The New Order of Deacons: The United Methodist Church

The “New” Order of Deacons: The United Methodist Church

The General Board of Higher Education and Ministry, The United Methodist Church March 2009

Beginning in 1996, a new ministerial Order was developed in The United Methodist Church, the Order of Deacons. Previously, all clergy were first ordained deacon followed by ordination as elder. Beginning in 1996, the deacon became a separate and distinct order. At the same time, the office of diaconal minister was discontinued. These transitions were accompanied by confusion and tension in the church. After more than 10 years since this change, what is the status of this order of ministry? How do deacons view their role within the ministry of the church? What is the job satisfaction level of this Order and what factors affect that satisfaction? These questions will be addressed based on a survey of 1,521 deacons, diaconal ministers, and those with certification in specialized ministry.

Perhaps the Order of Deacons can no longer be considered new as this order has now existed for more than a decade. Even at its inception the deacon was not an entirely new concept, but instead built upon an historical foundation of the ministry of service, diakonos, commonly shared among the Christian community (see for example, Frank 1997; Rowe 1999; Yrigoyen 1999; Kriewald 1999). Creation of a separate, permanent, and distinct Order of Deacons, however, is a radical departure from United Methodist practice even for this denomination whose roots come from such diverse sources as Peitist, Anglican, Roman Catholic, Reformed, and Evangelical Revival traditions (see Frank 1997; Harnish 2000 for discussions of the contributions of these traditions toward the development of The United Methodist Church).

change opened new opportunities, as well as presented a host of challenges. For some, the hope was that the Order of Deacons would play an instrumental role in the

revitalization of The United Methodist Church, but for others this change further exacerbated the challenges faced by the church (Kriewald 1999; Frank 1997; Harnish 2000). Some, such as Margaret Ann Crian and Jack L. Seymour (2001) recognize the validity of both claims stating that the legislation made organization of the orders “messy and ambiguous,” but that “out of this chaos and confusion can come vitality and

creativity hitherto unknown since the earliest days of the church” (p.35).

For nearly 212 years, the Methodist pattern of ordination was to first become ordained deacon, enter a probationary period, followed by ordination as elder (Harnish 2000). Beginning in 1996, the two step process of ordination was discontinued. In its place were two separate orders, the Order of Deacons and the Order of Elders. A deacons ordination became a goal in itself and not simply a step along the journey towards elders orders. Not surprisingly, this change in practice was and continues to be accompanied by no small amount of questioning, confusion, and disagreement.

Scholars often pointed to the anticipated challenges faced by the creation of a separate permanent order. Diedra Kriewald (1999) listed several “dire predictions” she had heard spoken including a lack of interest in entering the order, that deacons would take on the functions of elders, and that boards of ordained ministry would misunderstand the Order of Deacons. One of the primary issues of concern is about boundaries and the desire to clarify how the Order of Deacons are distinctive from the Order of Elders, and how they are distinctive from the ministry of the laity.

As illustrated by Harnish (2000) or Frank (1997) some are concerned that the servant ministry role of the deacon would devalue the role of the laity. Lay ministry is foundational to Wesley’s United Methodism; all Christians are called to ministry. The role of the deacon as defined in the 1996 Book of Discipline “is to embody, articulate, and lead the whole people of God in its servant ministry”(p.187). Kriewald (1999) argues, as do others that “a rightly appropriated Order of Deacons will promote an effective partnership between laity and deacons and act as a bridge between laity and clergy within the organic ministry of the body of Christ” (p.370). On the other hand, the previously understood distinctiveness of clergy (elders) from laity - calling, sacramental authority, apostolic transmission of the Word, Order, and Itinerancy (see Harnish 2000 p. 66-68) were not entirely applicable to deacons.

Elders are not called to their appointment, as in many other Protestant

denominations, but rather are sent. Elders covenant to the itinerancy - to be sent by the Bishop of the Annual Conference wherever they are needed. In turn, the annual

conference covenants to provide a continual appointment for every elder (named by some ‘guaranteed appointment’). Deacons, on the other hand do not covenant to the itinerancy, but seek their own employment although it may also be initiated by the Bishop and cabinet. The Bishop then determines whether the position is appropriate for the ministry of the deacon and then makes it their appointment.

The ordination of elder is to Service (servant leadership), Word (preaching and teaching), Sacrament (Eucharist, Baptism), and Order (leading in the life of the church). Deacons are ordained to Word and Service in a ministry that connects the church and the world. Deacons, although ordained, assist elders in the administration of sacraments.

