Absolutely

When was the last time you were wrong about something?

Last week my wife and I had dental appointments an hour apart in a small town not far from us were we used to live. Even though it is about a thirty minute drive we have stayed with the same dentist and ophthalmologist. They are both very good and we trust them. After our appointments we were going to drive out to a fabric store Nancy wanted to visit, but it didn’t open for over an hour. So we decided to get lunch. We agreed on the restaurant. I started to turn toward the restaurant and Nancy indicated I was turning at the wrong place. Sternly I insisted I was making the proper turn. (And I was right) She didn’t appreciate either my tone or my choice of words. She said, “In spite of what you think, you are not always right.” Ouch, but she was right. I think I made a mistake last year.

In many areas of life absolutism is the current base of discourse. We shout at and talk past each other with our absolutes. Listen to the political ads on the TV. There is one and only one answer to each of the issues, depending on who is talking. One candidate states that the only way to deal with an issue is their way. Another candidate will declare their proposal is the only reasonable solution to the same issue. Politics is not the only arena where absolutism is at play.

In the Church, we have been pretty good at the game of absolutism. It is absolutely true that the sun revolves around the earth. It is absolutely true that a day at creation had 24 hours. It is absolutely true there is only one view of marriage in the Bible. It is absolutely true that Israel is righteous in dealing with the Palestinians. It is absolutely true that Israel’s dealing with the Palestinians is unwarranted and evil. It is absolutely true that intinction is the best way to distribute the Elements for Communion. It is absolutely true that passing the Elements down the pew is the way it has always been done. It is absolutely true that dogs were created before cats.

Our absolutism can become absolutely ridiculous. Is it possibly true that “In spite of what you think, you are not always right?”  Some people cannot fathom the possibility there might be more than one answer to a problem or opportunity. There is only one way to balance the church budget, cut the fat and by that I mean the pastor’s salary. The only way we will ever balance the budget is to increase income. We have to insist on tithing from our members. Does it really have to be all one way or the other? Actually, we probably can find some ways to reduce some expense and to encourage increased giving.

Is there not any room for ambiguity? Are there not times where more than one answer will work? Is it not possible that the Reformed Tradition and Roman Catholicism have something to teach each other? Does one have to be either a strict creationist or an evolutionist? What do the two dominant American political parties have to teach each other? Can technology and spirituality co-exist?

I admit I can suffer as much as anybody from the disease of absolutism. However, I have to constantly be reminded and to remind myself, The moment we are convinced were are dead right, is precisely the moment when we are most vulnerable to be dead wrong.

Privilege

Have you ever thought when you go out to eat in a nice restaurant that the person serving you probably can’t afford to eat in that restaurant? How about when you stay in a mid-range lodging have you considered that the housekeeping staff can’t afford to stay there? The fact that you and I can afford the restaurant or lodging means we are privileged.

Yes, we are privileged. We read this blog on the internet. We are privileged, because there are people living within a radius of no more than two and one-half miles from us who cannot afford a computer or internet service. The fact you and I can read means we are privileged. As hard as it may be to believe there of men, women, boys and girls in the same two and one-half miles who are functionally illiterate. More often than not, we do not consider these things as making us privileged.

You bet we are privileged. Can you go to a faucet, in your house, turn it on and have access to all the clear and clean water you want? There are people even here in the good ole USA who cannot do that. If you can you are privileged. I remember, when I was in Rwanda, seeing young children and baby carrying mothers hauling home large jerry cans of water which they had just scooped out of a muddy creek. I am painfully aware I am privileged.

Often it is difficult to acknowledge and accept the fact that in one or multiple ways you and I are privileged. If one student in a class room has two pencils and the student sitting beside her has no pencils the one with two is privileged. Now, some would have us feel guilty about being privileged. The real question is, do we use whatever privilege we might have to level the playing field for those less privileged? It is not just sharing one of the two pencils we may be holding. What are we doing to make sure the one with no pencils has the where with all to obtain pencils for themself. It is not about telling those less privileged to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.  Have you ever tried to pick up both of your feet at the same time by your ankles? It cannot be done.

Trickle down economics can only be advocated by the super-privileged. It is based on the fallacious notion that as one gets richer the riches will flow down to those less privileged. The basic human inclination is to always want more than we currently have. Jesus told a story about trickle down economics in Luke 16:19-31.  Dives had to settle for the crumbs which trickled down from the table of Lazarus. The challenge to those with privilege is in reading what happened after both Lazarus and Dives died.

