To be in community with people that we don’t understand, we may not like, and we disagree with

Margie was assisting at the altar. We had come from the sacristy in a short procession. As we stood behind the altar, I could feel her agitation. “Almighty God, to you all hearts are open, all desires known, and from you no secrets are hid…” I’m wondering what is going on with Margie.

As the lector reads, I notice Steve, Margie’s ex-husband, in the congregation. I know enough about what has happened to know that he isn’t there to ask forgiveness and be reconciled. He’s bitter, angry, and has a violent edge. At the Peace I go out into the congregation, as usual. I go to Steve, shake his hand and place my left hand on his elbow. I lean in and say, “Steve, this isn’t acceptable. Please walk with me to the door.” Thankfully he does. I return to the altar, “Ascribe to the Lord the honor due his Name; bring offerings and come into his courts.”

It’s the only time I ever asked someone to remove themselves from the congregation. He was there to intimidate and frighten. Margie had a right to be safe and comfortable.

Feeling comfortable

The divorce was in the works. The lawyers had completed the necessary documents. It would be over, sort of, in another month. The rector spoke with Jill: “I’m wondering if you’ve thought about settling in at another parish? Being in the same church with your ex won’t be easy. I’ve already heard from others about how uncomfortable they feel.” Jill went to another parish.

Maria and Stan are a couple. Stan ran the program to feed the homeless for the past ten years. Maria led a pastoral care group. Both were good administrators. Two strong parish programs. He was awkward and slightly harsh when trying to recruit parishioners to help out. At times she was “bossy.” The new rector didn’t like their style; wasn’t comfortable with it. Several parishioners felt the same. The rector praised Maria and Stan for their service over the years. And then told them that beginning in the fall there’d need to be a change in leadership. “Some are uncomfortable with your leadership style.” Maria and Stan went to another parish.

Victoria had strong opinions about the state of the parish. Attendance was down and the parish climate seemed discouraged and worried. She wrote about what she saw. The rector and wardens made it clear that this was unacceptable. They and others were offended by what had been written. They started a campaign to discount Victoria’s efforts. Some in the parish stopped talking with her. After a bit another leader came to her, “Your presence on Sunday is making most people uncomfortable. They don’t feel like they can worship with a sense of peace.” Victoria went to another parish.

Same thing as Margie, right? Someone’s not comfortable because of the presence of someone else. The priest or other leaders take action to get the person causing the discomfort to leave.

People we don’t understand, we may not like, and we disagree with

It does have to do with maturity in Christ[i], of growing into the full stature of Christ. The parish church is part of the soil in which we grow. Through sacraments, in prayer, and just having to live and participate in community we are provided the circumstances and resources needed for growth in the Christian life.

In the parish church we get to be in community with people that we don’t understand, we may not like, and we disagree with. What a blessing!

Do you understand the difference?

Do you understand the difference between a situation in which there is a real threat and one in which you feel uncomfortable? The difference between someone entering your place of worship with evil intent and someone who is simply different from you?

In each case you may feel uncomfortable, even unsafe. And that’s the reason why we need to give our feelings respect and critique.

We know that some people feel uncomfortable in the presence of a person of another gender or race. Some get uncomfortable around people who speak another language. All people have biases. We may hide them from ourselves; we may be unaware of them. We all have limited experience. And out of that experience we have preferences and preconceptions. We have learned to be more at ease in some situations and with some people than others.

That doesn’t mean we should discount our feelings. Our feelings may be helpful guides for safety, and also lives of integrity and faithfulness.

Our feelings of discomfort or comfort need to be submitted to the Anglican tradition’s sources of authority—Scripture, Tradition, and Reason. And as we do that most of us come to the conclusion that feelings of discomfort based on race or gender are mistaken guides. We broaden our world.

