This dichotomy will not be unified and cemented as a life-long part of their identity until ordination. Ordination is the act of the Spirit which gifts individuals for apostolic ministry; it also confers the authorization and blessing of the Church for a gospel ministry unbound by time or location.
However, licensing in the United Methodist tradition, whether in the transitional state of provisional membership & commissioning or for the long-term as a local pastor, is a recognition that the Spirit is still unfolding the gifts of ministry in an individual. Moreover, licensing for pastoral ministry only recognizes a local and temporary (rather than universal or “catholic,” and life-long) call.
The Limits of Sacramental Responsibility
I cannot find anywhere--neither in the paragraphs relating to the ministry of local pastors & provisional elders nor in the paragraphs relating to the responsibilities of bishops & district superintendents--a place where the current Discipline provides for the administration of the sacraments by those not ordained as an Elder anywhere other than in their appointment. Moreover, regardless of what may have been past practice, the current Discipline does not delegate authority on this matter to a person or group: no bishop, district superintendent, cabinet member, senior pastor, Board of Ordained Ministry, nor District Committee on Ministry may make such an authorization.
In the event that there might be a neglect of the Sacramental life of a congregation or assembly, This Holy Mystery suggests suitable alternatives: celebration by a bishop, district superintendent, elder serving in extension ministries, or retired elder. (cf. This Holy Mystery: A United Methodist Understanding of Holy Communion, as recorded in The Book of Resolutions of The United Methodist Church, 2008, Resolution #8014, p. 992; cf. Discipline ¶ 340.2.b & ¶ 344.3.a.) A desire to further the mission of the church would still have to follow the Disciplinary procedure to begin a new church community; we should treat the celebration of Holy Communion with at least equal regard, even when we desire to "spread scriptural holiness across the land."
There are other reasons—theological, ecclesiological, missional, and practical—why I believe that this continued occurrence is wrong. There may also be reasons to review our current practice and re-open the debate on our orders of ministry and theology of the Eucharist. But I submit that--whether it is in departing from the tradition of the entire Church (without sufficient cause), violating the unity of the Body of Christ by engaging in practices unrecognizable by our ecumenical brothers and sisters, neglecting to be aware of the current requirements in United Methodism, or deliberately refusing to submit to the Discipline--the rogue practice of asking or allowing provisional elders or local pastors to celebrate the Sacraments outside of their appointment is un-collegial, disobedient, and a failure of the Church.
---Josh Hale written July 28, 200
This is my response.
I really miss the former ordination process whereby everyone was ordained as an deacon. If you were called to be an Elder you were ordained an a Transitional Deacon and then ordained as an Elder. We abandoned this process because we were creating a permanent diaconate no longer a transitional and created the practice of commissioning for ministry. I understand that this was in part to secure the integrity and identity of the newly recovered Order of Deacon.
While I think it is important and necessary to support the our new understanding of ministry with the creation of the permanent Order of Deacon, I hate that we have turned our back on the tradition of the church. I think there is something to be said that all Elders come through the diaconate. All those who are ordained share a common ordination to Word and Service. For Deacons this remains the areas to which they engage the world. For Elders they are ordained to Word, Sacrament, Order and Service. Together we have a common ministry of Word and Service. We also have specific ministry as Deacons are also called to exercise the their particular ministry in the church and the world. I realize this discussion of ordaination is not specifically related to Josh's post but I think it is related as well as an important part of the conversation. I can't help but wonder if we would be having any of this conversation if we had not abandoned our process in 2000. I would love to hear other people's response, Deacons, Elders, candidates and laity.
Disciplinary Provisions
This issue is one which has plagued Methodism from its early days. The official teaching document adopted by the 2004 General Conference, This Holy Mystery, reminds us that:
"[John] Wesley was convinced that there could be no sacramental ministry without ordination as elder. This conviction ultimately determined his decision to perform ‘extraordinary’ ordinations himself...Under the terms of the Book of Discipline, several groups of people are authorized to preside at Eucharist in the charges to which they are appointed.... "
(This Holy Mystery: A United Methodist Understanding of Holy Communion, as recorded in The Book of Resolutions of The United Methodist Church, 2008, Resolution #8014, p. 991.)