With General Conference 2008, the bishop can grant sacramental authority to deacons in specific cases, see ¶328 in the Book of Discipline.

Creation of this order has far reaching implications for ministry (Crain 2007, Frank 2000, Harnish 2000) and forces the reassessment of these traditional practices. In addition to the general confusion about roles, functions, and boundaries, a variety of other concerns and predictions of negative consequences have been promoted. For example, Diedra Kriewald (1999) reported hearing the prediction that “permanent deacons will be vastly undereducated in theological disciplines and will become undervalued and

underachievers” (p.366). The literature in combination with anecdotal evidence suggest that this order may not be fully accepted by others in ministry. The vast amount of attention on the order and the deacons’ continual attempts to explain their role, led me to question the satisfaction of these deacons with their ministry.

Several studies have documented a relative feeling of isolation by pastors and clergy. The results of the Study of Ministry Commission (NEWSCOPE 2006) and research by Jackson Carroll (2006) found that clergy in non parish roles reported staying connected with the denomination, and had less time for theological reflection. Also, Chang (2005) found that non parish work from the clergy’s perspective is viewed as “less important and more marginal than parish ministry” (Chang p.18). Further, stating “It was clear to these clergy [in parish employment] that denominational officials saw non-parish ministry as “outside the box” and were reluctant to deal with these career

strategies” (Chang 2005., p.17). Do deacons believe their roles are valued and is there a difference between deacons appointed in the local church compared to those who are appointed beyond the local church?

According to Cary Cherniss (1995) job satisfaction comes from doing work that has meaning, recognition, autonomy, and remuneration (cited in Hoge and Wenger 2005, p.13). Similarly, P. Spector (1997) argues that the minister’s “perception of the situation [that] is the most important in determining his or her job satisfaction” (cited in Mueller and McDuff 2004, p.264). What are the deacons’ perceptions about the order and whether the order is accepted, and whether their roles are valued?

Although some scholars recognize the need for exploration of the deacon’s experience, that line of inquiry has largely been ignored. For example, Charles Yrigoyen, Jr. (1999) queried “How will deacons view their role among the ordained? Will they be fully welcomed in their annual conferences as members of the ordained?” (p.340-41). The research presented in this paper begins to fill that gap through an examination of the Church’s understanding of the Order of Deacons from the perspective of the deacons. The questions, do deacons believe the order is understood, and do deacons feel valued in their roles, are examined based on responses to a survey conducted in 2007. Responses of deacons are compared to responses from diaconal ministers and those with

certification in specialized ministry (laity and elders).

Now that deacons have been members of this permanent order for more than 10 years, do they believe that the order has been accepted by others in ministry? Are the deacons perceptions similar to others in ministry? In other words, do deacons, diaconal ministers, and those with certification agree that the Order of Deacons is accepted or not accepted? Two hypotheses will be tested:

Ho1: Deacons perceive their order to be unaccepted more often than accepted. Ho2: The frequency of acceptance of the Order of Deacons will differ between

deacons, diaconal ministers, and those with certification in specialized ministry. Deacons will perceive non-acceptance more often, while others will perceive acceptance more often.

I examine the perceptions of deacons, diaconal ministers, and those certified in specialized ministry about the acceptance of the Order of Deacons, whether the order is understood, whether deacons feel they are valued in the ministry, and how supported they feel within the denomination. I show that the common representation of the order as rife with challenges is not entirely accurate. Though much work remains, the Order of Deacons is more often accepted than not.

METHODOLOGY

During 2007, an online survey was sent to 3,077 people which included all deacon candidates, commissioned deacons, ordained deacons, all diaconal ministers, and all who had a certification in a specialized ministry (both clergy and laity). The response rate was 49% (1,521). The purposes of the survey were to (1) describe the demographic makeup of the Order of Deacons (2) identify where deacons were serving (3) compare salaries within the Order of Deacons and (4) examine the job satisfaction levels of deacons. This paper examines one piece of that survey, specifically the perception of deacons as it relates to their acceptance as an order and the perceived value of the order.

Analysis is based on three groups of 1,521 respondents (1) deacons, including those on the track to becoming an ordained deacon, n=1,108 and (2) diaconal ministers, n=134. This lay office was discontinued as a path into ministry at the same time as the

creation of the Order of Deacons. Many diaconal ministers completed the necessary steps to become ordained as deacons, but others did not and instead retained their diaconal minister status. And, (3) Certified in specialized ministry, n=279, composed of 191 laity, 75 elders and 13 who are at some stage of the process toward ordination. Both laity and clergy may complete the steps to obtain a certification in a form of specialized ministry, such as Christian Education, Music Ministry, Youth Ministry, Evangelism, Spiritual Formation, and many others. Some of the deacons also have certifications, but for the purpose of analysis, deacons are included in the deacon group and excluded from the certification group.

