December 2015

The future of the Church does not have to be bricking up the neighborhood churches.

HOLACRACY: Part 2

Yesterday’s post introduced holacracy—a movement that is restructuring how organizations work together.

I suggested that the concepts may be exactly what the world of Church is struggling to find.

But how do we get there?

Holacracy is finding success in the business world because a few savvy entrepreneurs were willing to step away from titles like CEO and the accompanying vertical structure. They saw it hampering innovation. Fostering innovation makes you stand out among competitors.

In other words—there is incentive.

The Church talks about innovation but remains unprepared to invest in the concept. No incentive.

Tradition and constitutions define rules. (Holacracy has a constitution, by the way.) Leadership roles of bishop and pastor are guaranteed as long as congregational money lasts and people get along. Successful leaders keep people happy.

In recent years, the money is failing. When money is in short supply, tensions rise. People are not happy.

As congregations fail, church leaders have rewritten the rules to make sure money lasts longer for their benefit.

It is OK for congregations to fail, if the denomination benefits from failure. This isn’t made up. It is actually stated in training resources for church leaders. Don’t waste time helping struggling churches. Create a triage list. Spend time and energy on those showing more promise.

Self-survival is the only incentive. It is not survival of the fittest. The higher ranks of the Church are every bit as challenged as the congregations. Rather, it is survival of the most powerful. Service and Mission are off in the distance.

The Church of the near future is likely to be composed of denominational offices and the 40 richest congregations—a quarter the current size of our regional body. The roster of pastors will be similarly cut, although those remaining will be well paid. Affluence is the measure of ministry. All the buildings will be new or renovated.

One problem, pews are not likely to be full. The people of the 120 abandoned congregations spread across five counties will not drive to attend worship no matter how grand the parking lots or plush the pews.

The loss of neighborhood churches will challenge the ability of the surviving churches to effectively deliver in mission. They will have isolated themselves from the poor, needy and diverse. They will become social clubs for Christians who can afford the dues.

Failure to recognize the destructive nature of self-centered use of power sparked the Reformation. A refresher course every 500 years may be the ticket!

Just as in 1517, power feeds on money. The powerful will not easily revise their roles if it means ceding power and status.

This is likely to be the Church’s undoing.

Change is not going to come from clergy, seminarians or consultants. They remain heavily invested in vertical church structure.

I suggest we start by looking at what we already have. Examine that word in the ELCA constitutions that eludes us.

INTERDEPENDENT

What does it mean?

With that question in mind, take a look at this TED talk.

photo credit: Brick Filled Window via photopin (license)

I just finished a novel—a murder mystery. (Fisher of Souls by Hanni Münzer). Solving the murders of a growing number of high-ranking church leaders traces the motive to the proposed revelation of ancient documents sealed by the church leaders that indicate Jesus had appointed leadership roles to women. This information is seen as threatening to all church structure. Hence, 300 pages of intrigue.

The stuff of novels?

photo credit: Geordie via photopin (license)

The other day I was doing some research and googled “top church influencers.” Up popped a post on a blog, Brian Dodd on Leadership. It is a list of the top 30 blogs Christian leaders should have been reading in 2015. I recognized a couple of names that I’ve followed online and I had heard of a few more, but most were unknown to me.

But something was really jumping out.

Where were the names of any women? Women are the engines of most churches.

Of 30 influential blogs listed only three are written by women.  The only place women are listed as influencers are in the category “Women.” There is no “Men” category.

Women exist as influencers only as they relate to women. One writes about gender abuse. A bunch write for a blog written for women leaders and preachers wives. A third is an author and speaker who has written for the female perspective (a NY Bestselling author—must be a market for it!). By women, for women. An interesting segregation.

At least the men aren’t claiming to be experts on women! Where would that get them?

The remaining blogs on the list reveal that the world of church leadership (whether Protestant or Catholic) is still a male domain.

Most of the blogs take the corporate view of church, referencing the large church model that sports such oxymoronic terms as “executive pastor.”

Where are the women leaders? Probably serving the smaller congregations—most congregations.

I can still feel the bitterness of my grandmother and mother at their roles as preachers’ wives, which bridled their considerable talents. I often thought they might have been happier if they had been born today, but the dream of equality in the church is still a dream deferred. We’ve got some work to do if we believe in the priesthood of all believers.

Early in the current campaign for the 2016 presidential elections, I wrote a blog post about the wide field of Republican candidates and their religious affiliations. 

Back then, the candidates were eager to be seen as part of some faith group, but they were careful to define their affiliations to pass the political correctness test.

The test was given again this week. The grade for the Republican frontrunner is an embarrassing F–.

The field is now narrowing—current events are giving us a view of the forerunners’ faith. Character is emerging. Perhaps it is a God-send these issues are arising now, before the campaign narrows our choices any further. Perhaps it will help us avoid a serious national mistake.

Which is more troubling?

• The leading candidate, Donald Trump, is sending us back to World War II and the McCarthy Era. His views and proposed remedies of the current crisis with militant Islamic extremists violate our nation’s founding principles. It should be obvious to any eighth-grade civic student.
• The remaining serious contenders seem to be scared to speak strongly against the forerunner. Some have already pledged to support the person who won the nomination.

If ever there was a reason to break a promise, this is it. We need the other contenders to speak up and withdraw their pledged support. Just be honest: you thought you could support his candidacy but this is a development you cannot accept. That would be leadership.

There are more important principles at stake than protecting chances for the VP slot or protecting party loyalty. There usually are, by the way.

It has been proven time and again—Leaders who lead by excluding self-defined opponents are dangerous (in world politics and within the Church).

A few months ago, the candidates were trying to qualify for the nation’s faith vote.

Now they are missing the main point of most faith groups and the very definition of the God worshiped by Christians.

Back then, Trump defined himself as a Presbyterian who attends church as much as he can. “Always on Christmas and Easter.”

Well, Donald. In two weeks or so, when you find yourself in church on Christmas, I hope you hear the message.

God is love. Change the accent. God IS love.

Love is inclusive, not exclusive. Any Sunday School Kindergarten student can tell you that.