Ecclesiology of the ELCA: Blessing or Burden?

Submitted by Eric Ohrtman on Thu, 12/08/2011 - 12:19pm

I was recently asked to sit on the Constitution Committee for the Eastern Washington-Idaho Synod. In the past, this was the kind of opportunity that I would jump at without hesitation. I still can't tell you if it was blind ambition, a technical nerdiness, or a desire to serve my denomination that made those decisions so easy. But, this time I found myself thrown into considerable prayer and discernment. I told Bp. Asst. Mark Nelson that my difficulties with the ELCA and its model constitution would make it difficult for me to do the work of a positive team member for that committee. His response, typical from Mark, was insightful and set me onto further work. Essentially, he said this, "The ELCA needs this kind of continued hardwork and thoughtful caring if it is going to move forward. Working with what we have to make it something new is exactly why we need people of dissent amongst our ranks."

So, I was forced to ask myself what specifically I found myself struggling with in our beloved ELCA. And, finally it came down to the common use of "ecclesiology" (the historic use is very different, having to do with the buildings of a church- as opposed to the building of a church... here is an interesting Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecclesiology). My struggle is with the difficulty of balancing the stricture of a hierarchy with the autonomy of the local congregation.

I am a top down authoritarian thinker. I am comfortable with decisions being made by the best and brightest minds. I do not mind authority having its locus in a particular position or individual. I appreciate when strong leaders pursue a vision to the best of their ability. So, I chafe at how little authority our Synodical Bishops actually wield. I dislike the politics of our discipline process and firmly believe that lay, clergy, and congregation should have direct and obvious consequences that are far more rigorous in their scope and application. I believe that instead of asking congregations to give a benevolence amount to the synod we should move toward a franchising model that requires particular fee percentages, uniform advertising, and a practical application of core practices for clergy and lay, alike.

That being said, I live in Colville, WA. That which works in downtown Minneapolis bears little resemblance to anything that would be successful in the remnants of the Great Missoula Flood. The need for contextualization is obvious to us all. Though only an hour south, Spokane does not understand what is happening here. A sound argument can be made that if I were to get in trouble it would be a local problem and the congregation should be allowed to deal with it as it sees fit within the letter of the law. As for benevolence, we can only afford so much. To maintain our ministries and direct the precious few "extra dollars" to the places that will most enhance those ministries we cannot afford to be overtaxed and need the flexibility to skip a payment every now and then.

Diversity, creativity, flexibility, autonomy, and authority are all words of value in the ELCA. Holding them together creates both blessing and burden. My questions are these:

What are the strengths/weaknesses of our denomination through your eyes?

How have they played out in your local context?

Do you see the building of ecclesiology and the making of disciples as compatible or mutually exclusive?

If they are mutually exclusive, what are the greatest difficulties that you face inherent to our structure in the making of disciples?

Thank you. God bless. Merry Christmas!

Eric Ohrtman

Promote content

Structural difficulties

Submitted by marycjamison on Sat, 01/28/2012 - 10:54pm.

I'm not so sure it is the entire structure that is "faulty", but some of us "bricks" certainly cause some concern. Speaking as a lay person, it isn't difficult to work within the structure of our greater church but sometimes within the boundaries we ourselves set up. In our own congregation we talk a great deal about outreach and we truly do a good deal of outreach. It is dealing with the results of that outreach that sometimes leave us stuttering. When those whom we've reached begin to be involved, things change. Change is difficult. We are used to changing slowly, if at all. THEY don't obey our timeline for change! Accepting THEM a part of US? Are we still US when there's no longer a THEM? The answer is yes, even though adding them always puts a few bricks out of kilter, it adds another story.

Another part of the problem, as I see it and that I have experienced, is the lack of instruction on the infrastructure of the entire denominational entity. As a lifelong-Lutheran I was not aware, until I was a forty-something adult, that there was such a thing as a cluster. I didn't know what a synod was and had no notion of a national or international church. I knew we DID do mission work internationally; after all, I'd seen the yearly Sunday School presentations on Papua New Guinea! It wasn't until I chaparoned two of our youth attending a joint LYO session and a Global Mission Event that I learned that there was an infrastructure to our ELCA. Yeah, I know, I wasn't paying attention for the first forty years....but who is? We need to let our members know from a young age that we are part of something larger than the group we worship with of a Sunday. How it works and why it is structured the way it is. If we know those things then it should be easier to work for change within it.

