 |
Before the roof can be raised, a strong foundation must be set. Based on her extensive work with congregations, Alice Mann identifies four vital leadership tasks that undergird the difficult change process:
- Excavating the congregation’s religious culture(s)
- Creating a foundation of authority for change using the congregation’s own cultural materials
- Enriching the congregation’s practices of democracy and discernment
- Locating the congregation on an organizational “System Change Index”
Excavating the Congregational Culture
A congregation’s culture (or cultures, since there may be more than one distinctive culture within a single congregation) can be explored much like an archealogist digs for artifacts, or a sociologist studies a tribe. Culture arises from the stories, symbols, rituals, thought patterns, and world views of a group of people. Clues to congregational culture can be found in worship, in the building and everything in it, and most importantly in mission activity in the local context.
A congregation’s culture includes distinctive attitudes toward growth. In their book Varieties of Religous Presence, church sociologists David Roozen, John McKinney, and Jackson Carroll classified religious cultures as activist, civic, sanctuary, or evangelistic. In reflecting on these types, Alice Mann has observed varying attitudes toward growth.
With a focus on social justice, activist churches may see themselves as a small, committed cadre. They may also see growth through the lens of community organizing, as a way to “build their base” of ministry and influence. Civic congregations may see sabbath attendance as a minor measure compared to their influence within the wider community. They may also see building up membership as a source of strength, openness, and diversity. More evangelical churches generally see growth in numbers as a fulfillment of the Great Commission. At the same time, demands for theological conformity can also inhibit growth. Sanctuary congregations call people across the threshold to experience divine transcendence. Growing worship attendance may be seen as an indicator of effectiveness in spiritual formation. On the other hand, the “faithful remnant” may expect few others to join them and so make little effort to reach out.
About half of all church members are what church sociologist Nancy Ammerman terms “Golden Rule” Christians. They tend to say their goal is to care for those in need rather than change other people’s beliefs. They are often reluctant to talk about their faith, or to engage in invitational outreach beyond greeting visitors at the door. This reticence offers particular challenges for pursuing intentional growth. Even within a Golden Rule culture, a church may be motivated to change size in order to care for children and their religious education. And attention to adult spiritual formation can build greater comfort with sharing one’s own faith story in authentic and respectful ways.
Whatever the driver for change, staying stuck in the transition zone seems to drain the energy, vitality, and resilience of leaders and active members.
Creating a Foundation of Authority
On what authority may a pastor or lay leader ask others in the congegation to change? Church hierachies and biblical mandates hold less sway with many mainline Protestants, particularly in congregations with more liberal theologies and more democratic polities. Change will only be accepted if it is seen as a natural step, “authorized” by values at the center of the congregational culture itself.
Building a foundation of authority may mean unlocking hidden cultural resources such as personal faith stories, stories from the congregation’s history or faith tradition, or touchstone Golden Rule values like hospitality and inclusion.
Enriching practices of democracy and discernment
By living together as “little publics” and working through issues of common concern to members, congregations of all kinds contribute to the public good. In some congregations, however, democracy and dialogue are embraced as core spiritual practices. In these churches, process questions carry moral weight, and are viewed as vehicles of spiritual discernment. In the face of a major transformation—like moving to program size—such congregations do well to deepen and enrich their practices of communication, discernment, and participative decision-making.
Size transition presents a congregation with concrete decisions that test the people’s willigness to change—for instance, will the church expand the parking lot, add a staff member, or change the number of services? Good process is needed to channel energy, foster constructive communication, and make space for a range of reactions. Structured planning steps provide a “container” in which key issues can percolate for a period of time, allowing members to keep listening, learning, negotiating and adjusting until a settlement can be reached.
A congregation’s ability to set healthy norms for handling disagreement is an important component of “readiness” for size transition. Two outstanding resources for this work are Denise Goodman’s book, Congregational Fitness and Gil Rendle’s, Behavioral Covenants in Congregations.
Locating the congregation on an organizational system change index
Generally speaking, pastors and lay leaders underestimate the scope and extent of change that will be required before a congregation really hits its stride with a “program” way of operating. Without an accurate inventory of the degree and kind of change involved, leaders cannot solicit informed consent from the congregation. Even more fundementally, leaders cannot properly assess their own commitment and capacity to see this transition through.
Featured among the book’s helpful appendices is a detailed inventory called the System Change Index. This assessment tool identifies nine dimensions of organizational change required to complete the transition from a “pastoral” to a “progam” way of being church. The System Change Index is meant to foster conversation about the congregation’s progress through the transition zone between sizes, and help leaders to clarify their own readiness to lead a demanding process of change.
back to top
|
|
