MESA Licensed Ministry Study Marjorie H. Royle, Ph.D. Clay Pots Research 4/2018

Transcription

1 MESA Licensed Ministry Study Marjorie H. Royle, Ph.D. Clay Pots Research 4/18 Licensed Ministry (LM) is a significant segment of ministry in the UCC, with 66 current Licensed Ministers on the UCC DataHub. In previous studies of UCC clergy, the percentage of senior or solo pastors who had less than a seminary degree increased from 7.6% in to 12% in 1. 1 Given the increasing number of small congregations in the denomination, this trend is only likely to increase in the future. In the summer of 17, the Ministerial Excellence, Support & Authorization (MESA) team conducted two on-line surveys on Licensed Ministry, one for Associate Conference Ministers/Conference Ministers (ACM Survey) and a second for Licensed Ministers themselves (LM Survey). 2 A total of 64 ACM s or Conference Ministers in 33 of the 38 Conferences responded, describing the practices in their Associations or Conferences. In addition, 238 LM s in 33 Conferences provided their experiences and perspectives. The Conferences and Associations that are represented are shown in Table A-1 in the Appendix. How Many Licensed Ministers Are Serving Churches? Licensed ministers are present in every Conference, although some Conferences have many more than others, as can be seen in Figure 1 3 and Appendix Table A-1. The Nebraska Conference has the highest percentage of LM s, 3%, while California Nevada Northern Conference has the lowest at less than 1%. Of the Associations reporting, the largest Figure 1. Percent of Churches Served by Licensed Ministers by Association 5 to 6% 4 to 5% 3 to 4% to 3% 1 to % 6 to 1% to 5% 1 Faith Communities Today studies. 2 The ACM Survey was sent via the UCC MESA Memo to all staff in all 38 Conferences. The LM Survey was sent directly to all 66 Licensed Ministers included in the Data Hub. Links to the surveys were also provided in some Conference newsletters. The 238 LM s who responded represent 36% of the LM s with information on record. Although every Conference was represented by either ACM s or LM s or both, the LM response rates varied by Conference, and responses from Conference staff did not include every Association. In some cases, the Associations most likely to have LM s, such as the Dakota Association, were not represented. Also, some reports were incomplete, providing no data for some Conferences on some questions. 3 Graphs showing data from the ACM surveys are presented on a white background, those showing data from the LM survey are presented on a yellow background.

2 number (22) have only 5% or fewer churches served by LM s. Three Associations, the Western Association in Rocky Mountain, the Prairie Association in Nebraska, and the Association of Hawaiian Evangelical Churches in Hawaii, reported that 5 to 6% of their churches are served by LM s. In general, ACM reports of the percentages of LM s serving churches were larger than would be expected from the numbers serving in the Conferences according to the DataHub. Some of this discrepancy may be because sometimes the estimates were from only one Association and may have been lower in other parts of the Conference, with ACM s from Associations with more LM s more likely to have completed the surveys and ACM s with no LM s may not have completed it at all. In addition, people often overestimate small percentages, perceiving them as larger than their actual numbers. The estimates in Appendix A-1 all represent different approaches to understanding the prevalence of LM s serving churches in Conferences throughout the denomination, each with its limitations. Taken together, they suggest that an estimate of 1% of churches served by LM s is realistic and similar to that found in earlier studies. What Are Licensed Ministers? Association Committees on Ministry (COM) grant licenses to applicants in several different circumstances, creating a category in which the members may have little in common. To understand how different Associations use this category, ACM s were asked to say how often they use LM in various circumstances. The situation which the ACM s chose most frequently was When a person is identified and called into pastoral leadership but does not feel called to ordination, licensure is used to provide temporary authorization and oversight. Generally, they are lay people who have not graduated from seminary but feel called to ministry or are asked to consider serving a church, usually a small and often rural church for which recruiting an ordained pastor is difficult. Often they are bi-vocational or second-career individuals who have attended a theological training program, although not three years of seminary. Typically, they are licensed for a particular setting and a limited length of time. In Figure 2, below, these are represented by the left-most bar Not called to ordination. Of the ACM s responding to the survey, 38% said they license ministers for this reason frequently and 46% do so occasionally. However, 16% say they never do so. A second situation with some overlap with the first is When a church hires someone outside of the search and call process, who the COM determines to be unsuitable for ordination, licensure is used by the COM to provide oversight and covenant. This is represented by the fourth bar from the left. 14% of the ACM s say they license in this situation frequently, 56% say they do so occasionally, and 3% say they never do so. 2