Measures

Respondents rated on a four point scale (1 Never to 4 Very Often) how often in the past year: “Felt your role was not valued, ” “Felt the deacon order (position of diaconal minister, or credential of certificate in specialized ministry) was

misunderstood,” and “Felt the deacon order (role of diaconal minister, role of certified pastor/laity in specialized ministry) was accepted by others (reverse coded).” These seven items form the acceptance index with a coefficient alpha of .834.

Respondents rate their level of satisfaction on a five point scale (1 very

dissatisfied to 5 very satisfied) with the level of support or advocacy received from six sources: their candidacy mentor, clergy or probationary mentor, annual conference during the candidacy process, annual conference currently, the General Board of Higher

Education and Ministry during candidacy (GBHEM) and GBHEM currently, financial support from their annual conference during candidacy, and financial support from GBHEM during candidacy.

FINDINGS Acceptance of the Order of Deacons

Overall, most (62%, 645) respondents believe that the Order of Deacons is ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ often accepted by others. How often the order is viewed as accepted depends on the ministry group (Pearson Chi-Square 14.510 p.<.024). Equal percentages, 63%, of the deacons and the certified in specialized ministry believe the Order of Deacons was accepted fairly to very often, but only 55% (34) of the diaconal ministers rated similarly. From the view of 44% (27) of the diaconal ministers, the Order of Deacons is accepted only once in a while - a finding that may help to explain why these diaconal ministers remained as diaconal ministers rather than being ordained as deacons. Finally, although similar percentages of deacons and certified believe the order is accepted fairly to very often, a much greater percentage of the certified than of the deacons believe the Order of Deacons is never accepted (10% (8) certified; 3% (28) deacon; 2% (1) diaconal).

A greater percentage of deacons appointed in the local church believe the order is accepted (67%, 325) than those appointed beyond the local church (62%, 160). Deacons appointed beyond the local church are employed in numerous locations that may or may not be affiliated with The United Methodist Church. Those appointments may be to professions not directly related to being a deacon, but even then deacons believe the Order of Deacons is accepted. The majority of both those beyond as well as in the local church believe the Order of Deacons is accepted. On the other hand, fewer of those certified in specialized ministry appointed in the local church believe the Order of Deacons is accepted, than do those certified in specialized ministry who are appointed beyond the local church. While more than half, 57% (26) of certified appointed in the

local church believe the Order of Deacons is accepted, nearly all, 93% (13) appointed beyond the local church believe the order is accepted.

Contrary to what may be expected based on the literature and anecdotal evidence, deacons believe and the certified likely agree that, for the most part, the Order of

Deacons is accepted within the church. On the other hand, lay diaconal ministers, see things differently. Many diaconal ministers believe the order is accepted less often than what the deacons perceive their acceptance to be. As will be seen in the next section, however, acceptance does not indicate agreement or even understanding.

Deacons Order Misunderstood

On the other hand, 65% (668) of respondents believed the deacon order was misunderstood fairly or very often. The perceived frequency of occurrence of

misunderstanding of the deacon order depends on the ministry group (Pearson Chi Square 18.704 p.<.005). Fully, 65% (593) of the deacons compared to 54% (33) of the certified felt the deacon order was misunderstood fairly to very often. Interestingly, fully 70% (44) of the diaconal ministers believe misunderstanding of the deacons order occurs fairly to very often. Meanwhile, 18% (11) of the certified believe that misunderstanding of the deacon order never occurs compared to only 6% (50) of the deacons and 3% (2) of the diaconal ministers who believe misunderstanding of the order never occurs.

These findings seem to suggest that, for the most part, the existence of the order is accepted most of the time, but what the order is about is often troublesome or confusing. Diaconal ministers, as well as deacons believe that the order of deacons is misunderstood quite often by others. Among the certified group, just over half believe misunderstanding happens quite often, and just under half believe misunderstanding occurs only once in a

while or never. And, of the deacons appointed in the local church, 60% (298) believe the order is misunderstood fairly often to very often compared to 70% (180) of the deacons appointed beyond the local church.

