Re-inventing the Denomination
Indiana Denomination moves from central control back to “Connectional”
structure
Denominations tend toward centralization. Denominations often start out as a loosely
structured and connectional then gradually develop into centralized control and
bureaucracy. I know this—I saw the
reasons. Over 24 years in my own
denominational leadership I noted that every time we had a meeting with
district or local people they always “expected more” from their
denomination—programs, communication pieces, help, presence. When local and district people meet with
denominational officials they usually offer something they expect their leaders
“to do something about.” In this they
are like citizens of the USA who give scant praise for national leaders who “do
less and cost less” but generally elect to office politicians who “do things
for us.” Thus over tie denominations
gradually become more centralized and exact higher “taxes” from the local
church to support the increasing expectations of the people. Hardly ever does a denomination reverse this
trend. Until recently, that is.
The United
Brethren in Christ denomination with headquarters in Huntington, Indiana is
doing just that—reversing their centralized government back into a connectional
system. They are right now in the midst
of this risky/bold restructuring of their 215 churches that can only be
considered “a reinvention of their denomination.” This action will be
raising dust across the board since many denominations are looking at
restructuring in one way or another in the 21st century. Some are calling for a more connectional
approach to denominations—turning denominations into something more like the
Willow Creek Association. The spate of
sexual abuse suits is feeding some of this: in a centralized denomination when
one pastor abuses a child the victim can sure “all the way to the top” trying
to tap into the resources of districts and denominations. The UBIC is totally redesigning a formerly centralized
denomination where “the denomination owns the property” into a connectional
denomination that is a whole different pattern.
Here is a summary of the deatails:
Districts/conferences
replaced by “clusters”
The UBIC has eliminated their “annual
conferences “ (what many denomination’s call
“districts.” They are being replaced by “clusters” of similarly interested
churches no matter the geography—thus there could be a cluster of
mega-churches, rural churches, inner-city churches, church plants or whatever
other common needs and interests emerge in the future. The pastors and local
church leaders decide which cluster they want to join and they can drop out and
join another cluster in the future according to need. Each cluster of 5-10
churches determines its own focus as they work together to fulfill the great
commission. Each cluster suggests its own leader to the U.S. Bishop who makes
the final appointment of the “cluster leader.”
Tax Rate And Routing
The “tax rate is reduced to 3.5% of local church income (income less missions
and building fund) directly to the UBIC U. S.
Headquarters skipping the routing through a district or cluster. The local
church chooses where to send their missions support which is not included in
the denominational “tax.” Educational support is also not “taxed” and the local
church is free to sent their money directly to the denominational college,
Huntington University though the institution also gets a piece of the
Headquarters 3.5% too.
Property Given Back To Local Church
Formerly (like many denominations) though there were local “trustees” the actual ownership of local church property was in
the hands of the denomination. In a radical shift this denomination is
“giving back the property to those who paid for it in the first place.”
Doctrinal Stability & “the
Covenant.”
So how do they plan to retain doctrinally purity and stability? Each church connected
with the UBIC denomination is asked to sign an annual
“covenant” every two
years affirming its stance. A church who does not wish to any longer “sign the
covenant” is free to go its own way and leave the denomination.
Who did
this?
Such a restructuring is unlikely to ever
“come from the grass roots” in a denomination. Ideas that melt down
centralized control or taxes generally get squashed long before they get to the
proper legislative bodies. So how did the UBIC
get such a radical restructuring through? It came from the top.
Paul Hirschy, the US Bishop, called a special meeting of the General Board of
Administration to determine the future direction of the denomination. Bishop
Hirschy presented some recommendations to get the discussion started and after
extensive consideration the General Board passed some of the key issues
and appointed two teams to further develop the details. The details were then
presented to the delegates of the General Conference who made the final
decisions. PRESTO—they totally reinvented their denomination. (As
the new plan went into effect Bishop Paul Hirschy stepped aside.)
Click here to see the slimmed down new UBIC
Discipline.
Keith Drury
December 11, 2005
So, what do you think about this
kind of denominational restructuring? Is
it a good thing? Bad? What problems do you see
with it? Advantages?
Is it the wave of the future or merely deconstructing something good? What’s your opinion?
Click here to comment or read
others’ comments on this article