Among these groups of people will be found the commissioned elder/provisional member, as illustrated by the current Discipline:
"A provisional member preparing for ordination as an elder shall be licensed for pastoral ministry (¶ 315). "
(The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church—2008, ¶ 326.2.)
"Provisional elders...may be licensed by the bishop to perform all the duties of the pastor (¶ 340), including the sacraments of baptism and Holy Communion...within and while appointed to a particular charge or extension ministry. For the purposes of these paragraphs the charge or extension ministry will be defined as ‘people within or related to the community or ministry setting being served.’ "
(The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church—2008, ¶ 316.1.)
Theology of Commissioning and Ordination
These two paragraphs indicate the source of authority in a local church that is given to commissioned clergy and provisional elders: it stems from their license for pastoral ministry. Though their identity as clergy stems from the act of commissioning, they function as a licensed local pastor. This dichotomy will not be unified and cemented as a life-long part of their identity until ordination. Ordination is the act of the Spirit which gifts individuals for apostolic ministry; it also confers the authorization and blessing of the Church for a gospel ministry unbound by time or location.
However, licensing in the United Methodist tradition, whether in the transitional state of provisional membership & commissioning or for the long-term as a local pastor, is a recognition that the Spirit is still unfolding the gifts of ministry in an individual. Moreover, licensing for pastoral ministry only recognizes a local and temporary (rather than universal or “catholic,” and life-long) call.
The Limits of Sacramental Responsibility
I cannot find anywhere--neither in the paragraphs relating to the ministry of local pastors & provisional elders nor in the paragraphs relating to the responsibilities of bishops & district superintendents--a place where the current Discipline provides for the administration of the sacraments by those not ordained as an Elder anywhere other than in their appointment. Moreover, regardless of what may have been past practice, the current Discipline does not delegate authority on this matter to a person or group: no bishop, district superintendent, cabinet member, senior pastor, Board of Ordained Ministry, nor District Committee on Ministry may make such an authorization.
In the event that there might be a neglect of the Sacramental life of a congregation or assembly, This Holy Mystery suggests suitable alternatives: celebration by a bishop, district superintendent, elder serving in extension ministries, or retired elder. (cf. This Holy Mystery: A United Methodist Understanding of Holy Communion, as recorded in The Book of Resolutions of The United Methodist Church, 2008, Resolution #8014, p. 992; cf. Discipline ¶ 340.2.b & ¶ 344.3.a.) A desire to further the mission of the church would still have to follow the Disciplinary procedure to begin a new church community; we should treat the celebration of Holy Communion with at least equal regard, even when we desire to "spread scriptural holiness across the land."
There are other reasons—theological, ecclesiological, missional, and practical—why I believe that this continued occurrence is wrong. There may also be reasons to review our current practice and re-open the debate on our orders of ministry and theology of the Eucharist. But I submit that--whether it is in departing from the tradition of the entire Church (without sufficient cause), violating the unity of the Body of Christ by engaging in practices unrecognizable by our ecumenical brothers and sisters, neglecting to be aware of the current requirements in United Methodism, or deliberately refusing to submit to the Discipline--the rogue practice of asking or allowing provisional elders or local pastors to celebrate the Sacraments outside of their appointment is un-collegial, disobedient, and a failure of the Church.
---Josh Hale written July 28, 200
This is my response.
I really miss the former ordination process whereby everyone was ordained as an deacon. If you were called to be an Elder you were ordained an a Transitional Deacon and then ordained as an Elder. We abandoned this process because we were creating a permanent diaconate no longer a transitional and created the practice of commissioning for ministry. I understand that this was in part to secure the integrity and identity of the newly recovered Order of Deacon.
While I think it is important and necessary to support the our new understanding of ministry with the creation of the permanent Order of Deacon, I hate that we have turned our back on the tradition of the church. I think there is something to be said that all Elders come through the diaconate. All those who are ordained share a common ordination to Word and Service. For Deacons this remains the areas to which they engage the world. For Elders they are ordained to Word, Sacrament, Order and Service. Together we have a common ministry of Word and Service. We also have specific ministry as Deacons are also called to exercise the their particular ministry in the church and the world. I realize this discussion of ordaination is not specifically related to Josh's post but I think it is related as well as an important part of the conversation. I can't help but wonder if we would be having any of this conversation if we had not abandoned our process in 2000. I would love to hear other people's response, Deacons, Elders, candidates and laity.
