For the last few years I have been hearing more and more buzz around the idea of doing away with the UM practice of gauranteed appointments for ordained elders, especially to make it easier to deal with ineffective clergy.
I wonder what the measurement of effectiveness would be? Part of me wants to reject a relativistic answer and have some kind of clear definition of what constitutes clergy effectiveness. It could be church growth, professions of faith, great programs, paying apportionments - whatever - just something so that everybody understands the rules of the "effectiveness" game. However, the side of me that is trying to pastor in the real world is starting to convince me that the answer has to be, "It depends - it depends on the community, on the laity, on the history of the congregation, on demographics, etc." How do you take into account all the necessary variables to judge effectiveness of a pastor within a specific appointment?