How do we use our privilege to level the field for those less privileged? That is the question I am wrestling with and hope you will wrestle with it also.

Train the Elders Well

A new military recruit is immediately taken from the recruiting station and assigned to be a squad leader in a war zone. The recruit has no previous military training or experience. The recruit has not been through basic training, not to mention specialty school. The recruit does not know how to load a weapon, much less how to clean one. The recruit knows nothing about strategy and tactics. The recruit has absolutely no experience in leading other people to accomplish a task. Yet, here is the recruit assigned as a squad leader in a war zone. That sound very improbable, doesn’t it?

In some ways that is what we do to new members of a congregation, even ones who are new believers. I have seen many situations where a new member of a congregation is quickly nominated and elected to be an elder, serving on the session (governing board). Maybe the new member has come from a congregational or episcopal form of being church. They know very little about what it means to be in a Reformed/Presbyterian congregation. They know little, if anything, about Reformed theology and polity. Because the new member is now on the session, he/she is named chairperson of a committee. Talk about being in over one’s head, just like the new recruit the new member, now elder, is in way over her/his head.

Yes, the Book of Order states, G-2.0402 Preparation for Ministry as a Ruling Elder or Deacon When persons have been elected to the ordered ministry of ruling elder or deacon, the session shall provide a period of study and preparation, after which the session shall examine them as to their personal faith; knowledge of the doctrine, government, and discipline contained in the Constitution of the church; and the duties of the ministry. Many/most ministers find it difficult to get more than a couple, two hour, classes for newly elected elders for their study and preparation. Obviously, their study and preparation is superficial.

About all that can be done is acquaint the elders with the Book of Confessions, the Book or Order and the session’s manual of administrative operations. Some sessions give newly elected elders a copy of each other three documents, and send them home with an admonition to read them. However, many do not even do that. Giving new elders the three documents and asking them to read them is like giving a high school biology student a copy of Gray’s Anatomy, but without the illustrations, and expecting the student to be qualified to be a physician. In many cases the volumes are taken home and put on a shelf. They are too daunting to tackle alone.

Some pastors try to incorporate a time of elder development into each session meeting. Often such efforts are met with reluctance or outright resistance from those on the session. Elders can be heard in protest exclaiming, “Session meetings are too long as it is, let’s get to the business so we can go home.” After a while the pastor relents and drops the elder development from the agenda.

Elders are to be spiritual leaders of the congregation. How can one be an effective spiritual and community life leader if one does not know the theology and polity of the portion of the church they are elected to serve? In Presbyterian theology and polity ruling and teaching elders share a common ministry with shared and different functions. How can a common can they be on equal footing if ruling elders are not adequately prepared for their calling, and if sessions are disinterested in continuing development in their understanding and application of theology and polity?

Pastors, don’t abdicate your role as teaching elders among the ruling elders. What if all on the session were expected to bring their Bible, the Book of Confessions and the Book of Order to every session meeting? What is some of the lesser important business items were delegated to individuals, committees or commissions? What if you, as the moderator, insisted that part of the session meeting be dedicated to study and discussion of Scripture, theology and polity? Is it laziness or arrogance when ruling elders refuse to expand their understanding of what we believe and how we have agreed to be together as a community of faith?

If we think it is absurd to make a new military recruit, with no training or experience, a squad leader. Why would we ever entertain the idea of making a new member an elder and expect them to be a spiritual and temporal leader in the congregation?

Your Are the Moderator

There are stories which come out of every military conflict of newly minted junior officers acting like they know everything there is about leading a group of soldiers into combat. The smart junior officers knew they had very little experience in combat, and relied upon their senior sergeants for advice and counsel. The wise senior sergeants spoke privately with the junior officer in a manner of coaching rather than contradicting the junior office in front of the troops, or directing the junior officer with do this not that directives.

Too often, I have observed newly minted teaching elders (ministers) interacting with the session like the moderator is in charge. In the polity of the Presbyterian Church (USA), the pastor is the moderator of the session. For a first call pastor the words, “You are the Moderator,” ought to send cold chills down one’s spine. When I was a young pup in ministry I was not proficient in moderating a session. Although I had had plenty of group process training in college, I didn’t fully understand the theology, polity or practicality of moderating a session. My mother in executive service, Evlyn Fulton, often stated that most ministers do know what it means to be a moderator.

