4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

April 2012

Avoiding Self-Destruction in the Church

According to today’s Alban Institute’s Roundtable discussion, the Christian Church is not the only religious body to be experiencing economic challenges. Jewish communities of faith are having a tough time, too.

Rabbi Hayim Herring discusses the paid rabbinate as an endangered institutional cornerstone. His discussion may bear well upon Christians.

He points out that up until sometime in the 14th century, the position of rabbi was not compensated. All rabbis were, as Christians say, “tentmakers” — people who earned their living in traditional trades. Tentmaker rabbis produced some of the most cherished teachings of the Jewish faith, he writes.

The Christian church has a similar tradition. Paul was a tentmaker.

In the Christian Church, centuries of power and accumulated wealth, wrenched from the people by feudal fear, became a model for the up and coming religious. Self-sustaining religious communities operated with the funds of their own labors. Various orders and monasteries/convents had their own little hierarchies. But the central, self-focused power, centered much Church teaching on sustaining hierarchy — a legacy which may be behind today’s mission failures.

In early America, born of the Reformation and Enlightenment, the Church also centered on minimally paid clergy, often shared by many worshipping communities. It’s been a long-time since pastors were paid with bounty from parishioners’ farms (which was the same way farmers fed their families), but pastors still talk as if they had personally experienced this long tradition, which in their modern minds is degrading. Their numbers are few.

Paid positions came along with prosperity. It wasn’t until the post-world war economic boom that churches began to fund clergy positions with competitive salaries. They enjoyed a few short halcyon decades under this system and then all the work of the founding church members began to unravel.

As it unravels mission priorities have shifted. We created a model for ministry that we cannot sustain.

The Church began in America with an emphasis on building and supporting community. The emphasis today is on supporting clergy. A congregation that cannot support a clergy position, often compensated at a higher level than the any household in the congregation earns, is endangered.

The Church would like to ignore this reality and blame demographics or find fault with lay commitments. The fact is that the model of a congregation sustaining one professional salary as pastor and several others in compensated auxiliary roles is endangered.

When congregations are endangered, so are the hierarchies they created when times were better.

The Church has become ravenous. Closing churches and keeping the assets “in house” (never a Lutheran requirement—something we thought we had learned from the Reformation) has become a priority. Justifying it legally and morally is problematic but not impossible. It’s been done before in the Church. If we are to learn from our past, we will find that the harsh light of history is not kind to these eras.

It may be time to reprioritize our mission. Focussed on mission, we may be able to find ways to revive community churches—still your best chance of reaching and involving the most people.

This doesn’t mean Churches must die — which by the way affects the economy of the community beyond just the pastor’s salary as we at Redeemer can well attest.

Rabbi Herring asks some good questions about the costs of educating rabbis, the time spent in rabbinical training, continuing education (more important in today’s world) and the actual role and services provided by rabbis. Surely, our seminaries and leaders are having the same discussions.

Time to join the conversation.

Let’s start by thinking of mission first — not salary first.

  • What help does your church actually need to fulfill mission? Will one full-time pastor meet that need?
  • How can your congregation provide mission muscle with the abilities of the congregation?
  • What do we expect of pastoral help?
  • What can Christian community accomplish independently of pastoral leadership?
  • Are we preparing future pastors for the needs of the Church or to fill existing positions?
  • How can we restructure the Church so that the faithful can actually afford it?
16 Apr 2012

You Think Church Work Is Hard!

Here is a charming video about a boy with vision, ingenuity, perseverance. and with a little help, the ability to network. View and discuss! There’s a lot to learn from this video that applies to church work.

[vimeo http://www.vimeo.com/40000072 w=400&h=300]
14 Apr 2012

How to Bypass the Democratic Process in the Lutheran Church

Learn from the Roman Catholics.

Name a Blue Ribbon Committee.

Who gives out those ribbons to committees as they are about to go to work? Shouldn’t the blue ribbons be given after the work is done and the decisions have proven to be wise? Or does the ribbon automatically make the decisions wise? Chicken or egg?

East Falls is still reeling with the news that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese has determined, with the help of a Blue Ribbon Committee, that the parochial school children of St. Bridget’s in East Falls should no longer walk to their neighborhood school but should hop on buses and head to a brand new (well, somewhat renovated) school three neighborhoods away—if you take the most commonly traveled route, Henry Avenue. (East Falls, Wissahickon, Roxborough, final destination Manayunk)

A new name has already been bestowed on this school. There won’t be any fighting over existing names and no debate among vying factions. St. Blaise it is. (Read what has happened since!)