Continuous Education

Submitted by Eric Ohrtman on Mon, 01/30/2012 - 9:32am.

I have been cognizant of the structure of our ELCA since early high school when Pr. Charlene Rachuy-Cox served as interim at Trinity in Lewiston. Every time that I visit the structure in an adult education forum, though, I learn more. With the financial struggle of continuing education I have moved toward the idea of continuous education, and I think the idea could work for connecting people to our polity. The first couple of years I was ordained I took a class in the spring, attended Synod Assembly, and First Call Theological Education. Because these were mostly mandated they came with negative baggage (that changed when Susan Briehl and Holden Village combined to sweep me off my feet in Fall '10). Thanks to the negative baggage, my approach was minimalist. I was not active when present and prior to I did only the bare minimum in preparation. Of course, I never got anything out of these events and thus my theory was proved that they were worthless and I would be better off seeking education elsewhere. After FCTE concluded and I had really dug into Synod Council I found myself more curious about our denomination, Christianity, and the ministry of Jesus. That erupted into fullness when I was introduced to 3D Ministries (http://www.3dministries.com) by Pr. Michael Blaess. Since then, I have approached education as a continuous endeavor. "Jesus", "discipleship", and "piety" have morphed from theological terms to part of my vernacular. As they did so my relationship with and appreciation for each of those has grown.

What could happen to the ELCA if the same shift from talking about our denomination only at Synod Assembly and Bishop's Convo to making it part of our vernacular occurred? Would some of the difficulties sort themselves out? Would we begin to appreciate the work of Synod Staff and Volunteers in a new light? Would we sense a connection between Colville, Jackson, and Chicago that has never before been present?

Erik, You present some

Submitted by ejdull69 on Tue, 01/31/2012 - 1:20pm.

Erik,

You present some interesting thoughts. I don't believe we want to go in the direction of congregationalism. Your first question presumes rightly so that there are obvious strengths and weaknesses with a denomianational structure. The strengths as I see them are first adding a level of accountability. It is too easy these days to not be held accountable. I also believe being a part of a bigger church raises our vision. While I don't know all the issues that are going on inColville, I have people in my congregation that do. I also personally have moved from a small to a large town. I believe it is important individuals as well as congregations to understand it is not all about them. Being part of a denomination offers that that possibility with people who do share more in common then we often thing.

I do wonder though if thinking about the ELCA having three equal expressions is the right way to go. If the purpose of a synod for example is to serve a congregation, should the synod be leading in mission or following the mission being set in congregations. Take Africa, in my congregation I have people who have served as Doctors, teachers and theologians in 7 different countries over there. We have a companion synod that we do things with, we also have the Malaria campaign/ Stand with Africa etc. etc. Is it in this day and age the best ideas to have our synod looking to tithe in these directions? Do we use synod and churchwide to direct our congregations ministries. Sometimes it feels like we do it at St. Mark's according to who has energy instead of a mission that our congregation particularly identifies with.

Just some beginning thoughts...I will write more as time allows.

Eric

Vertical, Horizontal, or Pyramid

Submitted by Eric Ohrtman on Sun, 02/12/2012 - 9:31am.

3DM has me thinking in shapes. Eric, to respond to two pieces you gave in your post. As I think about the ecology of the ELCA and its relationship to my congregation and others I find myself facing uncertainty about the appropriate flow direction for information and accountability. It seems that as we married two very different polities in the 80's and introduced a third in the late 90's early 00's we created an intentional tension that allowed for us to live together. Now, though, that tension has degraded mostly to confusion and all that remains is uncertainty about any chain of command. So, will we function with the top down vertical authority of the Roman Catholic Church? The horizontal congregational polity of the UCC? Or, work at the image of the pyramid? Where there is an innate sense of building and information can flow up or down.