3 Figure 2. Circumstances in which Licensure is Used Percent Using It 1% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% % 1% % Not called to ordination Temporary for Sacraments Formation process Unsuitable for ordination Other Denomination Uses of Licensure Cultural contexts Never Occasionally Frequently The second major reason for licensing ministers is to provide authorization for Members in Discernment (MID s) to pastor churches and administer the Sacraments, while they are still in seminary, awaiting a call, or awaiting ordination. The second bar in Figure 2 presents ACM s responses to Licensure is used to provide temporary authorization for a MID to celebrate sacraments. 26% of the ACM s say they license MID s frequently, 66% do so occasionally, and 9% say they never do so. A smaller number (in the third bar), 17%, say that frequently Licensure is used as a formation process toward ordained ministry as referenced in the UCC s Ministry Issues Pronouncement. This use for MID s may overlap with the Temporary for Sacraments use. Another reason for using licensure is When a person from another denomination is called to serve a congregation, but their ordination/authorization by the other denomination is not recognized by the UCC (so Privilege of Call or Dual Standing do not apply), licensure is used to provide oversight. Only 14% of ACM s say they use this frequently, 52% do it occasionally, and 34% never do it. Finally, sometimes Licensure is used when appropriate to culturally specific contexts. Few ACM s (9%) said that they frequently use Licensed Ministry to find pastors for particular culturally-specific contexts, although 44% said they occasionally do, and 47%, nearly half, said that they never do and have no culture-specific churches. In comments, several ACM s said that the few such churches in their Associations have ordained pastors, so this need has not occurred. One caution in interpreting these percentages is that responses from ACM s did not include some of the areas with the 3

4 most culture-specific churches, so these percentages may be underestimates of this use of licensing. Of the 34 ACM s reporting that LM is used in culture-specific situations, 47% said that the Kinship/Mentorship structure raises up a person within the congregation for ministerial leadership in that specific local church, 23% said that an ethnic circle of elders helps delegate pastoral leaders across several churches as needed, and % said that church leaders from a denomination/organization (such as TFAM) outside of the UCC assigns or recommends pastoral leadership for these churches. However, 47% ACM s said that the UCC Association or Conference has involvement in identifying leaders, as well. Conferences and Associations within them vary widely in many factors including geography, the numbers of small churches and churches of different ethnic groups, urban, suburban, and rural mix and the isolation of churches which might allow for yoking, the presence of seminaries any lay theological training programs, and the ability to attract ordained ministers from other Conferences. All these may be factors in the large differences among Conferences in the circumstances in which they use licensure. Conferences differed significantly in three uses: when a church hires someone outside of the search and call process whom the COM determines to be unsuitable for ordination, when a person is identified and called into pastoral leadership but does not feel called to ordination, and in culturally specific contexts. Table 1 shows the Conferences that report that they never use each of these reasons and the ones that use them frequently. Some who say they never use a reason may have some LM s in this category because the reason was used in the past or is used by an Association that did not complete the survey. 4

5 Never Table 1 Conference Differences in Circumstances for which Licensing is Used COM determines is unsuitable for ordination LM does not feel called to ordination Culturally specific contexts Cal. Nevada Southern Cal. Nevada Northern Indiana-Kentucky Massachusetts Iowa Rhode Island Maine Rocky Mountain Michigan Vermont Montana N. Wyo. Nebraska New Hampshire Penn Central Penn Southeast Rhode Island Wisconsin Frequently Iowa Minnesota Central Atlantic Illinois Indiana-Kentucky Iowa Maine Michigan Minnesota Montana N. Wyo. Nebraska New Hampshire New York Ohio Penn Southeast Rocky Mountain South Dakota Vermont Wisconsin Cal. Nevada-Northern Illinois Massachusetts Rocky Mountain South Dakota Who Are Licensed Ministers? Demographics of LM s As shown in Figure 3 below, of the LM s completing the survey, about 9% are white, and over half are over 6 years of age. About half (47%) are women. Nine percent say they are LGBTQ. Five percent report a physical disability, two percent report a mental health issue, and two percent report an age-related disability. 5

6 Figure 3. Demographics of Licensed Ministers - LM White 89% African- Amer. 5% Race/Ethnicity Asian/PI 4% Native Hispanic American 1% 1% % Age Over 7 15% % % % % Where Do Licensed Ministers Serve? Figure 4. Type of Ministry Position Assistant 4% Associate 9% Supply 9% Designated term 6% Interim 6% Settled 66% According to the LM s reports, about two thirds (66%) of LM s serve as settled pastors (see Figure 4). Associate pastors represent 9%, as do those who are licensed to do supply preaching. A few (4%) assist the pastor, often without pay. Only about a quarter of LM s report that their call is full-time, as can be seen in Figure 5. A third report that it is part-time without specifying the hours per week. One percent are retired, and most of the others report serving as needed, often either seasonally or as pulpit supply. 6

7 Three fourths of the LM s serve one church, Figure Hours Spent in Current Ministry Position although 8% serve more than one church. Of the remainder, 13% do pulpit 35 supply, and 3% serve in a 3 non-parish ministry. For 25 most of these ministers (71%) this is the first 15 setting for which they have 1 been licensed, while for 5 18% it is the second, 4% the third, and 6% more than the third. About half (46%) have been in the position for a year or less, while 9% have been there for 1-5 years, and nearly half (46%) have been there over 5 years. ACM s report that in their Associations, service of LM s tends to be longer-term, with over 4% having served from 5 to 15 years. Over 4% of LM s say that they have been licensed for more than 5 years, and another 4% say they have been licensed for less than a year. This reflects the two largest ways that LM is used, for MID s awaiting ordination and for longer-term LM s. Figure 6. Worship Size of Churches with LM s Under 25 19% Other 12% 1+ 2% % Percent Responding % % Full-time When ACM s were asked about the average size of congregations that use LM s in their Associations (see Figure 6), nearly half (48%) chose congregations with an average attendance of 25 to 5 members, and 19% chose congregations with under 25 attenders. 19% chose between 5 and 1 members, and only 2% chose congregations of greater than 1 members. In the United Church of Christ, 17% of congregations have a worship size of more than 1 members, showing that LM s serve smaller congregations. Most of those who did not give a number said that LM s serve in congregations of all sizes, with LM s in larger congregations often serving as Associate Pastors or pastoral assistants. 3/4 time 1/2 time 1/4 time Less than 1/4 time Part-time Other 7

8 Nearly half of LM s serve close to where they live, traveling 5 miles or less, although some travel much longer distances (see Figure 7). One ACM said that this is similar to the commute of ordained ministers in that conference as well. Those saying other explained that some LM s in urban areas, particularly those serving culture-specific churches, live near their churches, while others have longer commutes. Figure 7. LM s Distance from Church 5 miles 45% Other 9% 1+ miles 4% 5 miles 19% 25 miles 23% Compensation Both ACM s and LM s were asked whether their conference had separate guidelines for LM s, with the results presented in Figure 8 below. 25% of ACM s said that separate guidelines are used, 34% of LM s said that is true. This difference is not only because different numbers of both ACM s and LM s responded in different conferences. When results were examined conference by conference, agreement within conference was not large among LM s and more LM s thought that separate guidelines exist in their conference than the ACM s reported. The percentages of LM s receiving compensation in each category are not directly comparable with the responses of the ACM s themselves. The ACM s reported whether or not each category was used in their conference and many reported that several categories were used. LM s, on the other hand, reported on compensation they are receiving. In general, the ACM s were more likely to say that LM s serving part-time were paid at conference guidelines, while the LM s themselves were less likely to say they were, and more likely to say that they were receiving no compensation. Although the numbers of LM s who are not receiving compensation according to conference guidelines seem large, many ordained pastors do not receive compensation according to conference guidelines either, although the percentages are unknown. Congregations having difficulty attracting an ordained pastor probably are less able than most to be able to afford to meet conference guidelines, so these differences should not be surprising. 8

9 Figure 8. Range of Compensation for Licensed Ministers Percent Using It None Minimal Stipend PT Conf. Guidelines PT No Guidelines FT less than Guidelines ACM s FT in Conf. Guidelines Separate Guidelines Percent Using It None Minimal Stipend PT Conf. Guidelines PT No Guidelines FT less than Guidelines FT in Conf. Guidelines Separate Guidelines LM s Perhaps LM s are not receiving compensation according to conference guidelines because they serve in various positions. MID s awaiting ordination might be expected to receive more than people who have received training through a lay theological education program who are assisting a pastor or serving as an interim or pulpit supply. In fact, of the 8 LM s serving as assistants to the ordained pastor, 7 receive either minimal or no financial compensation. The designation as a Licensed Minister may be a way of legitimizing their contributions without paying for them. Half of those with seminary degrees were paid according to guidelines, a higher percentage than for all LM s. However, even among this group, % reported that they were paid a minimal amount and 17% said they were receiving no compensation. When compensation levels were examined by position, in Table 2, the departure from guidelines was widespread across all categories of ministry. More concerning is that sizable percentages in each ministry position are receiving a minimal amount for their services. 9