There! Turn in your blue ribbons, committee members. Thank you for your service.

The Blue Ribbon Committee was entrusted with the fate of every Catholic School in the Archdiocese, most of which face economic challenges. They originally announced 40-some closings but changed their Blue Ribbon minds on more than a dozen of their decisions after protests were staged and appeals heard.

You have to wonder why the Blue Ribbon Committees don’t listen to the people before making Blue Ribbon decisions.

St. Bridget’s in East Falls has not fared well in the reconsideration process. They wrote letters, signed petitions, solicited the support from the community council and government representatives—as if Blue Ribbon Committees give a hoot about the views of elected officials. The Catholics of East Falls are left at this point with little but the knowledge that they tried. And we hope they keep trying. (Redeemer is in your corner.)

Why Manayunk?

The Blue Ribbon Committee reports that the parishes of Manayunk have already experienced loss and they don’t want to inflict more on them.

It’s East Falls’ turn to suffer.

Sounds familiar to us at Redeemer, just up the hill from St. Bridget’s.

Redeemer once heard the same reasoning. It was 1998. There were three struggling Lutheran Churches in Roxborough. None in Manayunk. None in Wissahickon. And then there was little Redeemer, sitting on a prime property (owned and paid for by the people of East Falls) with a healthy endowment.

In moves SEPA Synod and the Lutheran bishop with an attempt to close Redeemer.

Bishop Almquist appointed his own version of a Blue Ribbon committee. He called them “trustees.”

“Ministry in East Falls is not good use of the Lord’s money,” one Synod official said.

“We want to merge the churches in Roxborough into one riverfront church,” said another.  Redeemer’s assets were to fund the project. Redeemer was never consulted.

Some even dared to invoke the Resurrection parallel. Redeemer should die so that the churches of Roxborough might live. When in doubt turn to Scripture.

Only Redeemer was not dead.

There was a plan made by the Lutheran version of the Blue Ribbon Committee. Redeemer was  supposed to submissively fund this venture — which was never likely to work. The three congregations in Roxborough, the largest geographic neighborhood in Philadelphia, were too different. It might have been possible, but there was no unification plan short of ordering Lutherans to do as the Synod says, which doesn’t work very well. Those pesky constitutions keep getting in the way.

The Lutherans of East Falls successfully fought this folly, but the memory of our advocacy for our own ministry in our own neighborhood (the Lutheran way) festered in the minds of SEPA Synod leadership. Pastors disappeared. SEPA Synod began the death watch.

Ten years. That ought to do it.

In 2008, a new bishop moved in again. This time, there would be no fooling around with any attempt at working with the Lutherans of East Falls — which by now was an almost entirely new membership. Bishop Claire Burkat asked for action against Redeemer from the Synod Council—having never met with leaders of Redeemer. Then they waited nearly five months with not a word to the congregation that they were assuming control.

When the cat jumped out of the bag, Redeemer fought back.

The Bishop visited our property with a locksmith. Redeemer turned her away. Fort Sumter.

Bishop Burkat used the committee angle, too. She didn’t call it “blue ribbon.” That probably wouldn’t fly among Lutherans, who believe in the equality of lay and clergy leadership. She named trustees. She simply announced by letter that the trustees were replacing the elected leaders of the congregation — the names of which she didn’t bother to check.

The name change trick was invoked. When Plan A—to sell the property out from under the congregation—failed, the talk turned to closing the church for a few months and reopening under a new name, this time with a synod-approved council.

If only the people of East Falls could have been relied upon to vote the Bishop’s way! Then all this would have been unnecessary.

So take notes, Lutheran bishops. Blue Ribbon committees carry more clout. Forget the constitution. Just find a few loyalists, give them Blue Ribbon status, be clear about the game plan, and declare your work done.

Blame the committee if things go wrong.

Oh, and those three churches in Roxborough. Grace and Epiphany are closed and Bethany soldiers on alone.

photo credit: kevinthoule via photopin cc
14 Apr 2012

Let’s Get Rid of the Saints . . . and All Pitch In!

This week a Founders Day celebration was held at a nearby institution that is friendly with Redeemer. One of our members attended the pricy event.