In terms of accountability, I see little. As long as I stay out of moral and legal trouble the Synod is not likely to become involved with my ministry at St. Paul. And, if they do and the congregation does not agree they might defrock or censure, but because we are so desparate for nickels and noses there is no real-world power. I could continue to serve the congregation under a different denominational authority and they would likely be listed as having an opening (akin to those congregations who called openly homosexual clergy prior to the 2009 Churchwide Assembly). The synod does not have the resources or the will to begin legal battles over property or denominational affiliation. On one hand, I appreciate the level of commitment and self-accountability that is required of each congregation (the UCC is very proud of the covenental relationship with each other and the denomination- this is in reality what we share). On the other, I wish for a clearer structure with the authority and resources to function as needed for discipline and affiliation expectations.

As for pushing vision, I am stuck. I rarely engage the ELCA Initiatives because, quite frankly, my congregation does not care. Like St. Mark, St. Paul has its own mission and vision for justice ministries that emphasizes something slightly different than the ELCA and which changes nearly every year. This year we have devoted our efforts and resources to the eradication of hunger. We will drop several smaller ministries and initiate a few new. Our focus will be primarily local with even our mission trips taking into consideration how they impact the battle against hunger. The struggle with that is that together with the synod and national expressions our resources and influence multiply exponentially. So, out here in a silo we may do well in supporting our local food banks, but with the denomination's backing we may be able to work toward a national movement of local food production and the ending of the market speculation that has depressed third world farmers and created a shortage of food where there should be an abundance.

To summarize, I do not pretend to know which polity would benefit the ELCA's future the most. I do, however, feel quite strongly that the time is ripe for a shift in that polity that would make clearer the avenues of relationship, communication, and authority. One of the disciples in Colville frequently uses the image of the ox drawn cart for his role in ministry. The problem I see is that when he looks over his shoulder in the ELCA, depending on what expression is hitched, the implement he is asked to draw is different.

Eric

Unused Structures, Unfulfilled Potential

Submitted by jtrev on Sun, 02/12/2012 - 3:40pm.

This is a "IMHO" perspective from my rear view window. My bona fides: I've served on Synod Councils and District Councils before it, as well as Synod/District Committees of various sorts. I've done this for about 30 years. Yes, I am a glutten for punishment. I'm now on a glutten free diet.

I agree that we are still a church that can't decide what it is . . . or really wants to be. My hope is that the sexuality decisions and the lack of budget will force some identity on us that will suit us for a while. I think one of THE major problems is a lack of time to evolve clear identities. I think this goes all the way back to the centralizing mergers around 1960. Every time a clear identity began to emerge there was either an restructuring or another merger. Twenty or thirty years is not enough time to have a mature, embraced identity.

The recent loss of dissatisfied congregations may be a major benefit in helping us settle down and decide who we are. I conferred with a congregation that was debating leaving the ELCA. When I asked if people wanted to leave because of the sexuality vote or because of other dissatisfaction with the ELCA the vote was evenly split. I think the recent defections of congregation is a factor in finding identity -- for those who left and those of us who want to stay.

Some observations about how the church works (or doesn't.)

