Witness the Resurrection

One of the most hopeful trends within our presbytery at the moment is that some of our strongest congregations are some of our remnant and smallest congregations. For example, Burney, Marysville, and Journey-Folsom are all engaged in exciting missions led by folks with a new commitment and zeal for the work being done. In many ways, they are each representative of resurrection theology, rising from existential struggles to become retooled, remodeled, and, yes, reformed as vibrant communities of faith. Burney and Journey are remnant congregations following the departure of pastor and a significant portion of the congregation to another denomination. Burney dropped to three people; Journey to around fifty. Marysville shrank to the point where they could no longer manage a facility designed for a congregation of several hundred. Those twenty or so folks want to experiment with being a building-less congregation.

I believe each has something to teach other congregations within the presbytery. Each has met their context with imagination, faith, and creativity. They also remind us that being small can actually become an asset. There is a deep communal heart at work within them that can get lost in a larger group. 

Lessons to be gleaned from these congregations are as follows: focus on things you are good at; go all in; listen for God; and deepen the relationship between church leadership and the congregation. 

Each church abandoned the idea of being all things to all people. There simply aren’t the human and material assets to maintain a ministry of universal service. Necessity required them to trim things down to those ministries they knew they could support with the people and the resources they had. The beauty in this move is that it required a discernment of who was present—what did the people present bring? What were their talents? What were their interests? It led to a conversation about vocation in it’s truest sense, following Frederick Buechner—vocation is where your passion intersects with the needs of the world. What could folks genuinely engage in doing, feeding both their joy and the hungers of the community around them? That question alone narrowed the focus to truly relevant work—here is our communal joy; here is the need of our community; where do they meet?

As that focus sharpened, something remarkable happened. People wanted to join the work! Even though leaders expressed concern about finding enough workers to get things done, those fears evaporated quickly as rosters were easily filled. People had no problem volunteering for things they wanted to do (what a concept!). Moreover, stewardship became less of an issue because people saw the direct connection between their giving and the work being done. It was not a hard sell at all, but rather became something rather simple—we want to do this; this is what it takes; and so I will give this to get it done. It is not a stretch to say that this detail simply flows from the first—focus feeds focus; focus feeds understanding; and understanding fuels participation. 

Finally, a remarkable thing happened in the relationship between leadership and folks in the pews—all forms of hierarchical division (and distrust) vanished (or, at least, became mitigated). Instead, there was a deep sense of partnership between the congregation and their leaders—we are in this together. There was little sense that someone was doing something to someone else, or inflicting their agenda on another; or simply dismissing creative thinking from the pews. Rather, everyone began to see they had something to offer to the conversation about what the church did, where it was going, and how it would get there. A side benefit is that such thinking recaptures a truer sense of what a pastor is supposed to be—not a benevolent dictator, but a shepherd helping congregants realize their own gifts for ministry and embodying those gifts in service to Christ. 

As we within the presbytery understand the way the Spirit works within such congregations, we get a far better sense of what we need to be at the mid-council level. We need to be in the business of equipping this work. What that means is being ready to supplement a lack of resources (most often financial), offer educational opportunities to better train disciples in their work; and provide structural framework for the work being done in congregations.

Many of our committees are already in the business of making grants for ministry and mission through legacy funds. This work is immediately relevant to the lives of our congregations, offering them additional sources of revenue so they can continue to live into their mission as faith communities. The truth is that as congregations deal with being smaller, their need for outside support increases. The end result is that our presbytery committees better meet our congregations by letting go of programatic impulses, becoming instead support entities for mission and program flowing from the congregations themselves. Rather than being think tanks or mission nurseries, they become nurturers. The presbytery then becomes a responsive entity.

Beyond financial support, the presbytery can deepen its support work by being a connection to the wider world, so to speak, staying abreast of denominational initiatives, general teachings on adaptive change, and staying up to date on who is offering what and where. The presbytery can offer through its committees workshops, seminars, and so on to equip the people engaged in the work of ministry. They can also publicize national or regional opportunities and then help meet costs of attending so our workers in the field stay as sharp and as informed as they need to be. 

Finally, the presbytery can begin to consider developing services to provide for churches that are too small or ill equipped to provide them for themselves. For example, the presbytery can offer financial or payroll services to churches, becoming for the churches what synod is for the presbyteries. Also, as the housing market becomes a huge obstacle (if not flat dead end) in a church’s ability to call a pastor, the presbytery can explore such options as equity sharing, etc. to make things more attainable. Offering congregations the possibility of outsourcing such services can save them money and allow volunteers a chance to focus on the things they are really good at doing. 

So, the goal becomes to meet the renewed energy within our churches as they reform, refocus, and revitalize themselves with a presbytery that is immediately relevant to their work and life. The hope is to meet actual needs rather than shooting in the dark at things that may or may not actually represent what is happening at the congregational level. 

The inescapable foundational stone for all of this to work is listening. The first piece that needs to be firmly in place is a communication link. Churches need to have direct access to our committees, and vice versa, so everyone can hear what is actually happening and then respond accordingly rather than trying to guess or work from supposition. 

Secondly, we need to be sure the direction of information directly related to ministry formation is correct; i.e., from the congregations to the presbytery instead of the other way around.  For presbytery to be what it needs to be, it needs first and foremost be a responsive entity.