The emphasis of the night was “honoring heroes.” A slate of a dozen or so people influential in the institution’s difficult past was called forward. Friends and supporters applauded enthusiastically as each name was read and each honoree accepted a plaque and a handshake. It was a love fest with words of encouragement:

“Without you . . . . (followed by a long list of potential disasters that would surely have occurred if someone hadn’t done something).”

More striking was the behind the scenes banter. Among themselves, the celebrated heroes talked about the lack of the support, the drain on their energy and personal funds, and just how difficult their work on behalf of the institution they loved had been. There was a sense that any one of them would have traded the honor for a few more willing hands when the going had been tough. But still, they emerged before the assembly, proudly accepting the accolades of the less committed.

Hero worship is an interesting ritual. It’s a way of passing the buck. Let someone else take the risks; award them if they happen to succeed and if they fail we can say with our clean hands comfortably tucked in our pockets, “We told you so!”

And it’s also a chance to raise some money!

It’s easy for us in the Church to rely on the sacrifices of others. It’s the foundation of our whole religion! We expect sacrifices from the most faithful.

With plentiful biblical example of widows giving their last and martyrs standing up as stones are hurled—and let’s not forget—crucifixion, we encourage the faithful to give and sacrifice for their churches. Like the rest of society, we assuage potential guilt for our own lack of perseverence by bestowing honors on those foolish enough to really lay things on the line. We justify our own inaction with a few Bible verses about trust.

How much healthier would the Church be if there were no heroes (sometimes we call them saints)—if everyone got his or her hands a little dirty!

The next time we attend a ceremony to honor local “heroes,” we should think about what we might have done to have made their lives less trying.

Christ died so that we can!

photo credit: CRASH:candy via photopin cc
14 Apr 2012

Redeemer Enters East Falls Chili Cook-Off

Two members of Redeemer vied among 18 East Fallsers for top chili recipes. One of our entries was a dish that became a staple at Redeemer socials after we had a short time with a vicar from Puerto Rico. He asked us to make a favorite chili-like dish of his native Puerto Rico — sancocho, which combines beef and a larder-full of vegetables and even fruit. The spices used, we were to learn as our membership grew among native Africans, were similar to those in African cooking. This was all part of our journey as a growing community of faith and quite a deviation from the blander cuisine of Redeemer past! Yes, sancocho uses more than salt and pepper! For the cook-off we called it Sweet and Sour Chili because it had pineapple in it.

While locked out of our church, Redeemer intends to remain active in our community.

We are not closed; we are locked out of God’s House by SEPA Synod.

14 Apr 2012

Seeking Transparency in Church Leadership

This is an election year. We as a nation will elect a president—a decision we must all live with for four years.

It is also an election year in the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod (SEPA) Synod of the ELCA. SEPA will elect a bishop for a six-year term and congregations will live with that choice for more than half a decade.

We will take less time preparing for this choice.

The Church has a history of cloistering leaders. Clergy may know one another. Most lay leaders have little knowledge of the names presented to them on the floor of Synod Assembly.

People, today, want to know who their leaders are and what they stand for. We want to know this every day, not just at election time. There was a time when this was difficult. Communication was expensive and unwieldy. This is no longer an excuse. Church leadership can and should interact with church members on a daily basis. This should be a joy not a drudge.

There are long traditions of leadership by intimidation and fear in the Church. It didn’t start out that way, but it goes back centuries. The Reformation tried to address this but even today this leadership style rears its head in defiance of the Christ’s message of love.

In the business world, people have a choice. They can work for a company or they can leave.

It’s a bit different in the Church. People want to stick with their faith and their congregational community. It’s all wrapped up in their relationship with God, their understanding of who they are, and their personal and family faith journeys. When dissatisfied, they aren’t likely to look for a new Church as a first option.

In other words, they care.

That’s a good thing—a treasure!

As SEPA Synod prepares for its 2012 Annual Assembly, the topic is worth consideration.

SEPA Synod delegates need to carefully examine the relationship between synod leadership and the congregations—the only reason synods exist.

The relationship between the synod and its impressive list of rostered leaders is more difficult to analyze but just as important. Each question asked below might also be asked by each rostered professional leader.

Perhaps its best to start by examining the relationships between congregations, their elected leaders and synod leadership.