Most of us see the norms of liberal democracy as the best attainable form of political and social organization that flows from Christian faith. Largely because it addresses our commitment to human dignity while being realistic about human sin and limitation. So, representative government, free speech, separation of powers, rule of law, due process, a constitution and more, are part of the thinking that offers a critique of our feelings. So, we don’t only ask, “Am I uncomfortable?” but also, “What is the right way to act?”

It’s messy, not perfect, but it’s what we have.

An ex-spouse attempting to intimidate a parishioner – not acceptable. The uncomfortable feelings in that case being a useful guide when combined with a knowledge of the people and their history. That’s about creating an appropriate safe space. It allows for the proper harmony of the church.

Expelling people from the worshipping community because of their divorce, their style, or their opinions is creating an unsafe space. It is a perversion of God’s harmony.

Deciding to participate in the life of a parish church is a decision to be with people we don’t understand, we may not like, and we disagree with. It’s a choice we make because at some level we know it’s how we grow up. It’s part of how God would make us holy.

People are upset and hurt

The rationale for shunning and expelling is most often, “people are upset, they are hurt, they feel uncomfortable.” It’s an odd defense. It lacks Christian foundation. It runs counter to the best in American culture.

And, it’s dishonest. Those upset about someone’s divorce, style, or opinions may "feel" hurt. But those shunned and expelled are objectively hurt. In the one case, the difficulty is with their ability to manage their emotions and decide to act like Christians. On the other, actual harm is done.

The national climate

Our nation is once again suffering from intolerance. On the right and left are the zealots with pretensions to greater sanctity. The Pharisees are ascendant.

Attempts to compel behavior that conforms to someone’s ideology has increased. There’s an increase of fear and hesitation on all sides about saying what you actually think. The climate has gradually infected the church. Shunning is normalized. The communication vehicles of most parishes and dioceses are simply propaganda machines.

Still, there are in the church and the nation voices of inclusion and unity, of compassion and empathy, of hope and faith. So, we make choices. Which voices rattling around in our head will be listen to?

The harmony of the church

The harmony of the church is not advanced by getting rid of those with whom we are uncomfortable. The harmony rises as we open ourselves to the love and forgiveness of God and then act as instruments of that love and forgiveness with others.  The parish is a training ground in which you learn to love your even your enemies. 

What are leaders to do?

Two guideposts --

1.     Engage rather than ignore

2.     Embrace rather than expel

More specifically --

Explain the nature and purpose of the church to them. That the unity and holiness of the church is not based upon screening people out because you feel uncomfortable in their presence. We listen to one another. We respect the dignity of one another. "See how those Christians love one another!"

If the person claims that they have been offended, guide them in the Christian way of approaching that. Offer to bring them together with “the other.”  Offer to go with them. Not so one can try to convince the other about who’s right. But so that they may learn to live in God’s peace with those they disapprove of.

Be absolutely clear within yourself that you will not collude with the least mature people in the parish community. Nurture maturity. 

We follow Jesus. We follow the one who is often not understood, not liked, and whom others disagreed with.

rag+

---

[i] Colossians 1:28-29, Ephesians 4:13-15, 1 Corinthians 14:20

To be in community with people that we don’t understand, we may not like, and we disagree with #2

Resources

God's Harmony 

Contemplation - Intercession - Action 

Episcopal shunning

A nation and world at peace with itself 

The Church's way of reconciliation and forgiveness 

A list of all postings

The hardest thing to do

The Order of the Ascension is having one of those email conversations. We do that from time to time. I think we miss each other having done this year’s retreat on Zoom. Also, we get caught up in a train of thought. This one is about “The numbers.”

Brother Scott noted that he had “similar conclusions.” I wrote, “there's a two-fold task … One is that we need an apologetic for these times. The second is what OA is about--as you said, "nurturing healthy development in congregations.” He agreed and said, “an apologetic has to have some hook to give people a reason to listen and respond.”  Brother Lowell, weighed in with, “I want to connect people to God.”  With the three of the most senior Professed having commented, others came into it.

In saying Morning Prayer there was this psalm verse,

 

I like the “level ground” and “full assembly” images. Maybe that’s my two-fold task.

I wrote this,

I find myself having these random thoughts about an apologetic. I notice that few of them are about the ideas to be offered. 

Here's one - I want to be a church that can be a home for Barack Obama, Pete Buttigeg, John McCain, Amy Klobuchar, Blair White, Jim Mattis, and John Mc Whorter. Okay, and also Joe and Kamala.  

The conversation continues.

This was part of Bishop Peter Eaton’s reflection this morning --

Yet the building of Christian community is the hardest thing to do that there is. We are all still too formed by the world and not formed enough by the Gospel, and it takes intentionality to create and sustain Christian community. To be a genuinely inclusive community is not to be without boundaries and expectations, and to say that God receives us as we are does not mean that God does not expect us to change.

All this is hard to negotiate. But not impossible. It takes practice and determination.  It takes a particular kind of focus and energy. And most of all it takes prayer and the sacraments. I was once asked how it was that my parish was doing so well, growing and flourishing, and I replied that I was not exactly sure, and there were no quick fixes;  but I did know that the well-being of the congregation depended on us saying our prayers together every day and doing a full day’s work. We do know how to help congregations flourish, but such flourishing takes real effort. 

I recalled how Bishop Peter sent all his assistants from Lancaster and Denver to the national CDI at General Seminary, and later Deer Isle. Those attending went through three predictable stages[i].

- “This   is   hard.”   Part   of   it   is   that   the programs   are   demanding   and   require  focused   time   and   energy.   But   as   the participants   begin   to   engage   change  projects   in   the   parishes, we   hear   about the   need   for   persistence, wisdom, and,  at   times, courage.   They   talk   about   how complex   interventions   are   and   how  challenging   the   work   is   intellectually, emotionally, and   spiritually.  

- “This   works!”   That’s   the   second   statement   we   hear   about   one   year   into   the  training.   The   feelings   of   being   overwhelmed   and   disoriented   have   passed.  Interventions   have   been   planned, implemented, and   reflected   upon.  Some   of   the “this   works” response   rises out   of   a   sense   that   the   parish   system   is more   understandable.   They   are   learning   to   look   under   the   tip   of   the   iceberg.  The   other   part   is   they   are   beginning to   see   some   initial   success   or, if   not  success, some   understanding   of   why their   interventions   did   not   go   as   they  intended.   As   the   training   comes   to   an end, we   hear   comments   about   changes  in   parish   culture with more trust, more openness, and more competence in the core practices.  

- “This   is   inspiring.”   This   one   comes later; maybe   during   the   last   workshops,  sometimes   after   that.   People   have   seen themselves, others, and   their   parish  change.   It   is   a   kind   of   reasonable   hope about   their   future   together.   A  confirmation   of   the   investment   they   have   made.

The Bishop’s comment makes the point,

I was once asked how it was that my parish was doing so well, growing and flourishing, and I replied that I was not exactly sure, and there were no quick fixes;  but I did know that the well-being of the congregation depended on us saying our prayers together every day and doing a full day’s work. We do know how to help congregations flourish, but such flourishing takes real effort.

We know a lot about helping parishes to flourish. Though most of the church seems either unaware of, or uninterested in, that knowledge. We do know a great deal about “how.” The apologetic for our time—now that’s hard work. 

rag+

---

[i] From “Understanding from Within: Working with Religious Systems,” An article by Michelle Heyne, OA and Robert Gallagher, OA in the OD Practitioner 2015.

 A list of all postings

The numbers

I was the new vicar. I wanted to get a sense of the state of the parish. I spend a lot of time talking with people, both in the parish and in the neighborhood. We had group discussions. I read old reports. I listened to the perspective of clergy in the diocese.

Somewhere in there I looked at the record-of-services book. It went back many years. Years of growth and years of decline. But the years just prior to my becoming vicar were different. The services were recorded but no numbers. That a Eucharist was celebrated was there but not the attendance. I didn’t know what to make of it.

I asked parishioners. The most frequent response was along these lines, “Father became depressed. We were getting smaller and smaller. He didn’t know what to do.”  Over the years in my work as a consultant I saw the pattern a few more times.

It’s now become part of the broader culture.  We ignore data we don’t like. We avoid looking at data that might make us uncomfortable.

Why do we do that? Maybe it’s that it makes us depressed. Maybe we want to avoid having to change our behavior. Maybe it doesn’t fit our ideology. Think about it—the relationship between wearing a mask and an increase in hospitalizations; or those of us wanting to say our mass gathering doesn’t spread the virus but some other group’s gatherings do; or climate change data and regulation; or gun ownership and concealed carry permit data and the risk of suicide on the one hand and the very low rate of criminal activity by permit holders. If we can’t bend the data to fit our preferred narrative we explain it away or maybe we act like it doesn’t exist. Or maybe we change what we count.

A dire future

Yesterday’s Episcopal News Service had a reported “2019 parochial reports show continued decline and ‘dire’ future for the Episcopal Church.”    The article

“The Episcopal Church has seen declining membership, to varying degrees, since the 1960s, when it counted 3.4 million members. As of 2019, it had about 1.8 million. Membership is down 17.4% over the last 10 years.” 

The new report says, “The release of the 2019 data makes the picture clearer than ever: Even before COVID-19, The Episcopal Church’s days were numbered.” For an hour or so after I read it, I had a feeling of hopelessness in my gut. I thought, “I’m wasting my time writing about ways to nurture healthier parish churches when in a few years we’re dead.” That’s when the memory came of being a new vicar looking at a book of unrecorded numbers because the priest was depressed.

“The Episcopal Church’s days were numbered.” That of course is an interpretation of the data. Look carefully. There are other ways to understand what’s happening. My interest at the moment is about what we measure. Also, about what it means as we look at what we measure--Are we depressed? Are we avoiding? Are we adapting? 

What an institution measures is an indication of what it sees, and therefore what it avoids seeing. It connects to what we spend time and money on.

Count the numbers and/or seek a new narrative

The ENS report said this,

2019 will now be the last year of this particular iteration of the parochial report, the oldest continuous gathering of data by The Episcopal Church. With some adjustments in methodology and definitions, the report has measured membership since 1880 and Sunday attendance since 1991. Even before COVID-19, efforts were underway to redesign the parochial report, and the onset of the pandemic made that even more urgent. For 2020, parochial reports will only measure Sunday attendance from Jan. 1 to March 1 and include new narrative questions to help track “opportunities, innovations and challenges.” After 2020, the new permanent parochial report format may include additions or changes.

Church leaders have said that including narrative sections allows parishes to describe the less quantifiable ways in which they are serving God and their communities, and that membership and attendance numbers alone don’t paint a complete picture of the church.

It’s been in the works for some time. For years now there have been voices that claim, “the Episcopal Church is not in decline.” They want to stress our vibrancy and resilience. Fair enough. But why not say that. Why not hold in front of us both the fact of our decline in attendance and membership alongside the stories of persistence and creativity?

The underlying struggle is there in any institution. Sometimes we avoid the facts and truths that make us uncomfortable, that we don’t know how to respond to, or that don’t fit our ideology or narrative. And at times we exhibit institutional courage and act. In my own history I’ve seen both when the Diocese of Pennsylvania tried to come to terms with its abandonment of the city. See “Stay in the City.” Or the leaders of St. Paul's, Seattle when they were invited to look at the parish's pattern of growth and decline.

An earlier ENS report said,

The special report for 2020 will include new narrative questions to help track “opportunities, innovations and challenges” that congregations experienced while dealing with the pandemic. Racism is another new section in the report, with congregations asked to discuss how they are “actively addressing and working toward racial justice and reconciliation.”

Such narrative questions will preview a new approach to future parochial reports, as Rankin-Williams’ committee responds to complaints that the past emphasis on numbers misses other examples of church vitality and Episcopalians’ participation in the Jesus Movement.

Some concern was expressed by the Rev. Tom Ferguson about the danger of brushing aside the hard numbers. “My fear is, I don’t want a tool that just normalizes decline—which, frankly, I see everywhere, this normalization of decline.”

A Myers-Briggs take on things might go this way--Is what’s happening the victory of intuitive types over sensing types? It’s a tension in most organizations. The church is no exception. Have those more inclined to seeing new possibilities won out over those who ask “what are the facts? The MBTI insight to effective decision making in an organization suggests covering all the bases both in the content and the process. For example,

Individuals and organizations tend to pay more attention to ways of seeing and acting that are most comfortable for them. Using your strengths is reasonable and wise. However, it also means we miss information we need for sound decision making.

With a bit of discipline, we can make better decisions by ensuring that the content of what we look at and the processes that we use cover all the bases.

A healthy and effective approach to coping with problems is the touching on all the preferences.

Another lens we can use in looking at this is Intervention Theory. How do we carry out this work in a way that generates the most internal commitment possible? Are we basing this upon adequate valid and useful information and an exploration of options?

Will we be willing to look at uncomfortable facts and inconvenient truths? Those of declining numbers alongside our responses to racism and the virus.

Additional measurements – self assessments –needed conversations

In the late 1980s the Diocese of Connecticut required all of its small, struggling, financially aided parishes to participate in processes of self and peer reflection and assessment, meet together on a regular basis, make use of a trained consultant, and have a three-party-agreement on their goals (an agreement among vestry, priest, and bishop). As new priests were appointed, they were required to complete an early form of the Church Development Institute (CDI), in addition to the other requirements. Over a five-year period, the aided-parishes with leaders participating in the CDI training program experienced an 80% average pledge increase (vs. 68% for non-CDI participants) and 24% in attendance (vs. 15%). All these parishes reported increased satisfaction with the central elements of parish life, e.g., worship, formation, service, evangelization, etc. This occurred while the state’s population was declining and as the percentage of the diocesan budget allocated to financial aid to these was also declining.

The parishes were required to submit a written report in addition to the national parochial report. That included the vestry’s assessment of worship, learning, service, evangelization, and stewardship. The assessments were on a scale from 1 – Much Worse to 5 – Much Improved. Combining such factors with numbers of average attendance, pledge units and average pledge, gave the bishop’s office a clearer picture of the state of the parish and allowed us to open discussions about what assistance we could offer. Equally important was a dynamic it set in motion within the parish. In most cases the assessments set of internal conversations and provided additional energy for needed change.

Hopes

I don’t know what will be asked in the future parochial reports. I have three hopes. 1) That they will expand the range of measurements to include the parish’s self-assessment of critical areas of measurement. 2) That they will maintain the hard data as uncomfortable as that may be. And 3) That they will avoid the type of narrative reporting that is really spin.

rag+

Related resources

Parochial Report Trends  2008-19 - go to Study Your Neighborhood, then to Explore Parochal Report Trends.

2014 Report on Episcopal Church Growth and Decline

2019 Saint Paul’s Growth & Decline

Understanding from Within: Working with Religious Systems

Measurements I've used

Some key factors

Assessing the Parish's Spiritual Practices

Incorporation Process Assessment

Evangelization and Growth Assessment

With integrity and courage:Edward Bouverie Pusey

that we may with integrity and courage accomplish what you give us to do, and endure what you give us to bear

 
Today is the Feast of Edward Bouverie Pusey. There is much that could be said about how he and his companions changed Anglicanism and the Episcopal Church in particular.  Some of that is picked up in today’s reflection by Bishop Peter in Southeast Florida. (a PDF of the Reflection).

My thoughts go to his contribution to the transformation of society.

Out of shadows and images into the truth

The tradition he helped launch carries within it a vision of heaven and a transformed society. This story illustrates that.

They were instrumental in stirring up the Church's concern for the welfare, both spiritual and material, of the working classes. The building of factories had flooded many areas with workers who were without churches to minister to them. The Tractarians built churches in these areas, and in slum areas, and staffed them with dedicated priests. The influence of their work was widespread. For example: One disciple of Pusey was R M Benson, the founder of the Society of St John the Evangelist. One of Benson's disciples was Fr C N Field, who came to America and became deeply interested in the housing conditions of the poor in Boston. One of his disciples was Mary Kingsbury Simkhovitch. She says that it was Fr Field and the other priests of the SSJE who first taught her to visit the poor. Mrs Simkhovitch is accounted one of the founders of social work. She founded Greenwich House in New York City. One of her disciples was Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor in the New Deal. She and Mrs Simkhovitch went to Harold Ickes and persuaded him to put public housing on the agenda of the New Deal. Thus the American public housing program of the 1930's and after was indirectly a result of the Tractarian movement. (On Edward Bouverie Pusey at Satucket)

Father Ken Leech was part of that tradition.  He saw a social vision that developed out of the Catholic revival as corporate, materialistic, transformative, rebellious and of the Kingdom. (“What kind of social vision emerges from the Anglo-Catholic tradition?”) 

The history of the slum priests, the sisters who served among the poor and ill, and Anglo-Catholic socialism were all developments rising out of Pusey’s holiness.

The weakness and sinfulness of human nature

For Pusey this was offset by the need for humility. I’m sure it is a product of my own disordered mind that in thinking about Edward Pusey I turned to John Lewis.

I’ve been reading Jon Meacham’s, His Truth is Marching on: John Lewis and the Power of Hope.  He notes Lewis’ humility and his passion for justice. Meacham sees Lewis as part of a tradition that is realistic about human nature and still joyfully idealistic. For Lewis it had roots in Christian faith and American idealism. The struggle for justice would never be completed in this life. Meacham wrote -

Our constitution was founded on a dark yet realistic view of human nature: that we are fallen, frail, and fallible. The aim of the new republic was not perfection, an impossibility on this side of Paradise, but, as Gouverneur Morris put it in the preamble to the Constitution, a Union that would prove “more perfect.” Experience teaches us that injustice is endemic to political life. “The tragedy of man,” the twentieth-century Protestant theologian Reinhold Niebuhr observed, “is that he can conceive self-perfection but cannot achieve it.” And the tragedy of America is that we can imagine justice but cannot fully realize it.

Meacham sees in Lewis a saint who didn’t allow his realism to turn him toward either cynicism or fatalism. “He understood sin, but chose to see the depravity of the world as something to be fought, nor accepted.”

In all time of our testing

My seeing a connection between Blessed Edward and Blessed John is strengthened by the propers provided by Holy Church for this feast day. In those Scriptures I see the relationship between the 19^th century Anglian pastor and the 20 and 21^st century Baptist foot-soldier for justice. Now together in the arms of Mercy, “into the glorious company of the saints in light.”

From the psalm - Happy are those who act with justice (Ps 106:3)

From Ezekiel - A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.

From 1 Peter - When he was abused, he did not return abuse; when he suffered, he did not threaten; but he entrusted himself to the one who judges justly.

From Luke - “Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.” 

Ex umbris et imagini­bus in veritatem

rag+

Edward Bouverie Pusey: Post Reformation Saint? By William Davage

Note 1: Ex umbris et imagini­bus in veritatem (Out of shadows and images into the truth) is on John Newman’s gravestone

Note 2: The icon is lifted from an icon "The Oxford Fathers." In the icon Newman is on his left and Keble on his right. It's part of a collection The Anglo Catholics  

Ephemeral change or lasting change

It will last as long as you’re sitting on it and then quickly disappear once you are gone

In reading the news this morning I came across an AP report on Kamala Harris and policing. Before becoming a senator, she had been San Francisco’s DA and California’s Attorney General. So, she had a lot of experience with policing issues and police unions.

A couple of paragraphs in the story caught my attention –

Those decisions were based in part on her own experience as a San Francisco prosecutor. She also understood the need to change “hearts and minds” to make long-lasting change, said Nathan Barankin, Harris’ former chief of staff in the attorney general’s office and Senate. 

“Otherwise, if you haven’t done that, any change you do implement is Pyrrhic, it’s ephemeral. It will last as long as you’re sitting on it and then quickly disappear once you are gone,” he said.

I immediately sent an email off to a friend pointing out the article and saying, “If only we could get clergy to understand this.”

Lasting change

A central decision made by the priest in charge of any parish is whether the years spent in that parish will bring lasting change or ephemeral change.

Too much of the change that is done in parishes is transitory. The words in the AP article capture the issue, “It will last as long as you’re sitting on it and then quickly disappear once you are gone.” Clergy invest their time and energy in “things passing away.”  You serve a community for 7, 10, or 15 years and when you leave a new priest comes and changes most of what you’ve done. That’s because you have spent your time on things that have not become part of the parish’s culture.

Which raises a second decision clergy make--whether the change is important and faithful. Does it advance the long-term health of the parish?

Recognizing the issue

Many of us have a difficult time recognizing the issue. We come to the parish with our experience and our imagination. We arrive with the skills and knowledge we have at the moment. And we proceed to offer that to (inflict it upon) the parish. New clergy arrive with half thought through utopian ideas. More experienced clergy with programs and methods that “worked” in their last parish. And supposed mistakes they will never try again.

We often miss the deeper and more significant decisions we are making. Will the investment of our lives in this parish community have a lasting effect grounded in the central purposes and concerns of any parish?

Given that most of us arrive knowing what we know and are inclined to get to work based on that, aren’t we going to overlook and shoot right pass the issue? How to we offset that?

That’s hard and painful. We know what we know. And we don’t know what we don’t know.

It does help to keep in mind that there’s much we don’t know. You know—that humility thing!

In addition to a bit of humility we can broaden our knowledge and skill with training and education. In the early years, get a good coach.  Also, by developing our capacity to be reflective. Okay, got it! It’s life long. We all know that bumper sticker. The trick is to act upon it. 

My own bias is that we do well to focus our after-seminary training on a mix of ascetical theology and practice and organization development. One of the reoccurring debates is along the lines of--“am I a manager or a priest?” The fact is that the priest in charge of a parish is a leader and has responsibility to both tend the flock and also to shape the parish in such a manner as to enable a productively faithful culture. 

Two rules of thumb

We could come together and brainstorm dozens of “rules of thumb” about this. There are many useful mental models in both ascetical theology and organization development, especially in what’s call “use of self.” I’ll offer two.

Wisdom

What we’re seeking in our clergy is wisdom. Which comes only in part and over time. Which is to say—not enough and not when we need it.  So, back to the humility thing. And also, immersing ourselves in wisdom in the threefold rule of prayer, in our work with a coach and spiritual guide, and in on-going training in the relevant fields (Anglican ascetical theology and practice, organization development and organizational culture). We compensate for what we are not yet proficient in by being with the people who are proficient.

Then there is wisdom as a gift of the Spirit. Richard Holloway suggested that wisdom was the coming together of all the other gifts of the Spirit—awe, affection, knowledge (a capacity to accept paradox and hold things in balance), courage, counsel (openness to the Holy Spirit, listening), understanding (seeing the world rightly).  It is wholeness; spiritual maturity. Wisdom is a gift. It is also something we can make ourselves available for.  Ken Leech wrote of it in regard to prayer and self-knowledge.

Prayer must involve the unifying of the personality, the integration of mind and heart into one center.... Without self discovery there can be no further progress. ‘In order to find God whom we can only find in and through the depths of our own soul, we must first find ourselves.’ Without self-knowledge our love remains superficial. (Kenneth Leech, Soul Friend) 

The purposes of a parish church

What does any parish exist for? This isn’t about us creating a mission statement or vision. I think there are three intrinsic purposes for a parish church.

1. The worship of God

2. The formation of the People of God  

3. A sanctifying relationship with the external “public” the parish is most connected with (usually the neighborhood around the parish, sometimes an entire town or city, other times a particular community, e.g., the performing arts. In practice each has its own integrity and also overlaps with the others.

The priest needs to direct her energy around those three areas. And in the process learn how to see the relationship and synergy involved.

There is also the need the hold in mind how we can rationalize time spent on what in fact will be ephemeral by categorizing it under one of these three purposes. I'll offer one example that may help see the difference between what would be unlikely to last, and what would be more likely to be lasting and become part of the parish’s culture.

Most of us would agree that a parish is more fully engaging the purpose of “the worship of God” if the Eucharist is celebrated each Sunday and major feast days and the daily office is said each day in the church.  To bring in an ascetical mental model, a parish that grounds itself in the Threefold Rule of Prayer is engaged in an integrated and complete expression of worship. Living this Prayer Book Pattern means the parish is expressing the best of our tradition. It’s an appreciative change approach to base our change efforts in those things that run deep in the tradition. Those practices that have endured over time and under stress.

During the pandemic many parishes have found ways to do the daily office using web-based resources. It’s providential that when we are under such stress we fall back upon the riches of our traditional practices.

There's some useful discussion going on about how the use of web resources in saying the office might be continued in the future. So, we may have the possibility of seeking to have the office done in person in a parish chapel while allowing others to participate from home.

The pathway of integrating the daily office into the parish’s culture can include many elements that contribute to it becoming a permanent part of parish life—the parish priest always participants, there is a space for saying the office that feels right given the smaller numbers and rhythm of the office, it has happened consistently for a long time. Here is a page with other elements.

I’ll describe one element that is useful in all size parishes but especially in middle-size and smaller parishes. Small communities of people doing the office in the church on assigned days of the week. Teams of people who agree to attend every Tuesday or Friday. The team both takes care of the various roles that need to be filled (officiant, readers, etc.) and also provides a reliable community of worship. The priest needs to be present at all the offices but only serve on one of the teams. Teams may be between two and six people. Parishioners are asked to agree to serve on a team, to be part of that small praying community, for at least a year. Some will stay with that service to the parish for many years, others will do it for a year or two and then leave the team even as they continue to attend frequently. An advantage of this approach, over asking people to be the officiant on certain days, is that it is done with others, so it’s not all on you, and that you can be on the team taking on less demanding roles for a time as you learn how to officiate.

It can take more energy and persistence for a priest to initially recruit and maintain the teams. But rather quickly the teams begin to self-manage within the customary that’s been provided. Each year the priest needs to recruit new people. Over time that gets easier as current team members help with the recruiting.

After a few years a parish may find that a significant number of people have been part of these small communities of prayer. In the course of that involvement they will have developed an investment, an internal commitment, to being part of a parish that gathers for prayer each day. And within that process some will have matured in faith and practice. That may well become a critical mass engaged in and supporting the parish’s prayer life. Such maturity and numbers make it more likely that the practice will be long lasting.

Of course, nothing is guaranteed. You can do all the right things and somehow it doesn’t happen—“It will last as long as you’re sitting on it and then quickly disappear once you are gone,”  There’s that humility thing again.

Direct us, O Lord, in all our doings with your most gracious
favor, and further us with your continual help; that in all our
works begun, continued, and ended in you, we may glorify
your holy Name, and finally, by your mercy, obtain everlasting
life; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

rag+

A list of all postings