A moderator is, in the words of Robert Greenleaf in Servant Leadership, first among equals. The only difference between the moderator and the others elders on the session is function. The moderator is the presence of the presbytery in the session meeting to insure the mission and ministry of the congregation is in accord with the mission strategy of the presbytery. Yes, the moderator functions as the chairperson in the session meeting. That means it is the moderator’s responsibility to keep the business moving and the debates civil. The moderator’s function is also to keep the business and debate biblically and theologically focused. To use an image from family systems theory, the moderator is to be the least anxious person at the table.

I know there were times when I was the most anxious person at the table. I had in mind what should be done; how it should be done; who should do it; and when it should be done. If the session were significantly deviating from that, my anxiety would skyrocket and I became very ineffective as the moderator. I forgot that when one acts like the most knowledgeable person in the room, you are proving you are not. One of the core theological and polity beliefs we have is, even though councils can and do err, the decisions of the group are generally far better than those of an individual. The moderator’s function is NOT that of a dictator.

The moderator’s voice should not be the most heard nor the loudest voice at the table. There are appropriate times for the moderator to ask a question and sometimes for the moderator to make a brief statement. It is generally ill-advised for the moderator to scold the other members of the session, or to speak at length favoring one side or the other, or to filibuster on a topic. If the moderator wishes to make their opinion known, if is best to ask the clerk or another elder to function as the moderator.

In our system the moderator has a vote in session meetings, due to their having been elected by the congregation. Temporary, non-installed, moderators do not have a vote. My counsel to pastors has been either always vote or never vote. Cherry picking issues upon which to vote is a dangerous pattern. If there is an equal number of ruling elders on the session and the moderator’s vote would decide the question, one way or the other, means there is not a clear discerning of direction. It is likely the losing side of the question will feel resentment of the power play by the moderator in voting on that issue if the moderator usually does not vote on lesser matters.

I know I would have greatly benefitted by having had a coach with whom I could have debriefed the session meetings, and who could have helped me better lead the session. Having taught polity on the M.Div level and for those preparing to serve as ruling elders commissioned to pastoral service, I know there is not enough time to cover the material and to prepare the students to function as effective moderators. If I were doing it again, I would insist folks come to class fully knowledgeable of the material for that class, and we would spend the most of the class time in practice session meetings. I believe it would have been more effective than covering the material in class. Effective moderating requires knowing the material, and artfully applying it.

Newly minted moderators, who is your coach?

https://www.wayostccs.com

Flip This Congregation

Periodically my wife and I like to watch the television shows where a person buys a rundown house for as little as possible, remodels it and tries to sell it at a profit. Sometimes, but seldom, the remodel goes smoothly. More often than not there are so many hidden problems with the house that the only sound the flipper hears is cha-ching as the costs keep escalating. The drama is heightened with conflicts between the flipper and the contractor or sub-contractors. A sense of crisis grows as the date for the open house quickly approaches and there are yet more tasks to be completed than seems humanly possible. At the very last minute the whole thing comes together and the flipper makes money on their investment. It does not matter which of the flipper shows one watches the plotline runs the same course.

The shows have spawned the idea with some that they too can go into flipping and come away making money. Unfortunately, many who have gone into flipping on their own end up broke and discouraged that it didn’t work out as well for them as they see on the TV shows. For one thing, the shows have sponsors which help underwrite the costs. Have you ever noticed the product placement from Coke cans to store names prominently shown as the flipper or contractor pulls up to order supplies? A direct or in-kind income comes with each time the can or storefront is shown. For those products of supplies which do not produce income the name is digitally blurred.

Over the years we have tried many processes to flip congregations and mid-councils (judicatories/ governing bodies). The processes have had different names: rick evangelism, redevelopment, revitalization, transformation, and currently missional. The two primary motivators for these efforts are to get more members and raise more money. The idea is to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. Just like the house flipping shows. The processes begin with the interior of the congregation needs to be cleared down to the spiritual studs and redesigned. This is often where the greatest problems arise.

First among the issues are the hidden rules of how things are done in the congregation. Folks are locked into, “the way we have always done it.” Start messing with the rules and traditions and wasps come out of the walls stinging and causing panic in the pews. A second set of issues arise around remodeling the worship service so it is more acceptable to new people who know nothing about our traditional worship.