  • Do you know one another? Are you working together — interdependently — as the operating constitutions require? What do you know about the names on the ballot? What do they stand for? What do they know about you?
  • What do your leaders believe?
  • Do your members have a voice? Under Lutheran polity, you are supposed to! It’s a precious Lutheran concept that clergy and laity have equal leadership standing.
  • Do your elected leaders listen to the people they are serving? Is there two-way communication?
  • Is there a plan for reversing strong downward trends—or will that be presented after a six-year decision is made?
  • Are your lay members comfortable with synod leadership? Must all communication go through your pastor? Are your phone calls returned? Are dates for meetings mutually agreed upon? Are they scheduled within a month of request?
  • Is there trust?
  • What is the synod’s vision for moving forward? Is every congregation included in the vision?
  • Does SEPA treat every congregation and its leaders with respect and dignity — as valued members of God’s kingdom? Are elected congregational leaders treated with respect?
  • Is your only interaction with synod when there is a leadership change? When was the last time a bishop visited your congregation just to listen and get to know you?
  • Do you know what your leaders are doing in your name and in the name of God?

The choice of bishop is pivotal to the image of our Church. Let’s do this carefully.

13 Apr 2012

The Power of Negative Thinking

Label a problem “impossible” and you have an excuse for failure.

This temptation faces today’s Church. In many cases, Church leaders have given up on the Church!

“Neighborhood ministry can’t be supported.” Just declare it! That makes it true.

What happens then?

We stop trying. After all, we have given ourselves permission to fail.

The first to be defeated are the clergy. They throw up their hands and devise ways to make it look like they tried. Assign a caretaker pastor here, an interim pastor there, and pray. Christians support one another in failing ministries. Just look at the statistics.

The laity can only wonder what is discussed at ministerium gatherings of “caretaker” pastors whose assignments are to slowly and quietly bring ministry to a close. It must be deflating. Any pastor who walks in with a new idea is likely to have the conversation quickly changed. The idea is to fail as gracefully as possible.

How can you rebuild self-esteem in a Church where these conditions prevail? Hold grand worship services celebrating Church closures (failures).

Lay people who have more invested in their neighborhood ministries keep working, often under the leadership of defeated pastors, who are called with the tacit understanding that they are to keep things going as long as the money can flow.

Lay leadership is puzzled at the attitudes they encounter, but they soldier on, trying to avoid the conflict brewing from exasperation and a conflict in mission that is never defined — so it can’t be handled.

A  defeated attitude spreads like a bad rash. It chafes at the message that is preached from our pulpits. We worship a God of the possible. The Bible is filled cover to cover with accounts of insurmountable obstacles overcome. Some problems are fought with patience, some with trust, and a few with power. The deeper you go in the New Testament, the more faith is relied upon, and thank God for the Book of James, who reminds us that it might take some work.

The Church faces problems today that can be overcome but not if we must first meet all the standards of yesterday’s church. It is time to clear the slate and approach our congregations openly and with the knowledge that with God, all things are possible. If we do not believe that, why bother?

Walk in the shoes of the laity. Would you support a church with no momentum? Would you join a Church that doesn’t believe in its ability to succeed? Would you subscribe to a faith that doesn’t believe its own message?

photo credit: morberg via photopin cc
12 Apr 2012

Facebook: A Force for the Church to Reckon With

Facebook and the Church are entering relatively uncharted territory.

Congregations with broad age demographics are likely to use Facebook as a way of promoting activities. There are a few youthful congregations who have implemented a Facebook social media strategy that is more comprehensive, encouraging lively interaction among members.

Facebook is something the Church must learn with caution. It may be something we should teach as well, but it will take some experience to become authoritative.

A congregation should consider demographics when using Facebook. Measure them against these statistics.

  • 81% of Americans aged 12 to 17 check Facebook daily.
  • It is likely that a quarter of a congregation’s members over 65 are on this Social Media platform and this statistic is quickly growing.
  • Close to three-fourths of your members 25-45 engage in Facebook use.
  • Business people in your congregations are surely exploring Facebook strategies.

Your members are already on Facebook. Grandparents are following the activities of their grandkids. Youth are likely to be in touch with dozens of friends while you think they are having dinner with you.

How many of your members check your congregation’s web site daily? How many read the newsletter? How many members participate in creating the content on your web site or in your newsletter?

The reins of information are no longer in your church leaders’ hands.

There is no doubt that Facebook is a force to reckon with and a tool to consider.

Facebook is changing the way we think. Privacy is valued much less. There is a driving need to be in touch. Facebook has an entry age of 13, but figuring out what year you have to be born to qualify takes elementary math. Children are using Facebook.

