Follow up on St. Paul’s: Growth and Decline

It’s been almost two weeks since we shared the article on growth and decline.

We had promised a follow up. Here it is. 

There are three segments:

            -Responses received

            -Events

            -Our reflections

Responses received

We’re trying to provide an accurate impression of the range of responses without covering every comment or quoting people.  We were especially struck by, and appreciative of how, responders mostly avoided blame and defensiveness—that can sometimes be difficult and it’s a hopeful sign of capacity for meaningful conversation. 

Most people were appreciative of the article and the attempt to begin a conversation. There was a mixed response regarding finding fault—some agreed with us that fault finding wasn’t useful, others found fault with one or the other of the rectors, though that was generally limited to some specific areas. One found fault with us. There was general affirmation of the article’s position that dealing with the issues belongs to all of us, not just the clergy.

We were surprised by one type of response that came from most (but not all) of those who had read the article and took the time to write or have a long conversation: Hurt. For some the hurt was in the past, and for some it was more recent. All of those responses, though, were thoughtful, full of love for the parish, and often touching in their vulnerability. In a variety of ways, some people wrote of their hurt—being rejected or not accepted, not having their needs heard or addressed, and not being allowed to offer their vocation and gifts in the community. One wrote of talking with two people who had left and their dissatisfaction with things. Two wrote of how the analysis confirmed their own sense of things.

A few long-termers offered insights grounded in their many years at St. Paul’s. One especially liked Fr. Campbell’s “Five Apes” story as a way of understanding parish culture. The “acceptance” issue mentioned above was seen by one person as being long standing in the parish. Another noted there being high attendance with another rector some years ago and a fall off when he left. So, is there a pattern of some sort? One noted that the parish didn’t have a history of being rector driven and another that rectors had made it a point to accept the Anglo-Catholicism of our tradition while rejecting any form of clericalism. There was also some recognition of a broader base of skilled leaders not being formed along the way

From some we heard a sense of resignation, but those responders had all decided they were staying in the parish. There was too much they loved, e.g., liturgy and the music of liturgy, friendships, community, and roots. And there was fatalism and submission, patience and fortitude. There was mention of a lack of energy in the parish.

A couple of people wanted to attribute all the decline to forces outside the parish’s control. They thought that the parish needs a serious conversation about these matters but they wondered if there was some other way to get at it. They didn’t have anything specific in mind about what that way might be.

Overall the comments about what caused the growth and decline were congruent with what we had written but with interesting “takes” and some nuance on the history. Some placed an emphasis in a different place than us. 

A few commented on how the decline begins just after Mother Melissa leaves. One thought there was an over-focus on the rector’s personality involved for some of those people—that the parish in itself wasn’t enough to hold them.

Some noted the rector’s agitation. Some thought it an overreaction and misreading of the article. 

People offered thoughts about what we need to do now—have the conversation, create a new path, build upon our existing strengths, create slow growth, etc.

Some seemed pessimistic about being able to face into this, others less so noting that we have beat the trend before. People’s love for Saint Paul’s comes through again and again. 

Events

On the Sunday after the article was published there were three responses from those in positions of authority. In the sermon we heard the implication that a concern about “numbers” was choosing death and was church killing. It was brief and only those who had read at least some of the article would have caught the meaning. At both coffee hours there was an announcement with comments along these lines—no one requested it, we don’t know how many people have seen the paper, it wasn’t reviewed by anyone in authority, etc.  And in the worship bulletin the clergy prayer list (with the names of all clergy in the parish) and the list of retired clergy had been removed. We believe this was a way of removing Robert's name. The last time this happened the rector just removed Robert's name and the Bishop objected. So, this time everyone's names were removed.  On Friday the rector and vestry sent an e-mail to everyone on the parish list. They said, “[that they] did not request the creation of this document, nor have an opportunity to review or discuss it prior to publication, nor approve of its contents or its publication. … We believe the document is not only an inaccurate picture of our community and its leaders, but also may be harmful to the fabric of our common life and ministry together."

Update as of September 27: We learned that parish leaders have bumped things up the hierarchy in an attempt to silence and punish Fr. Robert. 

Our reflections (just a few of them)

As said above, the number of people noting their hurt was a surprise. Our approach to addressing that would be a structured, thorough, respectful and timely, parish wide conversation. It was rather clear to us that a number of people have not felt heard in earlier attempts to speak about this with parish leaders, past and present. We’d caution that this doesn’t mean that leaders have been ill intended, unwilling or unable. There are many reasons in a parish system why such matters get missed.

In doing this we've recalled story of the blind men and the elephant. They each touched a different part of the elephant--the tusk, the side, a leg. "The moral of the parable is that humans have a tendency to claim absolute truth based on their limited, subjective experience as they ignore other people's limited, subjective experiences which may be equally true." What we have touched in the article is just one piece of St. Paul's life. The parable on Wikipedia

Our writing is a form of independent journalism with professional analysis. As with earlier articles on St. Paul’s it wasn’t approved or reviewed by those in positions of authority. Our practice is that in our books and blog postings we don’t submit articles to others asking for their approval or allow them to edit the material. We do, however, invite people to offer facts we may be unaware of and alternative assumptions and viewpoints. We also encourage others to help us expand our own frames of reference and gain insight into our blind areas. All that might well change our perspective.

We think that what is needed is not a conversation about our article, but a conversation about what the article is about. The beginning point isn’t: What do you make of what Michelle and Robert wrote? Rather it’s more along the lines of: What do you want Saint Paul’s to be in the coming years? What are the gifts that God has given the parish? How might we build upon them? Enhance them? How might we share them with others? What is our blindside? How might that be understood and healed? We know others would add to these questions.  

We continue to hope that parish leaders will lead us into the needed conversation and engage a path of reconciliation and de-escalation. We continue to take responsibility for our own views and actions and welcome conversation with anyone who believes we have made misstatements. If we’ve been clumsy about some of it, we are sorry. We believe that what Christian communities most need is that “perfect love which casts out fear”—it’s a love that is founded on truth and compassion, willingness to stand together in difficult times, and openness to repentance, forgiveness, and continuing to move forward together. 

Michelle Heyne, OA and Robert Gallagher, OA

Background articles

The Church's Way of Reconciliation and Forgiveness    

 Bonding: Priest & People    

Transitions in Parish Size: Part one

Transitions in parish Size: Part two

Conversations parishes need to have: Three Things