That leads to the third issue. “What do you mean ‘new people’?” “Oh, we’re okay with new people as long as they are like us.” The problem is there aren’t any new people who will be just like them. It looks like the congregation is going to have to be rewired.

Every once in a while, one can hear a story of a radical change in the mission and ministry of a congregation. Just like the television flipper shows one in a thousand is enough to encourage others to give it a try. Who are the ones we send out to do the flipping? We send the newly ordained. We send out the naïve, the gun-ho, the inexperienced. We then wonder why the dropout rate of the newly ordained is high. If we are going to continue to do that we need to provide them with training in the basic flipping skills, coaches and enough backing to give them half a chance of succeeding. We need to line up sponsors with enough funding to underwrite the costs the congregation cannot or will not underwrite. We need to make sure that financial and spiritual bankruptcy are not the only alternatives for those we encourage to “flip this congregation.”

A Confession

And let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching. Hebrews 10:24-25.

One of the realities of the contemporary church is a decline in regular worship attendance. In my forty-two years of ordained service, I have seen this decline developing for several years. One can draw as straight line of correlation between declining worship attendance, and declining membership. I know the sociological and scientific maxim, correlation does not imply causation. However, in this case it is very tempting to come to the conclusion that one leads to the others.

I cannot count the number of times I have said, “If the butts are not in the pews the bucks will not be in the plates.” I do remember times when members who had been on vacation or for other reason had to miss attending worship for a few weeks would bring several offering envelops the next time they were in worship. One does not see that much anymore. Of course, it is impossible for the casual observer to know if several weeks offering is included in one check, automated withdrawal or online donation.

Now, for the confession, since my retirement I have missed far more weeks of worship than I have attended. Additionally, I have not maintained the regularity of our contributions. We attend a traditional congregation. The pastor’s sermons are solid. The choir is good. Folks are friendly. I have known some of the members for years in my executive service. My daughter and her family attend very regularly. The church is denominationally loyal, which is important to me. The support the Rwanda Partnership, which is also important to me.

Ok, Wayne, why your sporadic attendance and contributions? Why do you stay home and watch CBS Sunday Morning rather than going to worship? Does your answer give any indication as to why others may also be sporadic in attendance and contributions? For one, my faith is as strong as ever. I am gratefully amazed with the blessings I and my family enjoy. The Church, especially the tribe I have served (PCUSA), is dear to me.

There were times, in my twenty-four years of executive service that I felt and said that I might not be involved in the Church after retirement. Generally, that was thought and said in times of frustration with the wrangling in the organizational structures around the theological and social polarities which have divided us into opposing camps.

The bottom line is I am not personally involved in the life and mission of the congregation. In part, that is because of the nature of having been in executive service, which for me required a neutrality toward all the congregations. I have not exerted myself to find ways to be more involved, but neither has there been an effort to find a way for me to be involved. Part of that is a result of me being a teaching elder with membership in the presbytery and not the congregation. However, to make space for new leadership to arise and for new things to be tried, I have needed and will need not to be involved in the life and mission of the presbytery. The physical, emotional and spiritual distance required before and after retirement has meant being in “no place.”

The only correlation might be congregations making an intentional effort to involve people in the life and mission of the congregation. If one is physically, emotionally and spiritually involved, the more likely they will be more regular in attendance and contributions. Here is another perspective about why attendance may be declining, http://careynieuwhof.com/2015/02/10-reasons-even-committed-church-attenders-attending-less-often/

Parking Chairs

One of the local news channels was doing a feature on preparations for the Fourth of July in a local community. The story featured a Pittsburgh area tradition, reserving one’s parking space or parade watching space by putting chairs in those spaces. It happens year round. In the winter once one’s parking space is cleared of snow a couple of chairs are place where the car will later be parked. The amazing thing is most people honor this claiming of space.

In the small community of the news feature, the borough council passed an ordinance a few years ago limiting how long the claiming of space by the placing of the chairs to 48 hours before the Fourth of July parade. One local man stated, We don’t want outsiders coming in and taking our space. In some ways that expresses a widely held sentiment. It applies not only to parking spaces and parade watching spaces. The feeling is not particular to the Pittsburgh area, but it is clearly symbolized by the space saving chairs.

Not long ago, a fight broke out at a high school graduation because a couple family members had claimed and were saving seats for other family members who had not arrived yet. Seating was at a premium. The folks seeking a seat and the people saving the seats had a territorial dispute. In the end, none of them were able to see their graduate walk across the stage and receive their diploma.