When our way of thinking changes, our ways of acting follow. What this means to the Church is not known. Will members become more engaged? Will they see less use for Christian community?

If the Church hopes to influence the answers to these questions, we must engage in the conversation.

The problem Churches may have in building Facebook community is that the thinking of older members and younger members may clash. The impact could be felt across a congregation. One piece of private information, innocently shared on your congregation’s Facebook network, could create serious fallout. Pictures that seem fine to someone posting on multiple walls might not pass the vanity test of others in the congregation.

Though not excluded, deep thoughts are rarely shared on Facebook. It tends to be a lively conversation with lots of inside innuendo going on. This could be fun for those in the know. Others could feel left out.

Still, Facebook is here to stay and it is changing the way we think. If churches hope to reach the people in their community, we must adapt our mission strategies for today’s way of thinking.

Maybe Facebook will force the Church to dust off the cathedral rafters!

11 Apr 2012

The Underestimated Value of Small Churches

There isn’t much difference between small churches and large churches and their mission potential. Redeemer’s Ambassadors have visited nearly 50 neighboring churches. We’ve seen small churches with impressive worship. We’ve seen large churches with ordinary worship. We’ve seen volunteer choirs in small congregations perform as well as larger church choirs with paid section leaders. We’ve seen small churches with amazing track records for supporting neighborhood mission. We’ve seen large churches doing similar things. We’ve seen innovative, scalable mission projects in several very small congregations.

Yet large churches have preferential ranking in the minds of denominational hierarchy. That’s because there is one thing larger churches can do better than small churches. They can better support hierarchy.

Hierarchies are expensive and self-perpetuating.

There is rarely talk about reducing hierarchy. This may be precisely what is needed.

Hierarchies are responsible for keeping church professionals employed. They are also supposed to provide services to congregations. Most congregations have little contact with their regional office unless they are calling a pastor.

Clergy rely on the denomination for access to and approval of a call. The regional body becomes their employment agency.

In the corporate world, employment agencies work for either the employer or the job-seeker. In the church, a regional body, acting as employment agency, holds some power over both the job-seekers and the limited pool of employer congregations within their region. They serve two earthly masters and tend to favor the clergy.

When pastors are vying for the most lucrative or beneficial assignments, the regional body as employment agency begins to judge congregations by their ability to meet clergy needs. If a congregation insists on finding a candidate that fits ministry needs, they can be judged as uncooperative—a judgement that could follow them for decades.

Mandated initiatives that make no sense to congregations can result. The regional body might recommend merger or acceptance of an interim pastor for an undesignated time—or they may recommend closure.

Denominational leaders are acting as managers. Looking at the map, it may make perfect management sense to merge two or three congregations within a two-mile radius. The thinking is that if you merge two 150-member churches, you will have one church with 300-members and that’s a magic number for supporting clergy.

It doesn’t work that way. In the church . . .

1 + 1 = One half

Churches are little communities, something like families. They come with their own traditions and social structure. Merging them to save management costs makes about as much sense as merging three or four unrelated families to make utility and grocery bills more reasonable.

You cannot mandate community. Attempts to merge congregations often end up with one even smaller congregation.

There is another side effect. In the corporate world, mergers and management decisions often result in similar products and services replicated in similar ways. The beauty of small congregations is their individuality. Without small churches we will end up with cookie cutter large churches, worshiping in similar ways and providing similar services and mission opportunities.

The loss of neighborhood ministries will be felt far more deeply than any temporary gains of church closures and mergers.

We must make small congregations a priority. We must find ways to help them get over decades of neglect.

10 Apr 2012

Redeemer Celebrates Third Easter Locked Out of Church

Redeemer members gathered for a third Easter in front of the locked doors of Redeemer Lutheran Church in East Falls.No stone was rolled away at Redeemer this year. Maybe next year!

Nevertheless, Redeemer members gathered in front of the church, read the Easter Story, and prayed before heading to a member’s home for Easter fellowship. We had three new attendees this year, which has been steady growth since the lock out.

Please keep in mind that Redeemer members still live in fear of SEPA leadership. Not all will agree to be in a photograph—very sad commentary on the state of ministry in SEPA Synod of the ELCA.

(Our sign, which Bishop Burkat couldn’t wait to have torn down and destroyed as she pretends to honor the memory of Redeemer, will continue to live on as a witness to our ministry through the magic of Photoshop!)

We had a wonderful Easter — no thanks to the church!

Christ is risen indeed!

09 Apr 2012