10 Table 2 Differences in Compensation by Ministry Position Compensation Settled (142 LM s) Associate (19 LM s) Interim/Term Limited (23 LM s) Full-time at Guidelines 6% 1% Full-time NOT 18% 8% at Guidelines Supply ( LM s) Part-time at guidelines 22% % 22% 15% Part-time NOT 37% 42% 3% % at guidelines Minimal 9% 21% 22% % None 9% 37% 9% 45% Another possible reason for LM s not receiving compensation according to conference guidelines may be because their conference does not have separate guidelines for LM s so the church makes adjustments to account for their lower training and experience. However, when LM responses were analyzed separately for those who said their conferences had separate guidelines, the majority of pastors still reported that they were not receiving conference guidelines, so having separate guidelines does not seem to have much effect. Finally, Conferences differ in conpensation practices. LM s often appear not to know whether or how the Conference Guidelines exist or how they apply to them. Although the questions asked of ACM s and LM s were not parallel, if the LM s responding are a representative sample of the LM s in their conferences (and they may not be), there is a general lack of agreement between ACM s and LM s about compensation. LM s reported having a wide variety of theological training, as can be Figure 9. Theological Training Before Licensure Percent MentorshipResponding Regional Theol Ed. Program Seminary degree Some seminary UCC Lay Academy Other denom. Lay Academy Other No formal training

11 seen in Figure 9, with those who were licensed as part of the ordination process being much more likely to have completed or have some seminary training. Most of the other responses described various lay training or regional schools of ministry. In addition to the training types listed, many also described individualized programs including writing papers on their personal faith or other topics, and attending specific training programs. Seven LM s completed some Clinical Pastoral Education. Some also mentioned being required to complete courses or other requirements the next time they were offered after licensure. And two were preachers kids who said that experience provided more practical information than is provided in seminary. Interest in Ordination Barriers 1% Might in future 4% Considering Other Denom. Figure 1. LM Considering Ordination Considered in the past In process 33% 22% in process 11% want to start Not Interested 44% Licensed instead 2% Other 2% The differences in the ways that LM is used in different Associations are reflected in the interest of LM s, themselves in pursuing ordination, as can be seen in Figure 1. When LM s were asked about their interest in ordination, a third reported that they are already in the process or want to start and 3% are ordained already in another Christian denomination without Privilege of Call or Dual Standing with the UCC. 44% reported that they have no interest in being ordained, for various reasons, and 4% had considered it in the past but decided not to pursue it or found it was not possible. A much smaller percentage, 1% are considering ordination Figure 11. Reasons LM Is Not Pursuing Ordination LM is temporary MDIV is required Can't afford seminary Cannot move for seminary Need education for seminary Not enough time No call to ordination No desire for seminary Ordained in other denom. No interest in more theol. Ed. Tried before Multiple paths of interest Too old 11

12 and another 4% would consider it if and when their life circumstances change to make it feasible. LM s gave a variety of reasons for not considering ordained ministry, as can be seen in Figure 11 above. Seminary was the major obstacle for most of those who are not pursuing ordination, because of the cost, time involved, and need to relocate as well as lack of desire to attend or being too old to start the process. Some explained that they do not have the time for seminary because of family responsibilities which was mentioned slightly more by women than by men, or because their part-time call requires them to be bi-vocational. However, of those not considering ordination, 14% said they were not called to ordination and 8% said they were interested in pursuing multiple paths to ordination. Based on their interest in ordination, the LM s can be divided into three groups, 53% who are not interested or considered but rejected ordination, 38% who are in the ordination process or would like to be or are ordained by another denomination, and 1% who are considering or would consider it if circumstances changed. These three groups are different in demographics and in the types of churches they serve, as can be seen in Table 3 below. Table 3 Demographic Characteristics of Licensed Ministers by Interest in Ordination Characteristic Not Interested in Ordination Considering or Would Consider Ordination In Ordination Process or Ordained Age 5 or under 4% 1% 4% Age 51 to 7 73% 7% 55% Age 71 or older 23% % 5% White/Euro. American 97% 85% 84% African American 3% % 11% Other Race/Ethnicity % 15% 6% Male Gender 53% 54% 5% LGBTQ 4% 4% 16% Disability 8% 4% 7% In current setting 1-5 years 38% 23% 51% In current setting > 5 years 52% 64% 28% Seminary degree 8% 9% 3% Some seminary 13% % 22% Plan to retire from present call 35% 9% 2% Settled pastor 61% 75% 67% Interim or other temporary % 15% 21% Associate 9% 5% 8% Other 9% 5% 3% Note: All differences are statistically significant except gender, disability, and type of call. 12

