4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

Church Leadership

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

Stop Blaming Congregations for Failure

Let Social Media Save the Day

We lay people have been taking it on the chin for years.

  • We’ve been ridiculed. We don’t tithe. We don’t evangelize. We aren’t welcoming. We don’t volunteer.
  • We’ve been labeled. If we aren’t strong, we are backward and resistant to change, and dying. If we are strong, insisting on answers, we are adversarial and resistant to authority.
  • We are made to feel inferior and inadequate, unable to find our way in the world without hanging onto the robes of the clergy.

—all because mainline churches are failing.

IT’S NOT OUR FAULT.

  • It’s not our fault that the church is structured to nurture homogenous cultures of yesteryear that  naturally replenish and grow in numbers from generation to generation.
  • It’s not our fault that, in the New World, community demographics shift every decade
  • It’s not our fault that even the least dysfunctional families experience their own diasporas every generation or so.
  • It’s not our fault that fewer people enter the ministry as a life call and see the only road to advancement as moving to suburban settings, making neighborhood ministries less desirable.
  • It’s not our fault that leadership has been just as unprepared for changes in society as we were.
  • It’s not our fault that the Church, despite a strong start in the Reformation, managed to sit out the Renaissance and stayed mired in the Middle Ages for the last 500 years.

Now that we are in a new age yet to be named (the Information Age?, the Digital Age? the Age of Globalization?) we’re all playing catch up.

In the hierarchical past, this meant creating a position headed by a well-paid think tank leader with an alphabet of credentials after his name. It meant funding an office with a staff, providing an adequate budget for developing resources, allowing three to five years for development, and the creation of a network to implement resulting initiatives. Implementation would be easy because all churches would be alike, waiting for answers to their problems to be delivered to them. After all, there would be nowhere else for them to turn.

Today, we are standing at the door of the future. The answers will come by inspiring community. There will be much less need for a centralized office of any sort.

The church of the future will be led by a conductor who stands at the podium, signals the opening downbeat and walks away, allowing the musicians to get their cues from one another, to take off in an imaginative riff, to return to the group to enjoy another artist’s take.

Welcome to the Information Age, the Age of Social Media, the Age of Globalization. It’s all coming together just in time to save the mainline church . . . if the mainline church is paying attention.

There is a lot of rethinking that needs to be done. Lay people might be best equipped to lead the way!

photo credit: DeusXFlorida via photopin cc
02 Apr 2012

Church Competition (It’s not who you think!)

Did watch manufacturers ever predict that their major competitors would be cell phones? That’s what has happened. Cell phones display the time prominently. No need for a watch. Bulova, Timex, and Seiko were watching each other while T-mobile and the Iphone began to make them obsolete.

Understanding your competition is important to successful honing and implementation of mission.

Many churches have no clue that there is competition. There is.

We often address symptoms of the competition and miss the diagnosis. The competition is not:

  • the neighboring church of a different denomination
  • the church with the charismatic pastor or hefty endowment
  • the bigger church of your same denomination
  • Saturday morning sports
  • demands of the schools on family time
  • dysfunctional families
  • televangelism

These are symptoms.

The competition is the force that separates people from God and wanting to be in communion with the people of God. There was a time when the religious were bold enough to give it a name . . . Satan.

Most churches act as if their mission were to attract the biggest piece of the existing religious pie.

That’s what happens when you rely on demographers to direct mission efforts. Demographers can measure the known. Careful studies count the number of existing “Lutherans” in a geographic area. They compare it to how many “Lutherans” were in that area a decade ago. They measure the household income of the people in the neighborhood.

That’s where the train jumps the track.

Mission is about reaching those who are not measured by demographers and will not have the inclination to support ministry with a piece of their household income for some time.

The biggest problem (and there are many) in this approach to mission is that it keeps churches from working together.

Denominational church structures are designed to facilitate mission, but in tough economic times they can become self-focused, making decisions that protect their own status quo.

Denominations and congregations cannot serve our neighbors while we are coveting their people, their money, their staff, and their property.

When each visitor is seen as a potential “sell,” we fail to reach the soul of a seeker longing to know God. When each congregation is measured by its ability to support the denomination, not its community or mission, we fail the Church as a whole.

There is a trickle down effect. Unaddressed problems spread over the years. Failure to help one struggling church becomes ten neglected churches within a decade or so.

