"Diggin' Up Bones"

In 2012 Randy Travis wrote and recorded a song titled “Diggin’ Up Bones.” Yes, I have long listened to that genre of music. It is what I was raised on, payed on radios at home and jukeboxes in taverns and bars. Travis' song is about a guy grieving a relationship which has died. Here is the link to the song on YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6M2YuAVxuQ. Here are the words of the refrain,

I'm diggin' up bones, I'm diggin' up bones
Exhuming things that's better left alone
I'm resurrecting memories of a love that's dead and gone
Yeah tonight I'm sittin' alone diggin' up bones

One of the things I catch myself doing is "diggin’ up bones" of the church as I once thought it to be. I grieve its loss. I think many of us do that. It doesn’t matter if we are teaching elders (ministers), ruling elders, or members. Many of us who have a length of tenure in the church have a tendency to dwell on former years and experiences in the church. Today, compared to the former days, feels like a dearly held love which has left us alone.

We walk past the rogues’ gallery of portraits of former pastors, and sigh thinking how good things were back then. Somewhere in a classroom or on the walls in the basement are pictures of the men’s Sunday school class fifty plus souls strong. In a display case are the trophies from the church league softball, volleyball or basketball championships our folks won. Our hearts grow sad as those days have blown away like late Autumn leaves skimmering across the road, except in the memories we cling to while hoping beyond hope for their return.

We gather in naves built for two or three hundred or more worshipers and can still imagine seeing Aunt Minnie and Uncle Al Hoppe where they used sit, sometimes their ghosts appear occupying the pew. But the thirty of us who now come continue to sit in our usual places where our families used to fill a whole eight foot pew. On Christmas and Easter we sometimes took up a pew and a half, or had to sit on folding chairs in the aisles. Now, we feel so damn alone. Great voids of space exist between us another worshiper. The minister once joked that she felt the need to wear sunglasses on Sunday during worship so as to not be blinded by the shine off the varnish of the empty pews. That was cruel, and she didn’t need to say that.

Honestly, we spend a lot of time “diggin’ up bones.” We sit entombed waiting for Jesus to call to us, “Lazarus, come out!” and to give instructions to others for our unbinding. Maybe what is keeping us from finding new life is our propensity for “Exhuming things that's better left alone, and resurrecting memories of a church that's dead and gone.” The way it used to be is not the way the church is going to be. Can we dare bury the portraits, the pictures, the trophies of yesterday to make room for what the Spirit may be creating for tomorrow? Can we give up our sacred pew spaces to gather into a more critical mass as we pray and sing? Are we willing to clear out the reminders of yesterday for new treasures today and tomorrow? Or are we content to sit alone “diggin’ up bones?”

Unburied Skeletons

"Abandoned Church - Winter" by Brian Wallace

Across the stretches of rural areas and in the midst of urban neighborhoods lay grim reminders of communities and congregations which have literally given up the ghost. Abandoned and delict church buildings belie the ever optimistic challenge to renew, revitalize, transform a congregation which is just waiting to die, waiting for the last few members to die, waiting, waiting, waiting.

What witness do these buildings give? What hope do they offer? What consolation do they bring to others who are creepingly moving toward the same fate? No longer do hymns resound from them giving glory to God and fortifying the worshippers. Today, they stand like skeletons which were not buried. They are monuments to a past and warnings for the future. Mercifully some have collapsed in the wind, or have become a pile of ashes from a consuming fire. The agony of those still standing presses upon the souls who pass by them traveling to another destination.

Current congregants of declining congregations look upon them as a portent of things to come to their own frail existence. Even as the last gasps of life bleeds from the lungs of the dying ones, they insist, “That will never happened to us.” Some will seek to rally the troops with tales of the exceptional resuscitation of one which had been on the edge of demise. “If it could happen to them, it may be God’s will for us.” There is no one to play the piano or organ. The paint and wallpaper are stained with water from the leaking roof. A window, here and there is cracked from foundation settlement and bulging walls.

