Illustration 2: The Folly of Blindly Replicating Mission Strategies

Replication is King

During the six years of Bishop Almquist’s term, during which SEPA was all but absent in its relationship with Redeemer, the Rev. Claire Burkat was making a name for herself as an assistant to the bishop.

She had a success of which she was particularly proud. She worked with a failing church and devised a plan. Synod would close the church with its aging members’ cooperation and reopen it weeks later with a new name.

In 2006 in her early days as bishop, Bishop Burkat came to Redeemer eager to replicate the experience which had been so successful (by her reports) before her election. In truth, it was too soon to tell if the mission strategy was actually successful. There were no statistics to support whether or not it was a good idea.

We have checked the current statistics of this congregation. They are not impressive. Membership seems to be under 50. About half the statistics of Redeemer in 2007.

Nevertheless in 2006, the experiment was touted as a promising innovation. Bishop Burkat was eager to replicate it and add another “success” to her résurmé.

The problem was Redeemer was not at all like the congregation that had agreed to pioneer this technique.

Remember, SEPA had walked away from Redeemer six years before and their memory was that the congregation consisted of a dozen old ladies. Their waiting game strategy should have been ripe for implementation, in Bishop Burkat’s view.

Things had changed at Redeemer. The elderly members who had met with Bishop Almquist had in fact gone to their heavenly reward. But there were now three times as many Redeemer members as when Bishop Almquist had released us from synodical administration—and that would soon double. Our members were mostly young families, most of whom had joined within the last ten years. Many were Tanzanian immigrants, but there were other new ethnic backgrounds new to Redeemer’s membership as well. Bishop Burkat even suggested removing the Tanzanian members to create statistics to justify the strong-arm tactics she planned to implement. Some had been members for a decade, some had been born into our community. This was (and is) insulting to Redeemer’s Tanzanian members as it should be to every Lutheran. As one young Tanzanian member noted at the time: SEPA is big on ministry to the Tanzanians — as long as we stay in Tanzania. (The statistics presented to Synod Assembly by the trustees excluded the Tanzanian members.)

Redeemer’s interest in working with SEPA was to build on its success. SEPA wasn’t listening. They knew best.

Closing Redeemer and reopening it under a new name was the only plan they would consider. Why?Their way gave them control of the congregation’s assets.

Here we go again! Mutual discernment at work!

Bishop Burkat made this proposal. She would close the church down, have a grand closing ceremony, and reopen it a few weeks later. Renaming the church was key to this strategy. There should be no confusion that the old church was dead and gone. The new name had to meet with her approval. Oh, and the current members would not be permitted any leadership roles. From where the new leaders were to suddenly emerge to take control of our ministry was not made clear. Meanwhile, Synod would reign with no one to answer to — hardly the Lutheran way.

Of course, this was offensive to a congregation that had worked hard to recover from the mess created by Bishop Almquist — and was succeeding.

The first proposal was the church should close for two weeks. That became six months by the time they saw us in court.

Well, in 2009, Bishop Burkat finally got her way and has control of Redeemer’s property. It has been locked to Redeemer and the community for three and a half years.

Redeemer remains active through 2×2 Foundation, waiting for the day that the Lutherans of SEPA recognize that maybe, just maybe, they were part of a big mistake.

The strategy of replicating one success in a different neighborhood has been disastrous for both East Falls and SEPA. Redeemer bears the popular blame, but SEPA with its selfish policies is responsible. Bishop Burkat defends her actions, citing the process of mutual discernment.

Once again, the definition of mutual discernment is “comply or goodbye.