Our Ambassadors have visited many congregations. We have seen separate communities facing the same challenges—most of them in isolation. Some of them are within a three-mile radius (in well-populated areas). Some of them face closure—one at a time—over the next decade or two. Since the ability to support an expensive structure is put before mission, they fight an uphill battle even within their denomination.

There is untapped power in working together. Yet the Church that talks about unity is crippled as they seek success and solutions that help their bottom lines today.

When the church understands that their mission is to reach the world outside their demographics, progress will be made.

We offer a quote prominently displayed on another website.

People shouldn’t have to find a church.

The church should find them.

photo credit: mbgrigby via photopin cc

31 Mar 2012

Women Are Key Influencers in the Church (always have been!)

A business blogger recently posted statistics claiming that women are the most powerful “brand ambassadors” in the world. The business world sometimes uses a church term, evangelist, for this job description. Once again, the church can learn from the world of business.

Steve Olenski, in socialmediatoday, cited a study that showed that:

  • Women are 80% more likely than men to try new products/services based on advice of a friend.
  • Women are 74% more likely than men to encourage friends to try new products and services.
  • Women tend to stay more engaged (74%) with products and services they like.
  • Women are 42% less likely to share negative experiences with products or services.
  • Women are only 32% less likely to avoid products or services based on a friend’s negative experience.

These interesting statistics remind us of something we encountered in our own experience and on our Ambassador visits. Redeemer’s greatest period of growth was nurtured less by pastors but by the presence of a deaconess, who ran the educational and social programs in the church. Older Redeemer members could tell us the names of pastors but they talked about the work of the deaconess. In our visits we encountered several churches that referred lovingly to a long-departed deaconess.

And then we remembered the power of the women’s group at Redeemer, which operated independently with their own budget and bank account. Unhampered by church council they chose their own social pursuits — all of which reflected well on Redeemer as a whole. We thought back to the days of the Women’s Auxiliaries and Ladies Aid Societies.

Many of the churches that struggle today to afford pastors have their roots in the less recognized and less compensated devotion of women.

In a television program that follows well-known entertainers as they research geneology, Actress Helen Hunt appeared to be mortified by the revelation that her great grandmother had been a powerful force in the women’s temperance movement of the 19th century and early 20th century. She sat with an historian who pointed out to her that this movement was actually revolutionary, fighting serious societal problems that were affecting their communities in a world that gave women no vote or voice.

Women have always had a voice — just not a publicly recognized one. Their voice was easily overlooked because men controlled publishing as well as the board room. The powerful women’s groups of the era grew from passion, commitment and perseverance to make a difference in a world that refused to recognize their abilities.

No more!

The church would be considerably stronger today if it recognized and unleashed women’s powerful inclination to nurture — which is what the statistics quoted above reveal.

Consider this as you make plans for church growth. The challenge is to find modern, equitable ways to do this.

30 Mar 2012

5 Ways Social Media Will Change Your Church’s Life

If your congregation wisely chooses to invest time and passion in social media, be prepared for many things to change. We’re not talking about self-centered Facebook prattle; we’re talking about online interaction that looks outside your parish to the community and, by the nature of the internet, the world.

This may be the hardest thing for the Church to grasp. The internet connects individuals with the world. There is no intermediary. No church council, no pastor, no synod or its equivalent, no bishop, no national church can control congregational interconnectedness.

This means that congregation’s must be more mindful of  things which may have been neglected. While it is easy to reach the world, one mission of the individual Christian community will become more intense—the care and nurturing of individual Christians.

  1. Congregational Education is vital. A congregation must be confident in knowing who they are and what thy believe if they are to engage neighbors or the world in their mission. This has always been a focus of parish life, but educational components of many churches have been dropped in the last few decades. As long as the focus of congregational life was local, it didn’t seem to matter. This needs a remedy. Education must be intertwined with every activity.
  2. Social Awareness must be nurtured. You will begin to hear from Christians from places you never considered as being Christian. Congregations must understand, for instance, the challenges Christians face in Islamic nations, where Christians can be ostracized from their families or jailed. While freedom of religion is taken for granted by many Americans, some religions maintain cultural holds on their people even IN America.
  3. The Church needs to become attuned to the minute causes of community as well as the big picture. We live in an age where anyone can bring a cause to the public’s attention. Yellow ribbons, pink ribbons, donation cans, something-a-thons become very focused. Keeping up with them will be an ongoing mission challenge.
  4. Personal faith must be deepened. Savvy companies teach every employee that they are a representative of their company culture. The Church needs to foster the same sense of ownership among members. Every member reflects on the congregation. Congregations will want their members to be knowledgeable and engaged as representatives of their church.
  5. The biggest change is that many congregations will be able to rebound from survival mode and see themselves as important. Their interconnectedness will give them energy, resources and renewed purpose.
19 Mar 2012

Make Way for the Non-geographic Future Church

We are polishing our crystal ball again. This is what we see . . .

