The majority of ministers in the United Church are ordained and most people are familiar with ordained ministers. Diaconal ministers and Designated Lay ministers (DLM) are the minority with Diaconal ministers at around 7% of all ministry and DLMs even fewer. It means that the understanding of these two forms of ministry is low and there continues to be confusion around definition and function.
In function, these three forms of ministry are very similar. Most work within congregations as the paid minister who leads worship, offers sacraments (baptism and communion) and pastoral care, and leads programming. Ordained and Diaconal ministers are part of one order of ministry in the United Church, divided by function. Ordained ministers are ordained to word, sacrament, and pastoral care. Diaconal ministers are commissioned to education, pastoral care, and social justice. DLMs are not considered part of this ordered ministry. They are lay people who have come forward as leaders in their congregations, who receive training, and act as ministers in their churches. In practice though, DLMs are appointed in places where there is a need for a minister. In my experience living in Saskatchewan, DLMs are visually similar to ordered ministers.
Currently, both Diaconal ministers and DLMs need permission to offer sacraments. Most conferences in the church don't think twice about giving this permission. It's become almost a rubber stamp. There have been recent proposals for diaconal ministers to have this right to sacraments upon commissioning, which has caused conversations around what it means be able to offer sacraments and the theology in the world-wide church that deems only ordained ministers able to bless sacraments.
For all of these reasons, why wouldn't we want one order of ministry, especially because our ecumenical partners currently recognize ministers only if they are ordained? Seeking employment or working together with those from the presbyterian church, baptist church, or catholic church, to name just a few, would become a whole lot easier for Diaconal and DLM minsters. So, why am I voting against this proposed change?
I cannot speak for DLMs, and I cannot speak for all Diaconal ministers, but there are a few reasons why I, as a Diaconal minister in the United Church, do not want to be ordained.
- Minority voices are important and need to be heard. I have an issue with wanting to merge all forms of ministry into one. I know that the proposal encourages the continuation of Diaconal ministry in that people would be ordained to diaconal ministry, but when all are ordained, the differences will all too soon become less and less visible, especially as all ministers will be ordained to word, sacrament, pastoral care, education, and social justice. There won't even be a distinction of function anymore. I am asked over and over again to explain diaconal ministry because there is such unfamiliarity with it, and sometimes it can get annoying, but I will always be grateful for the opportunity to do so. I believe it is a distinct ministry and, as long as it is visible and distinct, people will keep asking. What happens though when it is no longer visibly distinct from other forms of ministry?
- Diaconal ministry has a clear history, from the first deacons commissioned in the bible in the Acts of the Apostles, to the Poor Clares and the Beguines in the Middle Ages, to the deaconesses in the United Church who offered their gifs of education and service. Diakonia is a world-wide expression of ministry, across many denominations. The Diakonia of the United Church or DUCC, the national association of diakonia in the UCC, is a part of DOTAC, Diakonia of the Americas and Caribbean, and World Diakonia. I am concerned that this history and our association with world-wide diakonia is at risk of being lost.
- Function is what blurs the lines, but identity is what creates clear distinctions. In looking at the history of diakonia, you will find that this expression of ministry was always in the minority, always on the edges, and mostly women. As the church came into power, women were banned from leadership positions and women found other ways to serve Christ. Often, they were silenced and/or persecuted. The history of diakonia is filled with voices crying out from the margins and standing up for those on the margins. The history of diakonia is filled with those working with people on the margins, the refugees, the economically disadvantaged, the ill, the persecuted, children and seniors, and more. The voice of diakonia has become one of prophet and advocate. The work of diakonia has become one of listening to those silenced and offering compassion and empathy to those ignored and neglected. Diakonia is about community, listening to one another's stories, mutuality, and journeying together. All of this embodies the identity of diaconal ministry.
The proposal was created to solve a perceived problem. With the best of intentions, people gathered to come up with a solution to the confusion around the different forms of ministry and the barriers to function. This feels like a band-aid though. It feels like providing medicine for symptoms without discovering the reasons for the symptoms. I know that there have been many studies of ministry in the church and there will probably continue to be many studies. With so many different opinions, it's impossible to make everyone happy, and maybe that's OK. Maybe all we have are questions right now, and maybe that's OK. There have been many proposals over the years that have worked and have failed and will probably continue to be many that will succeed and fail, and maybe that's OK.
All I know is that I will continue to answer the question, "What is a diaconal minister?" and that's quite OK with me.
