We Must Do Better at Honoring the Trust Clause's Moral Obligations

by

Special to United Methodist Insight

While we are certain of the responsibilities the trust clause places upon disaffiliating local churches, even going to court to enforce it, we have been remiss in honoring the moral obligations the trust clause places upon the annual conference.

The trust clause is inserted in church deeds so "that said premises shall be used, kept, and maintained as a place of divine worship of the United Methodist ministry and members of The United Methodist Church; subject to the Discipline." As I read this statement, the purpose of the trust clause is to ensure that the United Methodist witness continues unhindered and uninterrupted within a specific community. Yet we have not earmarked the funds received from disaffiliating churches for uses within specific communities but rather treated these monies as a financial windfall for the annual conference. Let me explain why I believe this attitude violates the spirit of the trust clause.

Once I was appointed to serve a church whose building had burned to the ground the year before. Shortly after arriving, I went to visit a parishioner in the hospital. I announced to the person at the front desk I was the pastor at such-and-such church seeking the room number for a patient. The desk person eyed me suspiciously, saying, "Oh, that's not possible. That church is gone."

I'm sure everyone in that area had vivid memories of watching the spectacular sight of the burning church building on the evening news. In the desk person's mind, the building was gone, therefore the church was gone. While it was true that our building was a deep hole surrounded by protective fencing, the church was still very much alive and committed to rebuilding.

We smirk at a theology that would equate the church building with the body of Christ, yet in these turbulent times United Methodists do the same. We focus on a struggle for control of the buildings to the detriment of the people worshiping within.

Our conference knew division was coming in some form whether under the Protocol or Paragraph 2553, so our committee on nominations considered nominating people who were experienced in real estate to serve on the board of trustees. The nominating committee knew a shrinkage of the conference budget would be necessary as churches disaffiliated, so the committee nominated people skilled in financial projections for the committee on finance and administration. We accounted for buildings and finances, but we forgot about caring for people in a time of upheaval and grief.

When I arrived at a church without a building, they were gathering for worship and engaged in ministry. Yet they were still grieving. I learned from my congregation that while the church is not a building, the building is more than a building. A church building is a sacred place where we often encounter God in marvelous and unexpected ways. It is a repository of sacred memories for individuals and the community.

When people spoke about what they missed from the old building, no one mentioned architectural features. They remembered their weddings, the baptisms of their children, and the funerals of loved ones. I was shown many pictures of the old building, but the structure was a backdrop for the rituals conducted within that sacred space. In the foreground were the people.

I mention this experience as a prelude to my "Eureka" moment about our current division. We've taken better care of the procedures and paperwork of disaffiliation than we have of the people. Few churches vote 100% in favor of disaffiliation. In larger churches, the number voting against disaffiliation is larger than the size of most congregations within our annual conference.

How do we minister with the people who vote "no" to disaffiliation, those who wish to remain United Methodist? Those who have voted "yes" usually have a pastor and a building, but what pastor is appointed to serve those who wanted to stay United Methodist? Do we shuffle this remnant into a nearby church or do we take the time to listen and grieve with them? Do we understand that what is lost isn't merely a building, but a beloved sacred space filled with memories of significant rites of passage? Do we recognize that in the voting process both biological and spiritual family may have been lost?

As United Methodists, we are more skilled in responding to natural disasters than to the crisis created by the denomination's splintering. Why hasn't every conference formed a Ministry Response Team charged with ministering to the remnant after a disaffiliation? A Ministry Response Team needs to listen to the grief of the remnant and mourn with them, so people are empowered to consider what is next for them and their community. This team may be composed of retired pastors, grief counselors, and laity who have already journeyed through the disaffiliation process. If we truly believe that the church is a people, then after disaffiliation there is a United Methodist congregation that remains within the local community.

As churches choose to disaffiliate, the major portion of the monies received from these churches (except for the portion designated for unfunded pension liability) should be used to support the expenses of a Ministry Response Team. During this period of transition for the remnant, there may be baptisms and weddings to be celebrated. The lives of those who have ended their earthly journey must be remembered and the promise of Resurrection proclaimed. And always, we must walk with people during their season of grieving. We do this as an annual conference because while the church building and at least two-thirds of the congregation may be gone, a remnant remains.

 The trust clause was established to ensure future generations that there would be a continuing, vibrant United Methodist presence within their community. Where a large remnant remains after disaffiliation, why couldn't this group become the core group for a new church start, using the disaffiliation funds as seed money? If those wishing to remain United Methodists are smaller in number, then the Ministry Response Team may guide people through a time of grieving and then accompany them to receiving congregations in the area. In those instances, why not use a portion of the funds received from the disaffiliation process as grants to the receiving congregations? These grants would remain faithful to the spirit of the trust clause by providing for the remnant wherever God has led them.

Zechariah prophesizes that God along with the remnant of the people living in Exile will return to Zion:

"Thus says the Lord of hosts: Old men and old women shall again sit in the streets of Jerusalem, each with staff in hand because of their great age. And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in its streets. Thus says the Lord of hosts: Even it seems impossible to the remnant of this people in these days, should it also seem impossible to me, says the Lord of hosts? Thus says the Lord of hosts: I will save my people from the east country and from the west country; and I will bring them to live in Jerusalem. They shall be my people and I will be their God, in faithfulness and in righteousness."

– Zechariah 8:4-8 NRSV

Not only here, but throughout the Bible God reveals a presence with and care for the remnant of Israel. When the remnant feels forsaken, God promises restoration to their land and a renewal of the covenant with them. If God cares for the remnant, why have we abandoned the remnants of disaffiliating churches to struggle without pastoral leadership and care? Why have we left them to grieve alone? The trust clause demands that our annual conferences do better by our remnants. If God blesses the remnants, shouldn't we as well? If we are faithful in tending God's sheep, a vibrant Methodist witness will continue unhindered and uninterrupted in the future as it has in the past within our communities.

The Rev. Daryl Fansler is a retired elder in the Illinois Great Rivers Annual Conference. He received a master of divinity degree from Vanderbilt Divinity School. To reproduce this content elsewhere, please email United Methodist Insight for permission.