The Church of tomorrow will have only two sociological geographies — the local church and the worldwide church. Intermediary layers will be defined by local congregations as needed — not by hierarchies.

Denominations and regional authorities will become expensive drains on local churches with waning benefits.

They and national church offices — at least as we know them today — will become archaic, outliving their purpose and mission. Once the hub of thought leadership, educational/resource publishing, and social ministry implementation, they are already being phased out by economic realities. Any congregation can form alliances with a multitude of social causes locally, nationally and internationally. Any congregant can publish.

Congregations will become identified by their works which will make them more relevant and help them grow. If they are to survive they will find vitality — quickly!

Congregations will soon realize that the dollars they are sending to regional bodies are better spent in ways they can monitor and become involved with directly. Giving will improve when results are more visible.

This is all the result of the internet.

Every congregation has the same power at its fingertips. Soon churches will realize they will get more help and better advice if they bypass the systems of the past.

Part of this is driven by economics of scale. Business has a saying: “Go big or go home.”

The church will discover this, too.

In the past, each individual judicatory duplicated similar services supported by its own 100-200 congregations. Better services will be supplied by pooling resources of more churches than one regional body can support. Local churches will bypass judicatories and go directly to enterprising thought leaders who no longer need denominational affiliation to gain an ear.

The economic failure of judicatories will return talent now stagnating in management to work in congregations.

The best ideas will be too expensive for regional bodies to implement. They will, for a while, keep trying to do things the same way . . . and fail. Frustration will turn the tide.

Denominational lines will blur as the internet helps ideas cross traditional lines. Congregations will find their own sister congregations . . . and they could be anywhere.

In the past, denominations might have worried that doctrines and traditions would be compromised without layers of oversight. No longer! Everyone has access to the same technology. This will create its own checks and balances.

Turf wars are likely at first. They could be ugly. But the realization that hierarchies are no longer needed will begin to set in.

For a while, middle management judicatories will flex muscles, trying to rein in congregations as their power weakens. There will be casualties that will be an enduring shame…but a new church will emerge.

The local congregation will become more important than ever. It will be the local hands-on expression. They will display renewed vitality as they tap resources beyond the offering plate. They will identify mission and form alliances with like-minded organizations.

We’ve spent decades in interdenominational dialogue to achieve what the internet will achieve in just a few years!

The coming Church is going to be exciting!

photo credit: frompandora via photopin cc
17 Mar 2012

Laity Need to Learn to Speak the Clergy’s Language

Talking with clergy lately, we heard some terms we doubt many lay people have ever used or heard.

Some terms universally understood among clergy describe congregational health. These terms include “hospice,” “caretaker ministries,” and even “undertaker ministries.”

Ask a lay person, “Is your church on hospice?” and they will probably look puzzled. As it dawns on them that hospice is a service provided to dying people, they will start to realize that the clergy person is asking if their church is dying and unlikely to receive meaningful support from their denomination.

They will keep listening as they recover from shock and anger sets in.

“Who’s your pastor?” might be the next question. “Is he/she part time?”

If the answer is “Yes, that’s all we can afford right now,” the clergy might nod and mutter, “Ah, —sounds like you have a caretaker ministry.”

The lay person has probably never heard this term either. When it is explained that “caretaker ministers” are assigned to churches to hold members’ hands as their congregations die, the sense of shock and anger is rekindled.

With any sensitivity, the clergy person does not use another term used among clergy — “undertaker ministers.” This type of minister has NO intention of growing a congregation’s mission and the assignment, in all probability unknown to the congregation, is that this minister is there with the denomination’s understanding that the congregation’s ministry be brought to a close with as little muss and fuss possible.

This is a prescription for church conflict.