In far flung regions where the railroads and highways by-passed once communities fill of promise the people moved on rather than being starved of commercial and industrial energy which would have kept them alive. Yet their edifices of stores, homes, schools, saloons and churches stand in resistance to the primal elements. Only those who go seeking them find them standing lonely against the horizon. The “pickers,” the human vultures, have carried off anything which might have a few pennies of value. In the urban areas some have been repurposed into breweries where there is more life and fellowship than the congregation knew in its last decade or so. Others have become squatter havens and crack houses for those as bereft of life and hope as the cold and drafty buildings themselves.

Vestries, sessions and boards did their best to keep the spirit alive as along as possible. Dioceses, presbyteries and associations sought to provide the necessary life support. In successive efforts to save themselves from death only ensured their death. More tightly they drew their huddling. Insisting on maintaining their solo existence, and refusing to join forces with others near or distant to share resources, to reduce expenses, and to expand mission and ministry.

Has God abandoned them, abandoned us? It is God’s will or our stubbornness which has left these wreckages littering the landscape?  Vainly we struggle to delineate a new identify to carry into a changed and ever changing world. What witness shall we leave behind us, decaying structures of yesterday or vibrant communities of grace, peace, and reconciliation? Do we hasten our death in seeking to save ourselves, or do we boldly proclaim and demonstrate a new and vibrant life spending ourselves for the sake of others?

When we look upon the abandoned edifices of the past let them be a warning to us and a call to us to see our survival is bound to the abundance and free life of all others. Shall we learn nothing or everything from those unburied skeletons of the past?

What Is in a Name?

Names are very important. It is interesting in Genesis 2:19-23, God give the man the opportunity to name all the creatures of the earth. The, in the account, the female was created and the man called this creature “woman.” This new creature was the only one with which the man made a personal identification. I can imagine the man pointing to the different creatures and saying in a rote pattern: that’s a horse, that’s a cow, that’s a Northern pike, that’s a sloth, that’s a……. But with the creation of this last creature, I can imagine the man jumping up and down with excitement, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one shall be called Woman, for out of Man this one was taken.” (NRSV) This last creature was one with which the Man directly identified.

Maybe I have related this previously, but when my wife and I were expecting our children she wanted names which were not frequently used in her kindergarten classes. I wanted names which had a deeper meaning to them. We wore out more than one baby names book. So for our first born, a boy, we settled on Quinn (Irish, wisdom or the wise) and Amiel (Hebrew, the people of God). Our second born, a girl, we chose Chaya (Hebrew, life) and Elizabeth (Hebrew, the gift or promise of God). Not names frequently found in clsssrooms and names with a deeper meaning.

In Scripture there are several instances of people being given a different name to indicate a change in who/what they are. Abram become Abraham. Sari becomes Sarah. Jacob become Israel. Saul becomes Paul. Simon become Peter. What we call something speaks to its purpose or essence.

I have been fascinated with the changing names for various things or functions in the PC(USA) Book of Order. At one time the four decision making bodies were known a judicatories or courts. Their purpose was to make wise decisions for the life of the church and to render discipline as appropriate (really meaning to settle differences in behavior and theology.) Then, with the 1983 reunion and the cultural distancing from “discipline,” the name of these bodies was changed to “governing bodies.”  Again, in the first decade of the Twenty-first Century, the cultural enmity toward centralized, impositional, governance the name was changed to councils. The effort was to reframe the work of these bodies to be more for discernment than disciplining or governing. The idea is what we call it creates its purpose.

Another example of our renaming has had to do with those who are charged to provide theological leadership within congregations. From Scotland the name was Minister of the Word. As we began to experience liturgical renewal and the sacraments were lifted up, the name was expanded to be Minister of Word and Sacrament. There was a move to reclaim some of the other designations for this functional role, among which was bishop which had been used in pre-reunion days. Again in the early decade of this Century, the ecclesiastical name was changed to teaching elder. Some would say the name is a rather limiting name for the role, and one nobody outside of the officialdom of the PC(USA) understands what it means.

A third instance of changing names in the Book of Order and life of the church has been for some serving in non-ordained specialize service in the church. One of the oldest, I remember, was commissioned church worker. People with that designation may, or may not, have received some special preparation to serve as Christian educators or who had been given permission to lead worship in congregations without an ordained minister. In the later years of the 20^th Century that designation disappeared and a new name and function was given. In order to provide worship leadership for far-flung or language specific congregations the title of certified lay preacher was bestowed upon some. Within a couple of years that name was changed to Commissioned Lay Pastor, and a host of possible additional functions were added. In the early years of the 21^st Century the name was changed to Ruling Elders Commissioned to particular pastoral service. The keep it short they are known as Commissioned Ruling Elders.

The changing of names has become a difficult hurdle for some in the church. It could be likened to changing from the American System of measurement to the metric systems of measurement. It can be very mind twisting. How can we be clear about naming roles and functions without having to have people learn a new language? How do we remain identified excitedly identified with a particular thing if we are always changing its name? Follow this line, the General Assembly Council and the General Assembly Mission Board became the General Assembly Mission Council and then became the General Assembly Mission Agency. Now, there is discussion of combining the General Assembly Mission Agency and the Office of the General Assembly into something which is yet to be named.

I guess we adapt the old rule that “form follows function,” and roll with “name follows function and cultural sensitivities.” Even the Bard deals with the difficulty of what one is named and places it upon the lips of Juliet,

'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;

Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.

What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,

Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part

Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!

What's in a name? that which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet;

So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,

Retain that dear perfection which he owes

Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,

And for that name which is no part of thee

Take all myself. (Romeo and Juliet)

The Hispanic question is at the root of it all ¿Cómo te llamas?.  How are you called?

https://www.wayostccs.com/getting-started-1.html

A Reflection and A Projection

The recent edition of “The Alban Weekly” (https://alban.org/archive/alternative-pastoral-models/) deals with the issue of congregations not being able to afford full-time pastoral leadership. One of the models offered as an alternative is bi-vocational pastors. This model is nothing new, even though it is now being touted as the wave of the future. I remember when I was in elementary school (a long, long time ago) the local Baptist minister drove a school bus in addition to serving the congregation.

For over twenty years I advocated that prior to presenting a person for ordination as a teaching elder (PCUSA speak for minister) they must be able to demonstrate a second set of skills by which they could earn a living. I could see (serving a presbytery of mainly smaller, rural, aging congregations) that fewer and fewer would be able to afford a full-time pastor. The two general presbyters before me, going back into the 1970s, were already dealing with that. They developed and maintained a larger parish program with a single minister serving as many as six to ten congregations. The minister would itinerate among them on a revolving schedule and usually leading worship in two congregations each week. The congregations paid into the pool for compensation and the presbytery allocated mission funds from the larger congregation to provide a full-time compensation and benefits. For several years this model seemed to work as a means of keeping smaller membership congregations having weekly worship.

A few things eventually led to the end of that model in the presbytery. One was the reluctance of ministers to move into the area and to serve multiple congregations. Another was the growing reluctance of some of the congregations to share pastoral leadership. A third was a decreasing mission income to the presbytery and a greater inability of the participating congregations to contribute to the compensation pool. And I admit, my bias that just keeping the doors open on Sundays was not a particularly faithful model of stewardship.

As our larger parish model was phasing out, the denomination developed a ministry model called commissioned lay preachers. Initially this model was for congregations which were far flung from another with which to share a pastor, with insufficient financial resources, and for language specific congregations. The concept was that a congregation would identify a person in the congregation to serve the worship and pastoral needs of the congregation. Within a short period of time the name was change to commissioned lay pastor (CLP) and some specific educational grounding in worship, theology and polity was required, which was the responsibility of the presbytery to provide. Not too long after that the name was again changed to “ruling elder commissioned to particular pastoral service.” Usually, they were called commissioned ruling elders (CREs).

During this developmental process presbyteries began to determine that the CLPs and then the CREs should not/shall not serve their own congregation. Additionally, presbyteries began a general use of this model as a standard model to provide worship and limited pastoral care for smaller membership congregations. Many congregations seemed to feel entitled to have their own CRE rather than sharing a full-time teaching elder. CREs were not required to receive the full compensation and benefits which were required for installed ministers, or which some presbyteries required for those serving in what are now called “temporary pastoral positions.” By some they were referred it as the “cheaper preacher” model. It was more affordable for the congregations.

There were several consequences arising from this model. One consequence was that some CREs began to expect to be treated with the same status as those ordained as teaching elders. Some even began to wear the preaching robes, which had previously been an indicator of advanced theological education. In a few situations some even began to be referred to as “pastor.” As time passed some of the “sending congregations,” those from which the CREs came, began to want to hold on to their own cadre of leaders instead of sending them off to serve another congregation. Also, some of the CREs missed out on worship and participation in their “home” congregation. In our general area, we saw fewer and fewer people entering the educational process to serve as CREs. We had a consortium of presbyteries and a seminary working together to provide both face to face and virtual preparation courses. Just recently, the seminary has decided it would no longer provide the administrative and virtual support for the program due to decreased enrollment.

Another factor is the denomination, in an effort to give more desecration/power to the presbyteries, eliminated the specific requirements of educational areas for the preparation of CREs. Now each presbytery may decide what, if any, additional areas of preparation will be required. In the early CLP years, the presbytery I served made the decision that a person only needed a high school education to serve as a CLP and then CRE. My former partner in presbytery leadership rightly stated, “The CLPs/CREs are natural speakers of the indigenous theology found in the congregations.” I question if that is enough. A congregation’s theology and practice will only grow to the extent of the one(s)

teaching and preaching in the congregation.

I suggest we move to the hub and satellite model? The teaching elders of the congregations which are still able to afford an installed minister would serve as the hub for support, encouragement, teaching and oversight of the smaller congregations being served by a CRE from within that congregation? The teaching elder of the hub congregation would provide developmental support to the CREs in some core subject areas. In many ways this would reflect what Calvin did in Geneva. It is much the model which is in use in other parts of the world. I am specifically acquainted with Rwanda. The “evangelists” serving the outlying congregations gather regularly with the ordained minister for education, strategy and fellowship. Of course, the congregations with teaching elders and the teaching elders would need to see this as part of their mission.

wayostccs.com

PAINFUL TRANSITION

Image: www.softwareandi.com

There may be no more painful transition than being fired. It strikes deep into our sense of self-worth. It raises fear for the future. At first, the only reaction is one of being stunned, especially if things had seemed to be going well until the moment of being handed the “pink slip.” One moment you thought the future would be the same as the past. Suddenly, in European terms, you are considered “redundant.” It feels like you has been grabbed by the shirt collar and thrown out on the trash heap.

Some organizations do provide some level of severance, but not many. Some offer “out placement services” to help with preparing a resume, and seeking a new position. Depending on the circumstances, one might qualify for unemployment insurance which might provide enough income to buy bread for a while between employments.

For ministers, it seems doubly painful. Most ministers understand their serving a congregation as their “call,” their God ordained reason for being. That is true in a broad sense of call to serve as a minister. It is also true in the specific call to serve a particular congregation. After conducting any number of baptisms, weddings, funerals the minister has developed a relationship with the people of the congregation. Add on top of that the myriad of hospital visits, home visits, being there in various crisis moments, leading classes and worship services and a bond, a sacred bond, is formed.