Among the deacons, as the frequency of acceptance decreases, the frequency of misunderstanding increases (Pearson Chi Square 193.245 p.<.000). Of those who believe the order is accepted only once in a while, 51% believe the order is misunderstood very often and of those who believe the order is never accepted, 68% (19) believe the order is also misunderstood very often. But, even among the deacons who believe the order is very often accepted, 45% (65) believe the order is misunderstood once in a while, 25% (36) fairly often, and 13% (19) very often.

Roles Valued

Respondents rated how often they felt their role was not valued. All three groups responded similarly, indicating that they (deacons, diaconal ministers, certified ministers) generally feel that their role is valued. Unfortunately, 20% of the respondents felt their role was not valued either fairly often (11%, 138) or very often (9%, 121). At the other extreme, one third (34%, 443) never felt their role was not valued meaning they have always felt valued in their roles. No statistically significant relationship exists between feeling valued and ministry status (Pearson Chi Square is 9.751 p.<.136). In other words, whether they feel valued is not a reflection of their ministry status. Whether or not they feel valued is a result of other factors, not simply that they are a deacon, diaconal minister or certified in specialized ministry.

Not surprisingly, more than half (56%, 15) of those who believe the Order of Deacons is never accepted very often feel that their role is not valued. And, the majority

(62%, 88) who believe the Order of Deacons is very often accepted, have never felt their role was not valued (Pearson Chi Square 241.987 p.<.000). For those who believe the Order is never misunderstood, fully 75% (36) have never felt unvalued. Most were right in the middle, 50% (128) of those who believe the order was misunderstood once in a while also felt their role was not valued once in a while. Similarly, 58% (179) of those who felt the order was misunderstood fairly often also felt once in a while that their role was not valued.

There is little difference in the percentage of deacons who feel their roles are not valued fairly to very often in the local church (19%. 95) compared to those beyond the local church (22%, 59). In other words, most of the deacons both in and beyond the local church feel that their roles are valued.

Denominational Investment

A connectional system, such as found in The United Methodist Church depends upon the interaction of its members. Feeling supported or advocated on behalf of may increase (or decrease) the perception that the Order of Deacons is accepted or not. The perceived value and importance of one’s ministry may be due in part to what is viewed as a lack of interest or support from others, in this case denominational officials. The annual conferences and the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry have significant levels of influence over the perception of the Order. Respondents rated their level of satisfaction with the advocacy and support they received from those sources.

The majority in all three ministry groups were satisfied with their candidacy mentor; among the deacons, 81% (727) were somewhat to very satisfied. The satisfaction level with their current clergy or probationary mentor is lower than for their candidacy

mentor. For deacons, 76% (446) are somewhat or very satisfied with their current mentor. Fewer deacons (61%, 53) are somewhat to very satisfied with support and advocacy received from their annual conferences during candidacy than are somewhat to very satisfied currently (67%, 394). Support or advocacy for candidates is not the primary concern of annual conferences during the candidacy process. Instead annual conferences are responsible for the examination of candidates to assess their fitness for ministry. Importantly, satisfaction with the level of support and advocacy received after completing the candidacy process is greater.

Deacons who are dissatisfied with the level of support and advocacy from their annual conference also believe the order is misunderstood (Pearson Chi Square 72.765 p.<.000). Of the deacons who are very dissatisfied with annual conference

support/advocacy now, 65% (24) believe the deacons order is misunderstood very often and half of those who are somewhat dissatisfied with annual conference believe the order is very often misunderstood. Similarly, there is a relationship between annual conference support/advocacy and whether deacons believe the order is accepted (Pearson Chi Square 80.039 p.<.000). Of the deacons who are very dissatisfied with the annual conference, 56% (19) believe the order is accepted only once in a while and 47% (46) of those who are somewhat dissatisfied believe the order is accepted only once in a while.

There is very little difference in their level of satisfaction with the support received from GBHEM either during candidacy or currently. During candidacy, 62% (549) were somewhat or very satisfied with GBHEM, and 61% (564) were somewhat or very satisfied with current support and advocacy from GBHEM. Although respondents were less satisfied with the support and advocacy from GBHEM than from their annual

conference, a greater percentage were satisfied or very satisfied with the financial support received from GBHEM (58%, 386) than from the annual conference (52%, 343).

As was found in the level of support and advocacy for the annual conferences, and acceptance and understanding of the Order, a similar relationship was found for support and advocacy from GBHEM. Again, those who are not satisfied with the levels of support and advocacy also believe the order is misunderstood and not accepted. Does the deacon’s perception reflect influence of the annual conferences and GBHEM on the churches understanding of the Order? Alternatively, perhaps deacons base their assessment of understanding and acceptance of the order upon the level of support and advocacy they receive. In other words, the relationship, or lack thereof, between the deacon and the annual conference or GBHEM influences the deacons perception about the acceptance of the Order. Unknown are the deacon’s expectations for support and advocacy from annual conferences and GBHEM.

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

The hypothesis that deacons perceive their order as not accepted is not supported. Nearly two-thirds of deacons perceive the order to be accepted. Few see the Order of Deacons as not accepted. This is quite encouraging, as so much of the literature suggested that the Order would not be accepted. At the same time, acceptance does not mean understanding. That the diaconal ministers and those certified in specialized ministry believe they understand the Order of Deacons while the deacons believe they are misunderstood can be quite frustrating. How these understandings differ or even the accuracy of perception is unknown, only known here is perceived frequency of misunderstanding.

There are many things we may accept and have misguided understandings about. For example, although I accept the importance of ground control personnel in a space shuttle launch, in all likelihood, I do not fully understand their role. Or, I am likely very misguided in my understanding of the current economic crisis, but I have come to accept the government’s bailout plan. So, while it is encouraging that deacons perceive that the Order is accepted, precisely what is accepted and what is not accepted is less clear. Is the church resigned to accept the order or, is the church fully embracing this order,

completely accepting and welcoming the order into the full life of the church? Future research is needed to explore the differing understandings of the role of the order. Examination of the commonalities and differences in understanding may help to increase the effectiveness of this order’s ministry.

The second hypothesis that the deacons’ perceptions will differ from others is somewhat supported. Equal percentages of deacons as certified believe the order is accepted, but a much lower percentage of diaconal ministers believe the deacon order is accepted fairly or very often. This finding may help to explain one of the reasons these diaconal ministers have not taken the steps to enter the Order of Deacons. Diaconal ministers may believe that their level of acceptance within the denomination would decrease if they took deacon’s orders than if they continue to serve in a category of ministry that has been discontinued.

Increased conversations among deacons, annual conferences, and GBHEM may help to improve the acceptance level of deacons, as well as to decrease the frequency of misunderstanding of the deacons’ roles across the church. Importantly, deacons feel their roles are valued while at the same time believing the order is often misunderstood.

Further exploration of these misunderstandings is necessary. What about their role is most often misunderstood? Are there particular groups (church members, employers, elders, etc.) among which there is greater misunderstanding?

Further exploration of the expectations of deacons/candidates have of the annual conferences and of GBHEM could be fruitful. This examination may help to clarify where deacons desire further support or advocacy and where they believe they did not receive appropriate advocacy and support. This information would be helpful to

determine whether there are realistic needs that may be easily met, or whether there are resources that may be better utilized.

REFERENCES

Carroll, Jackson, W. 2006. God’s Potters: Pastoral Leadership and the Shaping of Congregations. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Chang, Patricia. 2005. “Factors Shaping Clergy Careers: A Wakeup Call for Protestant

Denominations and pastors” Pulpit & Pew Research on Pastoral Leadership: Duke Divinity School.

Crain, Margaret Ann and Jack L. Seymour. 2001. A Deacon’s Heart: The New United Methodist Diaconate. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press.

Frank, Thomas Edward.1997.Polity, Practice, and the Mission of The United Methodist Church. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Frank, Thomas E. 2000.”The Future of Ordination in United Methodism.” Quarterly Review 20:383-397.

Harnish, John E. 2000. The Orders of Ministry in The United Methodist Church. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Hoge, Dean R. and Jacqueline E. Wenger.2005. Pastors in Transition: Why Clergy Leave Local Church Ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

NEWSCOPE. 2006. The United Methodist Weekly Newsletter.

Mueller, Charles W. and Elaine McDuff. 2004. “Clergy-Congregation Mismatches and Clergy Job Satisfaction” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 43:261-273. Rowe, Kenneth W. 1999. “The Ministry of Deacons in Methodism from Wesley to Today (1998)” Quarterly Review 19:343-357.

The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church. 1996. Nashville, TN: United Methodist Publishing House.

Yrigoyen, Charles, Jr. 1999. “The Office of Deacon: A Historical Summary” Quarterly Review 19:327-343.

Kriewald, Diedra. 1999. “Diakonia as a “Sacred order” in The United Methodist Church” Quarterly Review 19:357-372.