Laity NEVER consider their congregations as dying. They are usually aware that they face challenges, but when they call a pastor they are ALWAYS looking for help with their ministry. Lay people understand that the mission is to serve. They think every clergy person they talk to or call — even on a part-time basis — has congregational health and outreach as their goal.

Laity need to use a bit of “clergy talk” when calling their ministers. If they sense the candidate understands that the mission under consideration is to close the church—not grow the church—the congregation needs to move on and make sure their denomination understands that the congregation considers mission and ministry the goal.

It might help if we all spoke the same language!

photo credit: aldenjewell via photopin cc
17 Mar 2012

LinkedIn Can Help Church Pros Connect . . . If They Use It

LinkedIn is a powerful networking tool similar to Facebook but with a professional focus.

It packs a powerful punch for anyone wanting to connect with people in a specific sphere of interest. You can use LinkedIn to find professionals who might be willing to help you. Say, for instance, you are looking for someone who has worked in ministry with disabled people or who can preach in Arabic. You can look for people with those specific skills.

Conversely, you might have a skill you feel is underused. You can feature your special interest in your profile.

LinkdIn is an “opt-in” medium. The user chooses to particpate in the online community. Users can look for connections, accept referrals, and ask for introductions.

LinkedIn users can join groups . . . also entirely opt-in. Professionals can only connect by getting someone they already know to introduce them. Even then, the person of interest must accept and initiate any resulting communication.

It’s a fairly safe way to form relationships with peers that can be helpful in your work.

One would think that anyone going to the trouble to complete a LinkedIn profile would be serious about using this amazing networking tool. Most groups are filled with names willing to be found or to help others in their searches.

2×2 found a very odd exception. We looked at a group formed around a Protestant denomination. The group had hundreds of members with very detailed profiles. Most of them had their identities shielded!

What a waste of communication potential!

Again, the Church fails to understand how the tools of today’s world can be used in mission. What are church LinkedIn members afraid of? Why bother joining a professional network and then back away from any ability to take advantage of its potential?

It’s crazy! Back to the cloister!

photo credit: JeremyMP [Catching Up] via photopin cc
15 Mar 2012

Here’s an idea for SEPA . . .

The laity need a voice.

The Synod is dominated by clergy. Their voices and interests outrank lay concerns simply because they are involved more with leadership on a daily basis and somewhat dependent on their standing with the Synod for career advancement and security.

Many lay representatives at Assembly are new to church governance and follow their pastors’ lead.

The Synod Assembly agenda is tightly scheduled, leaving little room for lay delegates to explore ideas, which might be old to clergy but are new to them.

Lay people who become involved at the synodical level must first pass through a nominating process that is reviewed largely by clergy or lay people who have already passed muster.

Redeemer, years ago, attempted to nominate a lay member and received a phone call from a clergy representative who said they’d consider our nomination only if we “felt strongly” about it. Puzzling! Why have a nomination process?!

Generally, there is little contact between church leadership and the people they serve. Contact is often orchestrated toward SEPA leadership’s objectives.

One dedicated lay person once shared that they went to an Evening with the Bishop excited to be part of dialog. He left, frustrated and disappointed, after an hour of listening to the bishop talk with no attempt at interaction with attendees.

Redeemer’s experience with the last two bishops was that they wanted congregational interaction on their own terms, subject to their own timing, agenda and control. Congregational leaders, who had attempted dialog for years with no response, were ignored — and eventually replaced by decree.

So here’s an idea. What if there was an annual LAITY ROUNDTABLE, say two months before the Annual Assembly, where ANY lay person could attend, discuss challenges and formulate ideas and proposals to bring to the Synod Assembly’s attention? The retreat could be one-day, on a Saturday perhaps, and should be entirely lay led. No clergy allowed. Trust your lay people!

The LAITY ROUNDTABLE would serve no purpose but to review ideas and proposals of individual congregations for inclusion on Synod Assembly’s agenda.

There would be added benefits:

  • Laity would understand common challenges and be inspired to find solutions.
  • The interests of the churches would be lifted up.
  • Lay involvement and leadership would grow.
  • Churches would feel more involved with the denomination which can only help SEPA.
  • Large churches and small churches would interact as equals.
  • Community would expand as laity come to know one another without pastors as gatekeepers.
  • Interchurch problem-solving would pump some fresh blood into our church . . . and we still consider it our church even though we have been kicked out — without a voice!
14 Mar 2012