13 Those who are not interested in ordination are much older, have been in their current positions longer, and are more likely to be planning to stay in their current position until they retire. African Americans and LGBTQ persons are more likely to be in the ordination process than they are to not be interested in ordination. Not all those who are in the ordination process are young and out of seminary awaiting their first call, however. Less than half are under age 5, and only 3% have a seminary degree. Some LM s are serving a church while in seminary. Over a quarter have served their current church for over 5 years, perhaps while attending seminary parttime. As would be expected, Conferences differ in the percentages of LM s in each of these three categories, as can be seen in Table 4 below. These differences generally mirror the different ways in which Associations use LM. Table 4 Interest in Ordination by Conference Most Not Interested in Ordination Illinois Iowa Minnesota Montana N. Wyoming Penn Northeast Penn West Pennsylvania Southeast South Central Vermont Wisconsin Both in Ordination Process and Not Interested Connecticut Illinois South Indiana-Kentucky Kansas-Oklahoma Maine Massachusetts Michigan Missouri-Mid-South Nebraska New York Ohio Penn Central Rocky Mountain Southeast Most in Ordination Process or Ordained Cal. Nevada-Southern Calvin Synod Central Atlantic Florida Hawaii New Hampshire Pacific Northwest South Dakota Southern Like the first person to ride in the front car of a new roller coaster. This description of the experience of being a Licensed Minister captures what many LM s said in response to an open-ended question asking How would you describe your experiences as a licensed minister in the UCC? The vast majority (7%) of those responding to the question described their experience from positive to amazing!! The next most common response was challenging or humbling, given by 15%, and often the same person gave both responses. In 14% of the responses, people said that this ministry or congregation was the place that God had called them to be. Several were grateful to the UCC for allowing them the opportunity to answer God s call without needing to be ordained. 13

14 The group considering ordination now or in the future was the most positive about their experience, with 86% of those responding to the question saying how positive it was. This experience may be the reason why they are still considering ordination despite the time, effort and money needed. Of those not considering ordination, 66% made positive comments, while of those in the process, 55% did so, still a solid majority. Some people reported negative responses, including 4% who cited lack of support and 7% who felt that ordained ministers looked down on them or didn t recognize their ministry. Some of these reported good support from some people and lack of support from others. But the positives outweighed the negatives for nearly everyone, as they do for ordained ministers in other studies. The group considering ordination also were most likely to report being treated unequally, with 38% reporting it. This may also be a reason for them to consider ordination. Those in the ordination process were somewhat more likely to report unequal treatment, at 18% than those not considering ordination at 12%. While comments about the amount of support people received were not large (17% positive, 4% negative), those considering ordination reported the most support and those in the ordination process the least. LM s in Conferences with relatively larger numbers of LM s were more likely to say that they were not respected by other clergy, maybe because their larger numbers and not being in a path toward ordination made them a more visible class of clergy than in Conferences with just a few LM s in specific ministries. Another open-ended question asked What resources or support would be most helpful to you as a licensed minister? The most common, and encouraging, response given by nearly a third of those responding (31%) was that they have sufficient support. Further education and training was the most common request for additional support from 18% of the respondents, plus another 5% requesting on-line courses and 5% requesting specific types of training. Two related themes emerged. For people who are supporting their ministry with other jobs and are often underpaid for their ministry work, often both time and funds are short. That means that cost and convenient times and places of training and other activities are issues. Inexpensive courses and training events or more scholarships would be helpful. Also because many serve in rural areas, they have fewer colleagues nearby and more difficult access to Association events and would welcome gatherings of LM s either in person or on-line. Theology of Licensed Ministry - God Calls All Kinds of Fools. Differences in Conference policies about Licensed Ministry are rooted in different assumptions about what Licensed Ministry is. Therefore, both ACM s and LM s were asked several questions about their theology of licensed ministry. Figure 12 presents results from a question asked of ACM s about the typical assumptions regarding LM in their Associations. When asked about their assumptions, all ACM s agreed that licensing is necessary for celebrating communion, 9% agree that it should be time-limited, and 85% say it is necessary for baptizing. Most do not think it is necessary for 14

15 Figure 12. Assumptions about Licensed Ministry Percent Agreeing Communion Time-limited Baptism Lay ministry Pastoral office Cong'l leadership Life-long Assumption Public witness Preaching congregational leadership, although some said that the laity think it is. More believe that it is a lay ministry than a pastoral office. In their comments, several people said that it is setting-limited, as well as time-limited. Others said it is a way to provide authorization and oversight when other categories do not fit. Few thought it is life-long, or necessary for public witness or preaching. Percent Agreeing Conferences differed in these understandings. Differences were statistically significant for whether LM is time-limited, whether it is a pastoral office, and whether it is necessary for preaching. ACM s in the Indiana-Kentucky, South Dakota, Southern, and Vermont Conferences said is necessary for preaching, while others did not. Most considered it to be time-limited, although ACM s in Penn Central, South Central and Southwest thought it could be life-long as well as time-limited, and some ACM s in other conferences agreed Figure 13. Theology of Licensure ACM s % 1-1% 11-% Authority for Word and Sacrament representing the church universal. 21-3% 31-4% 41-49% 5% 51-6% 61-7% 71-8% 81-9% 91-99% 1% A lay ministry of the congregation for local preaching, teaching and administering the sacraments. Both ACM s and LM s were asked to choose on a sliding scale from % to 1% how their Association s (for ACM s) or their personal (for LM s) theology of LM fell between two understandings, Authority for Word and Sacrament representing the church universal, and A lay ministry of the congregation for local preaching, teaching, and administering the sacraments. As can be seen in Figures 13 and 14, both groups held a variety of views. LM s tended to choose either one end or 5% with smaller numbers choosing an intermediate point. ACM s were more likely to choose a response closer to a lay ministry, although many saw some 15

