Eliminating Designated Lay Ministers in the United Church of Canada

[Dave Henderson]

The United Church's General Council Executive recently passed a series of proposals, that if passed, will effectively eliminate Designated Lay Ministry (DLM). Why is this happening? Do you consider DLM a "lesser" ministry than ordained or diaconal? Is the United Church eliminating this stream of ministry ro make it easier to forge new relationships with other denomonations? Why didn't the United Church suspend the DLM education stream when it knew it was poised to eliminate this position? Have I posed enough questions to satisfy those in the Socratic school? ;-) I am interested to hear from you regarding this.

 

[Mendalla]

I always found the DLM concept interesting, though it postdates my time in the United Church. UU'ism has long embraced lay leadership in the pulpit (in fact, I know at least three UU congregations in Ontario that have chosen to be entirely lay-led, though the local one occasionally gets ministers as guest speakers) without needing a formal designation. It offers workshops and such to help lay people learn and become better at service leadership, but there's no special designation to be earned. Any member is free to offer a service if accepted by their leadership. I was leading services in the local fellowship for a year or two before I even joined.

At the same time, I rather like the concept of lay leadership getting some kind of formal liturgical training and often saw the results of that not happening in my UU days. And keeping the education stream going when they knew they were going to eliminate seems a tad unfair to those who took it during that period.

 

[revjohn]

The United Church's General Council Executive recently passed a series of proposals, that if passed, will effectively eliminate Designated Lay Ministry (DLM). Why is this happening?

I suspect that it is happening for a number of reasons. Some of which include the following. Initially, the DLM was designed to be a temporary stop-gap measure due to the shortage of available ordinands or commissionands. DLM's have largely resisted this and the limitations that were placed on the office claiming that as a justice issue they are no different than either ordinands or commissionands. The One Order of Ministry Remit failed but that doesn't mean anything really ends.

Do you consider DLM a "lesser" ministry than ordained or diaconal?

Neither is lesser nor is any greater. They are all different. That appears to be the rub. The differences. The push is toward sameness save for the time invested in arriving at where one is ordained/commissioned/licensed. Since equality is the issue and the dismantling of differences is the desire this is the result the Church thinks for the best. Train all ministries to the same standard.

Is the United Church eliminating this stream of ministry ro make it easier to forge new relationships with other denomonations?

I know that has been raised as a concern with the various ministry streams. I don't see any evidence that the various streams provide an actual obstacle.

Why didn't the United Church suspend the DLM education stream when it knew it was poised to eliminate this position?

Because the stream hasn't yet been eliminated. Terminating the education stream would have been putting the cart before the horse. As a whole the denomination doesn't have a problem with the different streams. It is only among the streams that there is tension between what is the same and what is different. Or what should be the same and what should be different?

Have I posed enough questions to satisfy those in the Socratic school? ;-) I am interested to hear from you regarding this.

Always room for more questions to arise.

I don't think that this move creates a solution so much as it removes problems. The chief problem is that the perception of inequality among offices that are not actually designed to be equal represents an injustice. This suggests to me that the Church has failed to train us to actually identify injustice or to celebrate difference.

 

[Dave Henderson]

Thanks revjohn, Balanced and thoughtful as always.

 

[jimkenney12]

Thank you Rev John for your last paragraph. The last church I served in Calgary was going to be losing their Youth Program Minister and family and children's minister because neither was willing to substantially upgrade their training. They were not interested in a simplistic justice and equity achieved through sameness. They were not seeking the same compensation as ordered clergy. They just wanted to do ministry they enjoyed and were successful. The youth ministry program supported over 200 youth across the city and area. The family and children's ministry provided programming that reached as far as Medicine Hat, 300 km away.
They both started as lay leaders hired for specific tasks about 20 years earlier. Their programs evolved over time and we're still evolving. They took courses relevant to their ministries.

The eye opening day for was as presbytery clergy rep on a search committee. They chose to appoint a lay minister who had worked as part of the administration of a congregation for about 10 years before taking the training for a lay minister. I had 4 years experience as a minister after spending three years at seminary, mostly at my own expense, and she started about the equivalent of two salary levels above me due to the number of years she had been in the church pension plan.

I did not like the attitude of some ordained ministers towards diaconal and lay ministers as we are all supposed to be on the same team. But I have trouble with how equity had come to be understood in the UCC.