When I was in seminary I served as a student pastor in a really nice middle class congregation. The clerk of Session sat in the same place Sunday after Sunday. I was co-teaching the senior high church school class. The class asked if they could be released about five minutes early. With snickers they wouldn’t tell is why, but it was easy to see they were up to no good. We relented and dismissed the class. I went to my office to robe, met the pastor, and we went into the worship space together. The senior high class had packed themselves in the usual place of the clerk of session. It was an amazing sight to see the whole class filling the pew awaiting the entry of the clerk. At his usual time the clerk came into the worship area, stopped dead in his tracks, did an about face and walked out in a huff.

On another Sunday in that same congregation we were to celebrate the baptism of an infant. The family were not regular attenders and had arrived early to get seat up front. The pew was packed. Their chosen pew happened to be the regular pew for one of the longer attending families. Upon entering the seating area, the matriarch of the regular attenders walked to the pew with the rest of the family in tow, and announced to the baptism family, This is our pew, please move. Standing commandingly at the end of the pew, it was obvious she wasn’t going to find another place for her family, and the baptism family meekly vacated the pew and found a pew for their family about two-thirds way toward the back of the seating.

How is it that we become so territorially possessive? I do not remember if the baptismal family ever returned to worship with us. I do not think I would have. What are the other ways we more subtly say to others, We don’t want outsiders coming in and taking our space? It might be helpful to ask an outsider come in and help us take an inventory of the barriers we erect to make sure outsides don’t come in and take our space. From parking chairs to steal or concrete fences on national borders we claim as ours that which is not ours. The earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it, the world, and those who live in it; … (Ps 24:1)

I Don't Like It

Other than “we have always done it this way,” or we have never done it that way” what is the next most common statement one is likely to hear around the church? Often it is “I don’t like….” I cannot begin to count the number of times I have heard “I don’t like…” coming from the mouths of church members. One would think everything in the church should meet the personal preferences of every single member. Teaching elders (pastors) are not exempt from declaring these words either.

Personal preferences become the measure for what is expected and acceptable. I don’t like highly liturgical worship. Therefore, everybody else should bend to my preference for more informal worship. I don’t like the preacher’s sermons because they don’t feed me. Therefore, we should change pastors. I don’t like long session (governing council) meetings. Therefore, regardless of the issues, our meetings should last no more than an hour. I don’t like the new hymnbook, the pages are too thin. Therefore, we should continue to use the old maroon ones. I don’t like the new 10:00 worship hour. Therefore, we all should go back to 11:00.

If my personal preferences are not met I will go where they will be met. If I do not find a place where they will be met, I will just drop out. Our tolerance level for things which do not meet our personal preferences is very low. What I want and like is the primary metric for everything from apple sauce to zoos.

I used to spend time with sessions and pastor nominating committees trying to help them articulate their expectations about their next pastor. Some would prefer a pastor who would be a good preacher. It was interesting trying to get them to flesh out what “good” meant. Did it mean the pastor was to preach as if she were addressing a room full of people with a doctorate degree in the English language? Did it mean delivery was more important than content? Did it mean the pastor stayed statue like in the pulpit, or was animated and was seldom in the pulpit? Did it mean the pastor never referred to current events or sensitive topics? Did it mean every statement or paragraph had to have a biblical proof text?

The Sunday before a new pastor was to begin his/her ministry with a congregation I wanted the opportunity to deliver the sermon. The title was always the same, “What Do You Expect?” In a few congregations, during my years of service, I got to preach that same sermon more than once. My text was Mark 8:28-29. Jesus asks the disciples who do people say I am? Depending on the answer it indicated what they expected and what their preferences were. I would suggest some pastoral images which were unrealistic for the congregation to expect/prefer in this new pastor. And I would offer some images which might be more reasonable.

I am convinced that preferences/expectations, on both sides of the pulpit are the cause for many wrecked relationships between pastors and congregations. On both sides of the pulpit, many of those preferences go unspoken and then blow up like an IED. Personal preferences have been the fuel of many intra-congregational conflicts. When my personal preferences and your personal preferences clash head on, there will be dead, wounded and missing in action within the congregation. Collateral damage is to be expected.

Rather than making our personal preferences the standard, what would happen if we followed the admonitions in Philippians 2:3-4 (NRSV)? Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves. Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others. Or the admonitions in Romans 10:12 (NIV)? Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves.