Basic Unit of Mission

They Depend on Me, I Depend on Them

When we boil things down to the basic unit for mission, be it in business, the military, or in the church it begins with the individual. Our bodies are made up of cells. It could be said the cell is a basic unit of the body. Each cell has a particular function. Each cell is differentiated from other cells. Cells join together to fulfill a particular function in the body as an organ. Each organ as a particular differentiated function in the body. The body depends on each organ fulfilling its function. Each organ depends on the body in order to fulfill its function.

I shift metaphors. On a football team, since it is that time of the year here in the States, each player has a particular function. Players joint together in differentiated squads: defense, offense and special. The squads can be broken down in to particular units: defensive line, offensive line, safeties, linebackers, receivers, quarterback, and so on. To carry out a successful play each single member must do their part in the functioning of the whole squad. Each squad must do its particular function for the team. If a team were composed only of people who can function as a quarter-back the team would be in total chaos. Yet, every individual player, every squad, relies on the success of the team.

Let’s move to another realm, the church. Individual believers join with other individual believers to form a congregation. Each individual fulfills a particular function/role within the congregation contributing to the well-being of the congregation. The congregation contributes to the well-being of each member through corporate worship, various programs, government, discipline and participation in mission in the congregation’s particular context. Congregations are the basic unit of mission. Because the Mission of God it larger than a particular congregation can fulfill congregations frequently join efforts for effective mission within a larger geographic context. The larger body contributes to the well-being of the individual congregations.

If an individual withdraws from the congregation, both the individual and the congregation are the poorer for it. The individual is no longer contributing to the health of the congregation, and the congregation is unable to provide for the health of the individual. The same is true when a congregation withdraws from the larger body. When an individual withholds financial support for the congregation, the congregation is robbed of one of the nutrients required for its health and functioning. The same is true when a congregation withholds financial support for the larger body. Both the one which withholds and the one which receives experience poorer health and a lessened ability to function.

The congregation is a confederation of individual members. The larger parts of the Church are a confederation of congregations. Friedman says this about these confederations,

Within such “confederations,” to the extent that the smaller unit helped the larger unit deal advantageously with the environment, the larger unit, by surviving, ensured the survival of the smaller unit. It was thus to the advantage of the smaller unit to work to preserve the larger unit’s integrity. That is because those smaller units that worked for the survival of the larger unit were more likely to survive. (A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix" by Edwin H. Friedman, Kindle location 2960)

It is to the advantage of the congregation to fully participate in and work for the health and functioning of the larger portions of the Church. However, what we see are individuals and congregations declining when they move into a posture of seeking to ensure their own survival at the expense of the larger portions of the Church. I have heard it said by congregation leaders, “We cannot afford to share some of our best human resources with the presbytery. We need them here.” Therefore, the larger body is weakened and is less able to work for the health of all the congregations in its bounds, and congregations become weaker in the loss of nutrients which could be provided by the larger body.

The Apostle summarizes it all in 1 Corinthians 12:12-31.

www.wayostccs.com

BROAD HORIZONS

I am still plodding my way through Rabbi Edwin H. Friedman’s Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix. (Church Publishing, Inc., 2006) I am plodding through it, on my second reading of it, because there is so much to reflect upon. I read a bit, and then think a bit. Sometimes, I have to read something else to give my mind and spirit some rest.

Today, sitting outside on a delightfully pleasant day, following many of high temperature and stifling humidity, under the glorious canopy of our large maple tree, Friedman was speaking about the three factors which determine survival: the physical reality, dumb luck, and the response of the organism. (Kindle location 2734) He maintains that our response to any toxic/threatening situation is key to our ability to survive.

Our potential response combines all those traits mentioned in previous chapters that enable self-definition and self-regulation: the richness of our repertoire of resources, including persistence, stamina, resiliency, hope (that is broad horizons), and the capacity to think systemically in the first place. (Kindle location 2759-2766)

His enlargement on the word “hope” as being “broad horizons” struck me. Immediately, I remembered the scriptural definition of faith. Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. (Hebrews 11:1) Our survival does not depend on what our eyes can see, as much as it depends on the breadth of our imagination to hold on to that is not seen.

There are many who cannot see beyond the moment, or at best beyond today. Their imagination cannot see beyond the present reality. They are, in some respects, the walking dead. The only thing which animates them is the natural life process which keeps the body alive. Can one imagine a day when hunger will be eliminated; when wars cease; when cures for diseases will be discovered; when racism will be an archaic word found only in old dictionaries?

Our personal and societal survival demands an imagination which sees beyond the walls which are built around us; beyond the edge of the horizon; beyond and beyond and beyond. We may not actually see the fruition of everything we hope for. We may not physically live to “see the day when….” Without hope, without a horizon broader than we can actually see, our life comes to an all too soon end, even though our bodies may robotically continue to go through the motions of existence. When our horizons extend beyond what is known in our present reality our life takes on new meaning and we have a greater chance of surviving into untold generations.

Moral Majority - Moral Agenda, A Polarity

William Barber – Moral Agenda     Jerry Falwell – Moral Majority

These two men could not be any more different, except they both profess faith in Jesus Christ and they both base their “morality” on Scripture. However, their sense of morality is a true polarity.

Can they both be right? Can they both be wrong? Is there a point in the middle

Rev. Falwell is no longer with us, his words linger. I believe that Americans want to see this country come back to basics, back to values, back to biblical morality, back to sensibility, and back to patriotism. Americans are looking for leadership and guidance. It is fair to ask the question, "If 84 percent of the American people still believe in morality, why is America having such internal problems?" We must look for the answer to the highest places in every level of government. We have a lack of leadership in America. But Americans have been lax in voting in and out of office the right and the wrong people. …  It is now time to take a stand on certain moral issues, and we can only stand if we have leaders. We must stand against the Equal Rights Amendment, the feminist revolution, and the homosexual revolution. We must have a revival in this country. . . . (Listen America, 1980)

Rev. Barber has said, I'm a preacher and I'm a theologically conservative liberal evangelical biblicist.  I know it may sound strange, but I'm a conservative because I work to conserve a divine tradition that teaches us to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with our God. … That is why I'm so concerned, about those that say so much—about what God says so little, while saying so little—about what God says so much.  And so in my heart, I'm troubled. And I'm worried about the way faith is cynically used by some to serve hate, fear, racism, and greed. … The prophet Isaiah cries out, “What I'm interested in seeing you doing, says the Lord, as a nation is, ‘Pay people what they deserve’  ‘Share your food with the hungry.’ Do this and then your nation shall be called a repairer of the breach.” …  Jesus, a brown-skinned Palestinian Jew, called us to preach good news to the poor, the broken, and the bruised, and all those who are made to feel unaccepted. (Speech at the DNC Convention 2016)

For me, this illustrates the great divide among us. It illustrates the difference between our two major political parties, and within the parties. It seems we will have to choose one or the other. The theories on polarity management appear stymied in the face of this polarity. Where is the leader(s) who can manage this polarity? For some, the choices are absolutely clear. For others, it is like walking through a dense forest on a moonless night. It is unclear which way to go.

I know which choice I am making.

Hill To Die On

In these tumultuous time of a presidential election campaign, it is tempting for preachers and writers to extol one candidate and to demonize another. Yielding to that temptation can be unwise, for preachers and congregations, on two accounts. First, it is illegal. From the IRS website (https://www.irs.gov/uac/charities-churches-and-politics) it states,

The ban on political campaign activity by charities and churches was created by Congress more than a half century ago. The Internal Revenue Service administers the tax laws written by Congress and has enforcement authority over tax-exempt organizations. Here is some background information on the political campaign activity ban and the latest IRS enforcement statistics regarding its administration of this congressional ban.

In 1954, Congress approved an amendment by Sen. Lyndon Johnson to prohibit 501(c)(3) organizations, which includes charities and churches, from engaging in any political campaign activity. To the extent Congress has revisited the ban over the years, it has in fact strengthened the ban. The most recent change came in 1987 when Congress amended the language to clarify that the prohibition also applies to statements opposing candidates.

Currently, the law prohibits political campaign activity by charities and churches by defining a 501(c)(3) organization as one "which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."

While it seems the enforcement of this provision is laxly or lopsidedly applied, all it takes to draw attention to “political activity” is for one or more parishioners to file a complaint. Let’s face it, not everybody in a congregation will appreciate our activities or words. Now, I am not saying I fully agree with the law. On the other hand, I do not want the Church to be co-opted by the state as it was in Germany during the 1930s.

The other reason to avoid direct political speech or actions is it could be a nail in the coffin of one’s ministry with a particular congregation. Some would say, “So be it, I must be prophetic.” That is noble, even righteous, but one has to be willing to pay the price of being prophetic. Prophetic proclamations might not just shorten one’s current pastorate, but can make future pastorates difficult to come by. Yes, we have a prophetic responsibility. There are many means of exercising that responsibility. One can address the issues without openly speaking for or against a particular party or candidate.

One of my mentors, in former days when I was a young fire-brand, would ask me, “Is this a hill you are willing to die on?” Sometimes, I was willing to run the risk. At least once, it did cost me future service with that congregation. In retrospect, there were several other ways to have exercised what I felt was my prophetic responsibility on a local issue. In the long run, what I thought was a critical issue, did not materialize, and that particular sermon had nothing to do with the issue becoming a non-issue.

Is speaking or acting for or against a candidate for office “a hill you are willing to die on?” For each of us, that may bring forward a different answer.

Administration

Captain Kirk’s San Francisco Sailing

Papers were stacked on the desk. The freshest on the top and the stale ones on the bottom, hoping benign neglect will eventually mean they can be trashed. There are workers needing directions about the work they are doing. A budget has to be prepare for the council to review. Both the computer and the copier quit working on Thursday afternoon, and there is little chance of getting them working before Monday. The worship bulletin is not yet finished. The organist/choir director just called to say she was not well and would not be able to be at church on Sunday. A substitute will have to be found. Millie called to complain because the Women’s Birthday Luncheon isn’t on the church’s website. The florist wants to know when they can get in Saturday morning to place the flowers for the wedding Saturday afternoon. The annual statistical report needs to be completed and submitted, but the computer is down and that is how it has to be submitted. The sermon isn’t even started. It will have to be another Saturday night special.

Such is the life of a pastor for a smaller membership congregation. Details, details, details. What is it they say, “The devil is in the details?” Many pastors know the frustration of being the one designated as the person who is to handle the details. Although some pastors do like to hide in the weeds of the details to avoid doing other activities, most proclaim their disdain for administration. Get a group of pastors together and one of the chief complaints will be about the time and effort it takes to handle the administrative details of the congregation. “I didn’t go to seminary to become the congregation’s CEO,” can often be heard. Most seminaries barely provide instruction in the area of church administration. Among many, administration might as well be a four letter word.

It is no wonder so many pastors have an allergic reaction to administration when it is taken to mean handling a plethora of details which have not been delegated to some other person, or which have been dropped by others like children’s toys strewn on the floor for the parents to pick up. The Apostle must have been using some bad dope when listing administration as a spiritual gift. (I Cor. 12:27-28). Is there another way of understanding what is meant by administration?

Martyn Burt, Treasurer for the Anglican Diocese of Rochester, writes, The spiritual ‘gift of administration’ is the ability to turn God-given vision into reality. The word administration comes from the Latin and literally means ‘to’ (ad) ‘minister’. To administer is to do ministry. Paul lists it as one of the crucial gifts for building up the church so it must have been thought of as being quite crucial. The Spirit equips us with the ability to make things happen and to help church-life flourish. http://www.rochester.anglican.org/content/pages/documents/1425900820.pdf

When we look more closely at I Corinthians 12:27-28, we see that various roles (gifts) in the community are listed. Jeff Carver writes, The Greek word for the spiritual gift of administration is Kubernesis (Κυβερνησεις). This is a unique term that refers to a shipmaster or captain. The literal meaning is "to steer," or "to rule or govern."  It carries the idea of someone who guides and directs a group of people toward a goal or destination. http://www.spiritualgiftstest.com/spiritual-gift-of-administration

Without a person, or group of people, with the gift of administration the church, be it a congregation or a denomination, is like a boat which merely drifts from one sport in the ocean to another without ever reaching any particular destination. An administrator organizes people and resources to fulfill the “Great Ends of the Church.” {Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Book of Order F-1.0304}. Administration is a crucial role within any organization. Administration is not about picking up dirty laundry dropped on the floor by others. Administration is the gift of guiding the church to fulfill its God given purposes.

RESILIENCE

As I look out the window I am watching the window blow against and through my favorite tree in the yard. It is a glorious maple. I have plenty of room to sit under its expansive canopy. Earlier today the wind was more gentle causing the thinner limbs to sway lazily as the wind was caught by the leaves and then relaxing back in place as the wind eased. Now, the wind has increased its force and the limb now bend more and dance more vigorously. The increasing wind portends the approach of the possibility of a storm. Thankfully the limbs are supple and maintain enough ability to bend and come back into place without breaking.

Over the year of gentle and strong winds the limbs of the tree have developed resilience. If they never had the wind gently and strongly blowing them about there would be no resilience. Without resilience the limbs were to suddenly encounter a strong wind the limbs would most likely snap. Over time with mild and gusty winds the fibers of the limbs have developed the strength whipping back and forth of more robust winds.

Organizations and people build resilience as we encounter the gentle and strong winds which blow against us. As we are pushed out of our comfort zones and then regain our position. Small challenges, disruptions to our stability, and overcoming them strengthens us to endure the next more resistant challenges. The unexpected flat tire or leak in the roof challenges us to figure out how to deal with the non-budgeted expense. Each small challenge which comes our way strengthens us in problem solving skills. Building resilience enables us to deal with larger problems without breaking.

Drawing on our experience of handling the disorientating events of the past gives us clues in handling the troublesome events of the present day. “What did you do the last time your car broke down?” “How did that work out?” “Not so good.” “What would you have done differently then?” “Oh, you would have called AAA instead of hitch-hiking twenty miles.” “So, you would have called for help instead of trying to resolve it yourself?” “Wasn’t walking along the road with you thumb sticking out a way of asking for help?” “Facing this issue, what from the time your car broke down can you apply to this situation?” “Well, I guess I could ask for help.” “Who would you call?” “I could call that company called TECH GUYS ARE US.” “How important is it to get your computer up and running sooner rather than later?” “I do have that report to finish by next Thursday.” How long will it take you to finish the report?” “This is Thursday of this week. When do you plan to call the Tech Guys?” “I think I better call them know. I don’t know how long I’ll have to wait for them to get here.” “Good, will you let me know when the report is finished so I can celebrate with you?” “That would be fun. I’ll call you.”

The winds blow against us. Sometimes the winds are gentle and we sway from our place of comfort to a new position and then back to where we were. The swaying strengthens us for the time when the winds blow with greater intensity. Resilience is what keeps us from breaking.

Devolving or Evolving?

(Magic Optical Illusion by Robert Gonsalves)

Is it devolution or evolution? There are many sectors of life which are undergoing massive change. Retail, manufacturing, entertainment, economies, technology, everything is changing. Because I have only limited knowledge about the changes being face by humankind, I limit my reflections, today, to the church in the United States, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), in Pennsylvania, in western PA. I do think what is happening here gives a glimpse of what is happening across the Church in the United States.

What are some of the observable realities?

1. Church membership is declining.
2. Worship attendance patterns have changed.
3.  Fewer congregations can afford a full-time pastor.
4.  More is spent on facility upkeep than mission.
5. The number of congregations being served by non-seminary trained pastoral staff is increasing.
6. The governing structure is being restructured again and again.
7. Mid-level (presbytery and synod) administrative staff positions are disappearing.
8. Financial support of the more inclusive structures is decreasing.

These are but a few of the changes occurring in the contemporary church.

This past week the Bishop of the Pittsburgh Roman Catholic Diocese announced the imminent closing of 15 congregations, and by 2018 many more could be merged or closed (http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/10371846-74/parishes-diocese-pittsburgh). Historically, the Roman Catholic and the Presbyterian presences in the Greater Pittsburgh Area have been very strong. The Presbyterian presence has splintered into three primary divisions. Add that to the aging and declining membership, and the PC(U.S.A.) is a mere shadow of its former self.

I have been saying, for many years, "full-time, uninterrupted, congregational service as a pastor from ordination to retirement is a thing of the past." I have urged that those being considered for ordination must be able to demonstrate a second set of salable skills by which to earn a living. This article from the Presbyterian Outlook in March, 2013 lifts up a picture of the issues for ministers and congregations (http://pres-outlook.org/2013/03/full-time-called-pastor-as-an-endangered-species/).

One possibility for the future is to under-gird the pastors who are serving full-time in congregations, and to have them serve as “teachers” for some of the Ruling Elders commissioned to particular pastoral service (CREs) who are serving very part-time in surrounding congregations. I can see the time coming when many presbyteries will have more CREs than Teaching Elders (seminary trained, and ordained ministers). The full-time pastors need to be supported in their role as Teaching Elders. They need to be released from day to day management of the congregation leaving that to the Ruling Elders. They need to be released from the day to day pastoral care of their congregations leaving that to the deacons in the congregation. They need to be released from multiple responsibilities in the more inclusive councils of the church. They need to be provided with a coach to help them chart a path to greater life and vocational fulfillment. Full-time teaching elders could then have some time to dedicate to under-girding the CREs serving nearby congregations.

There is much wringing of hands and despairing conversation about the state of our congregations, and the decline in the number of fulltime pastoral positions. In very few presbyteries, or across the denomination, are we developing comprehensive strategies which might lead us into a different and new future. Even though things are not the way they were 43 years ago when I was ordained, I have to believe the church in this part of the Church is evolving, not devolving. I believe there is a new role developing for teaching elders (ministers). The parish and presbytery will become the seat of development of schooled leaders, particularly for the congregations with fewer than 200 members. We will still need seminaries, though fewer of them, to provide the in depth preparation of teaching elders who then will serve as those who serve a congregation and providing greater training for Ruling Elders commissioned to particular pastoral service.

https://www.wayostccs.com