16 aspects of a broader authority as well. Different ACM s and LM s within a Conference often held different views. LM s were more likely than ACM s to say that they represent the church universal and their comments echoed this, seeing the two types of ministers as both ordained by God, if not by the Association. Both groups also described their Association s (ACM s) or their personal (LM s) theology of Licensed Ministry in open-ended questions. While many themes were similar, ACM s were more likely to emphasize Licensed while LM s were more likely to emphasize Ministry. For example, nearly half the ACM s said that LM is limited in time and place (49%) or authorization for ministry (47%) and nearly a quarter said it is authorization for the Sacraments (24%) and authorization for lay ministry (22%). In contrast, nearly a third (32%) of LM s mentioned pastoral tasks, including preaching, teaching, and pastoral care, and another 6% said their call is to share God s love. About a quarter agreed that LM is limited and less than ordained (28%) and it is authority to administer the sacraments (23%). However, they also emphasized that it is something that they are called by God to do (24%). Several mentioned that God calls people with different skills and, after having many years of experience in secular jobs, LM s have skills that, although they may differ from those of ordained clergy, are also ones needed by their churches, because God calls all kinds of fools. 11% said that LM is equal to although different from, ordained ministry. The Process of Finding, Qualifying, and Supervising LM ACM s Figure 14. Sources of Potential Licensed Ministers use a variety of sources to identify 6 people who could be LM s, as can 5 be seen in Figure The most common source is 3 the conference pool of Members in Discernment. 1 Next are local theological education or lay leadership programs. About 3% said They just show up. UCC Profile Snapshots are rarely used. The most common other response was that the church discerns a potential LM, sometimes with help from the ACM, and requests licensing. Percent Using It Conf. Pool of MIDs Local theo. ed. program Lay leadership programs Other ACM reccomendations They show up Conf. Pool of Licensed Seminaries Church ID's person UCC Profile Snapshots 16

17 Because this option was not asked specifically in the question, the 1% who use it probably is an underestimate. Conferences differ in the sources they use to find ACM s, with the use of Lay Leadership programs and referrals from staff of other conferences differing significantly. In general, the conferences that use LM s to fill small and rural pulpits use a greater number of sources than those that use LM s only as part of the ordination process. LM s report that they entered Licensed Ministry by a variety of ways. Some (21%) had completed a Conference or regional training and were ready to be licensed. Others (13%) were in a local church, or were near a church without a pastor and were asked to help. Nine percent were MID s who needed a temporary license while waiting for a call or for ordination. A few (4%) were from another denomination. A few had been identified and mentored by their pastor. About half (48%) had been members of the church to which they were licensed. The majority (63%) were not MID s before being licensed. According to most ACM s, a seminary degree is not required for LM, although some seminary or regional theological education is required in most cases. Most Associations require Boundary Training for LM s as they do for other ministers, and Figure 15. Requirements for Licensed Ministers Percent Using It Boundary Training ACM s Criminal Check Some theol. education Psychol. Assess Abbreviated Marks Marks of Faithful.. Percent Requiring It Seminary degree Boundary Training Criminal Check Psychol. Assess Marks of Faithful.. Transcripts LM s Letters of Reference CM Interviews UCC History & Polity Ecclesiastical Council 17

18 most also require a criminal check, and more than half require a psychological assessment. Some form of the Marks of Faithful and Effective Ministry is used by a majority, as well, as can be seen in Figure 15. When the LM s were asked what the requirements were for them to be approved, they were somewhat less likely to say that Boundary Training and Criminal checks were required, although these were required for most. Because some LM s have served for many years, they may not have remembered all the requirements, or these requirements may not have been in place when their licenses were granted, although they completed them after licensing. Letters of reference, interviews with the Conference Minister, and completing a UCC History and Polity class were the most common requirements not listed as items in the ACM surveys but added by respondents. Few were required to have an Ecclesiastical Council. Some also mentioned a written request from the calling church, specific coursework, or papers on their faith journey and specific theological topics as requirements. Others said that a condition of licensing was that they commit to taking specific courses. Half the conferences reported that they never license someone before an individual is called to a church. About 8% say that they either frequently or occasionally license after a request from a congregation, they license only after vetting, and they license with requirements for maintaining standing. Of those who license before a call, only about a third (32%) do so upon the request of an individual, 82% do so only after vetting and formation requirements are met, and 74% do so with requirements of formation as a condition of maintaining standing. In almost all Associations, ACM s reported vetting the candidates at some point in the process, in most cases before the person was licensed, either as part of the MID process or as part of Search and Call. Vetting occurred in different ways in different conferences. Figure 16. Vetting Process for Licensed Ministers Percent Using It COM vets before license Vetted as MID's Conf. vets in Search/Call COM vets for ongoing standing Cong. calls/no vetting Other 18