When the governing body of the congregation decides to seek dissolution of the pastoral relationship news often reaches the minister through back channels. A member who might be particularly close to the minister may call or stop by the pastor’s study with the news. I once came back from vacation early. My car was parked in front of the church. Two separate people stopped to tell me the news that the session had been polled and they were going to ask for my resignation. The session’s process was totally out of order, but the deed was done. After feeling the blood drain from my body leaving me with an icy feeling, I wanted to run to the restroom and puke. Being who I am, my next reaction was to mount a full counter assault, but the deed was done. Thankfully, enough time was bought in seeking to reconcile the situation to allow me time to seek and find a new call.

The church, at least the part in which many serve, has a non-existent out-placement process. The presbytery, conference, association or whatever the overseeing body is, may have some requirement for severance to be paid, because ministers are not eligible for unemployment compensation from the state. If anything beyond the minimum severance is to be paid the minister has to plead their own case and hope for a modicum of “Christian charity” to be extended. The sense of betrayal by those one has served is sword-edge sharp.

The usual time it takes to seek and acquire a new call is between a year and eighteen months. Dissolution of a pastoral call is a time of fear for the minister and their family. It is a time of grief and mourning. William Bridges, writes, I had always confused mourning and grieving, seeing them both as referring to missing the dead person terribly and weeping when you recalled things that you had done together. …(B)ut for me mourning was different. It was an almost cognitive process, where inwardly and at levels that I could only occasionally glimpse, I was dismantling a whole life structure and relinquishing the outlook that went with it. (The Way of Transition:Embracing Life’s Most Difficult Moments, William Bridges, Perseus Publishing, 2001, Kindle Location 880).

Ending a “call” with another in hand is sad in the ending, but the pain of severing relationship is softened with the promise of moving into a new position in a new place. Ending a call due to an involuntary dissolution of the pastoral relationship is more like the mourning described by Bridges. It is dismantling a whole life structure and relinquishing the outlook that went with it. One begins to question if the broader call to ministry was misread, and seriously doubts the ability to fulfill a particular call. It is a dark and lonely place.

From personal experience and by observing multiple involuntary termination of pastors, I know it is important to have another, who is not involved in the situation, to walk with the terminated pastor. Dismantling what was and taking steps toward a new future is hard work. A competent coach is a significant help in living through the transition.

Contact me 

Wayne A Yost Coaching and Consulting Services

Sabotaging Change

Image Source: dailykos.com

Whenever one is trying to initiate change there will be resistance. Some resistance will be rather benign. Other resistance will be conscious or subconscious sabotage. Suppose you have announced to your co-workers that you are going to try to lose twenty-five pounds of excess weight. Everybody in the office knows you are especially fond of jelly filled rolls. You can usually resist all other donuts and rolls, but jelly-filled are particularly irresistible. It is an office tradition for one of the staff members to stop at the local bakery and to pick up a dozen donuts and rolls. Nobody else in the office is fond of jelly-filled rolls. Yet, every Friday, there are two jelly filled rolls in the box when the staff gathers for a morning break. Quite without thought the purchaser of the pastries is sabotaging your weight lose goal.

I am the kind of person who likes to talk through an idea before beginning to take steps toward initiating a change. In one congregation I served I would often go to the secretary’s office to engage her in such conversations. She was a member of the congregation and a very capable secretary. She would politely listen to me spin out my idea. Often she would ask some excellent questions about it. I did wonder, a few times, when I would introduce an idea at a session meeting, why there were already some who seemed to know about the idea in advance. One day a member of the congregation stopped by the office for a chat. He said, “The other night when you brought up your idea for the stewardship campaign to the session, I sat there and realized I had heard about that a few weeks ago. Do you realize your secretary tells her husband about your conversations, and he talks about them at the golf course in the Nineteenth Hole?” Intentional or not, I was being sabotaged.

