The candidacy process has been interesting thus far. A year and a half after first bringing it up to my DS, here are my thoughts.

First off, my sense of call is strong and has developed over a long period of time. Because I’ve worked through a lot of soul searching previously, the candidacy process isn’t the big revelation time that I think others expect it to be. I’m not wrestling with whether I’m called to serve, though I do wrestle with how that call will be lived out in the future. At this point in my process my mindset is more about the execution of seminary work than crossing all the t’s and dotting all the i’s of candidacy – as a part-timer in seminary I have a lot of time left in the process.

The reception from my DS and my pastor to my intention to begin this process was very good. These two persons know me pretty well, and I believe that they gave me, and continue to give me, honest support. I appreciate this. My guide through the Ministry Inquiry Process was top notch and my candidacy mentor is a source of support through highs and lows.

DCOM has been more difficult. I’m a second career candidate with 15 years in the corporate world and a third of this time in leadership, so committees generally don’t make me nervous. These DCOM folks make me nervous. I haven’t put my finger on exactly why, but I have a few ideas. (1) I don’t know the majority of them, and I expect all but a couple don’t know me. I get the feeling that I’m the object of a take-a-number, you-have-to-be-this-high-to-ride-this-ride surprisingly impersonal assembly line process where the one on one experiences (mentors and others) have been very personal. Could be misperceptions on my part, though other seminarians also describe awkward (or painful) COM experiences. (2) They are gatekeepers in a process where I distinctly feel God guiding me personally. Didn’t they get God’s memo that I’m OK (ha ha)? (3) My discernment process regarding elder or deacon track – when I mentioned deacon the temperature went down in the room a few degrees. I get the distinct feeling that some persons with whom I’ve interacted thus far prefer elder track folks with strong Meyers-Briggs “F” characteristics. More on this later. I will figure out how to make connections with them as we walk together and as I learn from them and as they learn about me.

Seminary has been a good experience thus far. My studies are limited by my night and weekend track, but it is not the time in my personal life to approach seminary (and candidacy) in any more aggressive way. My call “happened to” my family and it is a balancing act to figure out the best way to proceed. The first year was loaded with Biblical studies work, an area in which I have a lot of interest. This was not by design, but came together due to the opportunity to go to Israel. I have no regrets; next year I pick up pastoral care and other study areas next year.

I look forward to what’s next.

In Polity, Practice & Mission of the UMC (2006 Ed.) the author states that "whether deacons and elders can really be peers in United Methodism remains to be seen. Deacons can initiate their place of employment, work part-time indefinitely, or work for no salary at all." The author continues to say that deacons' non-itinerate status and the expectation that elders work full-time creates tension. "How will these two orders work together in a particular local church, given that the elder is appointed as pastor 'in charge'?"

The answer is simple. The elder is appointed in charge and the deacon has a different role. As someone who looked at the role of a deacon once and has re-embraced this possibility, I accept that our system expects of elders their time and willingness to itinerate with the trade-off of guaranteed appointment and being in charge. I haven't formed a full opinion regarding sacramental authority and the orders. 

For me, itinerancy isn't the issue with respect to pursuing elder vs. deacon. If I felt (or feel in the future) a call to embrace the role of an elder I see itinerancy as a part of the package -- one that is largely a positive thing given an elder's work. Guaranteed appointment would be nice, and Lord knows there are underperforming and/or incompetent elders out there who should have this perk revoked, but I understand and respect this difference in elder vs. deacon, including the practicalities involved in deacons' work outside of the church structure.

I am appalled at the relative dearth of information about deacons in our denominational resources. The only books seem to date back to the creation of the order in 1996. The online resources are pitiful. The candidacy materials are scant. If you tell an elder that you plan to pursue deacon's orders, you may get a blank stare or some push back (I received a good comment, myself). Deacons themselves haven't been too chatty in the few outreach efforts I've made to gather information.

It is high time that the church pull its collective head out of the sand and realize that ministry happens in places other than the local church even as we affirm and protect the central nature of the local congregation. Elders and deacons can and should work together, recognizing and supporting the 'in charge' role of our itinerant elders while affirming and supporting the assisting role of the deacon in the local church and the equal role to elders in work outside the local church. God calls all types to ministerial work; some are called with gifts and graces to lead in the local church and others to different (perhaps more specialized roles). 

Welcome those whom God calls, I say. Together may the Kingdom of God be expressed in the world through the work of both of our ordained United Methodist orders.