19 Most ACM s reported that when a church wants to fill a pastoral vacancy with a LM, most often the church contacts the conferences for assistance (81%) and uses a search committee (72%). The most common practices (Frequently and Standard Procedure in Figure 17) are a full search process including ordained and licensed candidates, with ordained first or both together. In some situations, about 3% of placements, the standard procedure is to help the congregation identify someone from within who could be licensed. Differences among conferences in placement procedures are large and statistically significant.for ways in which the search resembles that for ordained pastors. In most conferences, the church contacts the conference and uses a search committee. However, in some conferences that use more LM s to pastor small, rural churches, the ACM is more likely to Percent Using It Figure 17. Placement Practices for Licensed Ministers 1% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% % 1% % Full Search w/ ordained 1st Full Search/Ord. & Lic. Give Names of Licensed Placement Process Help ID from within None of these Never or N/A Rarely Occasionally Frequently Standard provide names of licensed or licensable candidates or work with the church to identify members who might be licensed and serve, and less likely to provide names of candidates, starting with ordained pastors first. Both ACM s and LM s report extensive supervision and oversight, with 9% of ACM s and 7% of LM s reporting that they meet with the Committee on Ministry (COM) annually (see Figure 18 below). The remainder say that the COM meetings are held every 3 to 5 years after LM s have been in their positions for several years. Most ACM s report that LM s have a supervisor who is usually ordained but not on site, although a little over 1% each have an ordained supervisor not on site or a nonordained supervisor on site. 9% of ACM s report that supervision is not assigned. Conferences do not differ significantly in the ways LM s are supervised. Smaller percentages of LM s report having supervision. 38% report meeting regularly with a mentor, 1% meet with a supervisor, and 13% meet with a cohort group. Only 2% report having no ongoing supervision. 19

20 Percent Using It Ordained not on site COM meets annually F igure 18. Supervision of Licensed M in isters COM meets less than an... Ordained on-site A C M s Non-ord. On-site No supervision LM s reported a variety of requirement for renewal of their licenses, with most meeting annually with the COM (75%). Other activities included 5% attending continuing education of their own choosing, 13% assigned activities by the COM, over half (54%) attending association and conference meetings and events (56%), and 87% attending Boundary Awareness Training. Percent Requiring It Fitness reviews of LM s were relatively uncommon, according to the ACM s, with 7 saying that they had not occurred. When they do occur, two-thirds of the ACM s reported that they place the results both in association files and the UCC DataHub. Another 5% reported that the reviews are placed only in the association files. 23% said that Fitness Reviews do not apply, and the association removes the license, while 9% said that the LM leaves the ministry setting COM meets annually Regular w/mentor Reg. In-person w/supervisor Cohort group Asso./Conf. Meetings Boundary Awareness COM formation tasks Self-choice contin. Ed. Other None LM s What Should Be Done about LM s? Both ACM s and LM s used the open-ended questions at the end of the surveys to provide their opinions on the future of Licensed Ministry, with many of the comments strongly supporting retaining this category of ministry. When asked to describe their experience with LM in the last five years, 33% of the ACM s said it was positive. In addition, 24% said it is an important option, the need for which is increasing. Twelve percent said that it provides oversight for people with less training whom a church decides to hire. Only 6% said their Association had few or no LM s (although those with no LM s would have been less likely to complete the surveys). Four percent cited problems with the process being ambiguous or not well understood.