The next time the secretary was in the office, I went in to talk with her. We had the usual chit-chat about families and pets and such. Then I said to her, “I am disturbed to learn your share our conversations about ideas I am working on with your husband and he then shares them in the Nineteenth Hole when the men’s league plays. I feel you are sabotaging me, before the idea is full blown and I am ready to take it to the session. It needs to stop, or we’ll not be able to work together anymore.” Needless to say, that did not go over very well. When I left her office, she immediately wrote a letter of resignation. She stated as the reason that “I had yelled at her.” The letter was sent to every member of the session. Maybe I could have handled it differently.

John C. Norcross, PhD, writes in response to the question, “What should I do if someone is sabotaging my efforts to change?” Dr. Norcross suggests, Based on research and experience, we know that it helps to address the potential saboteurs from the get-go. That’s addressing, not confronting, mind you. (https://www.sharecare.com/health/wellness-healthy-living/what-do-sabotaging-efforts-change) That is all well and good if one anticipates not just the possibility but the probability of sabotage and deals with it proactively as Dr. Norcross suggests.

In later years, while still preferring to talk through ideas, I learned to go to whoever I was going to discuss an idea, and began the conversation saying, “I have an idea running around in my head. I would like your feedback on it, but this has to be limited to just the two of us.” In most cases, that seemed to work.

Initiating Change

Image by www.eci.com

How do you go about initiating changed? Some may seek to initiate change with the “royal decree.” The formal, or titular leader, may simply make a declaration that the old way will cease and a new way will commence. “As of tomorrow we will no longer use the latest version of the iPhone and must use landline phones.” That is one way to initiate, but what preparation was made to ensure everybody in the organization understood the reason for the change and had landline accessibility. Cell phones have become so ubiquitous why revert to landlines? There would be a great deal of organizational anxiety, and resistance (active and passive).

Some may seek to initiate change using the maxim, “Rub raw the sores of social discontent.”  What are people dissatisfied with, angry about, and fearful of? To initiate change one keeps reminding people of their dissatisfaction, anger and fear while magnifying it to ever greater heights. Keep pounding home how bad things are and paint a picture of how good things could be. In the current political environment and the U.S.A. presidential campaign, some are maximizing their message around dissatisfaction, anger and fear.

The strategy is to rouse the populace to the point of “revolution.” That is the way of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky. In some ways it is the model I was taught by my professor Hal Wareheim and (in my view) is used, in a modified form, by consultant Del Poling (http://delpoling.com/ministry_services.html)

in his Leading Congregations Through Major Change. It is also the means used by disgruntled congregation members when trying to get rid of the minister. Keep telling the stories of what you, and others, do not like about the pastor’s service until greater and greater numbers begin to adopt your dissatisfaction or come up with their own. The more logs which are thrown on the fire the hotter it gets. The solution is clear, get rid of the pastor and everything will be right, again.

Consultant Alan Hirsch proposes another way (http://www.alanhirsch.org/). In his blog entry Stir Up Holy Discontent Hirsch states,

Questing is the result of holy discontent, and more often than not, as in all genuine renewal movements, they are the result of the Holy Spirit working directly in our lives. And behind every good quest lies at least one really good question—we do well to heed Einstein’s advice to a young admirer when he said, “The important thing is to not stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existence.”

(http://www.alanhirsch.org/blog//cultivating-learning-and-innovation-iv-stir-up-holy-discontent)

What is God calling us to be and do? What will expand the realm of God in our community? What would things be like if we sought a more peaceful means of resolving our differences? How might we improve our educational endeavors, from cradle to grave, for our members? What else could we do to proclaim and demonstrate the good news of the Gospel?

Questions are expansive, open, seeking a multiplicity of possibilities. Questions stir the imagination. Questions are non-judgmental. Questions are egalitarian, rather than the imposition of a solution from the “king on the mountain.” As Hamlet says to Horatio, There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy. (Hamlet (1.5.167-8)