21 In responding to the question asking How has the ministry of licensure shaped your conference/association search and call processes in the past five years? ACM s said that having the ministry of licensure has been helpful, and in some situations essential. 18% said it has been useful, another 28% said it has been useful in specific situations. About a quarter said it had little or no impact. Some (9%) said it had made their job more difficult. In response to the question If MID with Limited Standing, Ordained Ministerial Standing, Ordained Ministerial Partner Standing and Dual Standing were available, what needs of the church would not be met? many ACM s provided long and wellreasoned comments on why not having the LM option would be detrimental to many of the churches they serve, as well as to the denomination. Several major reasons were expressed. The most common, given by 24% was that people with talents for ministry would be lost to the UCC and the churches. Some also said that the gifts and talents of LM s are often a good match for the small, generally rural congregations they serve. Others said that ACM s would have extreme difficulty filling pulpits without the option of LM s. Small vital congregations will be unable to find pastors, one ACM said. Not only would this make the ACM s jobs more difficult, but the UCC would also lose churches. Twenty percent said that the result would be that some churches would close as a result, while others will resort to finding their own pastors who might be from another denomination that does not share the UCC s progressive theology. Non-UCC pastors may lead the church out of the UCC, or not having the UCC as a viable resource to fill their pulpits might break the bonds with the denomination so that they see no reason to stay. Also, without the goal of licensure, these leaders will not be helped to relate to the UCC. In addition, 14% said that the UCC will lose an accountability mechanism for those that the local congregation chooses to call. Some ACM s (6%) cautioned that the result would be that people without seminary background and the commitment to all that ordination entails would be forced into ordination, which would make ordination less meaningful. If people agreed to do the required work but then did not, the Association would have to decide whether to ordain them anyway. One person cautioned that If Licensure is eliminated and everyone is Ordained without benefit of seminary, who would go? What would be lost would be an educated, formed clergy. Another 6% cautioned that, without the LM option, ACM s would have to tailor a program for every MID with limited standing. Some Associations would have to develop their own training programs to fill the gap. When asked Is there anything else about licensed ministry that you would like us to know? two-thirds of the ACM s who responded again said that Licensed Ministry is useful and should be kept. 23% mentioned specific changed that might improve the process. In response to a similar question, ten percent of LM s who responded said that small rural churches need the option of LM because often they cannot attract ordained ministers. Another six percent said that LM is needed and should be kept. 21

22 Continuing education of LM s was mentioned as important both in moving them toward ordination and in equipping them for their pastorates. In addition, LM s stated that more training would be a way to support them. Greater consistency between Associations and within Associations over time is one need mentioned by both ACM s and LM s themselves. While diversity in practice has advantages such as providing ways to tailor policies and procedures for local contexts and allowing for local experiments, consistency in policies and procedures does provide comparability across conferences. The authority of the Association provided by the UCC Constitution in matters of clergy credentialing needs to be honored. However, many Association Committees on Ministry may welcome sample procedures or best practices for their consideration, modification and adoption. This procedure would provide more consistency across associations and conferences while still preserving autonomy. Greater clarity about policies and procedures, both from MESA and within Conferences and Associations, also was mentioned as a need. LM s and ACM s in the same Conferences often had differing ideas about existing policies. Several ACM s said that discussion within their Conferences about LM has served to clarify issues and gain greater acceptance of changes. Such conversation might also help increase the respect for LM s among ordained clergy. Although responses to all these questions stressed the importance of keeping the LM option, some ACM s said that it could be dropped. Nine percent said that the listed options would be sufficient. Others thought the proposal would work if implemented slowly with concern for the existing LM s and the rationale explained. Three percent said that moving LM s toward ordination is the right thing to do. And 8% promised to work hard to implement any changes, with some saying they have already begun trying to implement changes in the draft Manual on the Ministry. One ACM said This will be a difficult road, but I think it's an important one for us to take - but we must do so wisely and well! 22

23 Conference Table A-1 Responses from Licensed Ministers and Staff by Conference Number Percent of Estimated # Number of of LM s clergy who of churches LM surveys (DataHub are LM s served by received ) (DataHub) LM s Number of ACM/CM surveys received Cal. Nevada, Northern 1.2% -5% 3 Cal. Nevada, Southern % 5-1% 7 1 Calvin Synod 4 9.7% 1 Central Atlantic % -3% 3 2 Central Pacific 4 2.4% Connecticut % 5-1% 4 4 Florida 1 2.9% -5% 2 2 Hawaii 13.6% -3% 6 2 Illinois % 5-1% 5 3 Illinois South % 4 Indiana-Kentucky % 5-1% 11 1 Iowa % -3% 18 2 Kansas-Oklahoma 6 6.5% 2 1 Maine % -5% 5 7 (1 ACM) Massachusetts % -5% 4 2 Michigan % -5% 5 1 Minnesota % 1-% 4 1 Missouri Mid-South % 1-% 6 1 Montana N. Wyoming 6 1.1% -3% 3 1 Nebraska % 4-5% 13 3 New Hampshire 6 2.3% -3% 4 1 New York % 1-% 16 6 Northern Plains 5 1.2% Ohio % 1-% 3 3 Pacific Northwest 6 2.9% 5-1% 2 1 Penn Central 3 8.2% 1-% 7 2 Penn Northeast % -3% 15 1 Penn West % -3% 7 1 Pennsylvania Southeast % 5-1% 5 1 Rhode Island 4 5.3% -5% 1 Rocky Mountain 6 2.6% 5-6% 4 1 South Central 19 1.% 5-1% 7 2 South Dakota % -3% 1 1 Southeast % 5 Southern % -5% 3 2 Southwest 5 3.1% 5-1% 1 Vermont % 5-1% 1 1 Wisconsin 4.4% 1-% 7 3 No conference given 12 TOTAL % -6%

24 24