If you have an idea or vision for ministry from your own vision or the ministry of your congregation . . . or that is needed for your congregation you can find a committee or task force at a Synod level from which you can take your idea to a wider audience. Or you can form a work group of your own and take it to the Synod. I know this to be true. Some decades ago the North Pacific District (ALC) formed a Small Town/Rural Ministry structure that became a model for the ALC when small town/rural Pastors started talking, then started acting. The District structure was more than happy to have us do the heavy lifting . . . they didn't have to. They even gave us funding with which to work.
On the other hand, the structure has always suffered from inertia, and will resist attempts to change directions or challenge the existing structure. Ask some of the early emerging ministries about their struggles to be recognized as valid, much less funded. While this seems to contradict #1 above, what it means is that when you DO have an idea, you should find like-minded thinkers so that you have a strong enough base from which to work. The small town/rural ministry committee cited above is an example of this.
Neither the structure of the ELCA nor any of the predecessors ever realized the potential of Synod-wide ministries connecting to congregations. There are exceptions to this -- Living Faithfully in the Oregon Synod is one of them. But for the most part committees did their thing with little or no connection to congregations. This is a problem of the structure being designed top-down. It's more theory and good theology than practical application. We often end up doing work because there is a group (committee) that's supposed to do something rather than a group being formed because something is being done that needs such support. I don't think this is any different than most congregations -- do you?
I think Bishops are gate-keepers . . . permission givers. The ELCA structure includes Clusters. In former iterations of the church these local area structures have been high funtioning -- a source of inter-congregational mission and relationship as well as being a good conduit to the Bishop about what the church in that area is up to. Some Bishops see the Cluster Deans as only their listening posts but have little or no other use for Clusters. Where there has been encouragement for Deans and Clusters to be more active some interesting ministries have emerged.
Invoking #1 -- Clusters can be a great hub for ministry between congregations. But that only happens to the degree that there is initiative from congregations and congregational leaders.
Synod and National SHOULD be resources for mission. But sometimes you have to make enough noise for that to happen.
National IS a mission leader for large iniatives. Lutheran Disaster Relief. Publishing (love it or not, we have it!) Mission Investment Fund. ELCA Endowment. It just seems that we have to plow through all the dross to find the pure ore. But then, ain't that the way life is?

Questions for jtrev

Submitted by Eric Ohrtman on Tue, 02/14/2012 - 9:52am.

First, I am so attuned to gluten free needs (almost 10% of our Sunday morning attendants are gluten free) that I had to read the glutton joke three times before I got it. Nice work. A pun of which my dad would be proud.

Two questions:

1. I would like more on #4. I understand you to be saying, "in a perfect world the Bishop would be in touch with his/her clusters and empowering them to pursue joint mission that might eventually permeate the entirety of the synod (and potentially keep spreading beyond). However, because of the lack of clarity and purpose for clusters in some synods (that should be encouraged by the Bishop) they wallow in uncertainty about the role and never develop any mission."

2. What mission do you see emerging from Augsburg Fortress, MIF, and the Endowment? I can think of a few, but I'd like to read what you are thinking.

Thanks! Eric

Answers.

Submitted by jtrev on Tue, 02/14/2012 - 7:59pm.

CLUSTER ROLE

I think you are accurate in the first half of your perceptions about what I'm saying. I'd push the last clause of the last sentence -- "they wallow in uncertainity about the role and never develop any mission."

I don't think there is any uncertainty about cluster roles. There was no encouragement from Bishop Swanson for clusters to be active. It is more that there is no EXPECTATION of a role or the development of a mission. All of us are busy enough that there was no reason to ask for more work when there was no purpose given.

There has been mission development in Metro Portland but that was tangential to cluster.

Bishop Swanson came out of the LCA and the cluster level of the church was not something they did.

There has been an active ministry going on between two of the East Portland Metro clusters. It has centered in the dimished size of the congregations, and especially one congregation that is in process of ending itself.

There is also more encouragement from Bishop Brauer-Rieke for clusters to be more active in themselves. Deans have begun to have more of a cluster/congregation centered role. Bishop BR is former ALC and served congregations in active clusters (or whatever we called them in the ALC.)

Bishop BR is the first State/Region level leader that I can remember that has intentionally gone to congregations . . . roughly using the cluster structure . . . for listening and talking about his vision for mission, ways of being effective church, and what assets and needs exist at the ground level.

Short Form: There are two possibilities for clusters -- one where the bishop has deans function as his eyes in the cluster. That's top down. The other is for congregations to be working together in logical geographical areas. To date there has been little or no expectation of the latter, although that is beginning to emerge.

Helpful?

NATIONAL CHURCH/MAJOR OPERATIONS

I don't know what to tell you about Augsburg/Fortress. Quality is inconsistant. Where the hell they get some of their writers I couldn't tell you -- maybe former classmates of mangagement people. Take into account that we on the West Coast are a different kettle of fish than the rest of the ELCA. That may account for little that comes out of Augsburg seeming to have much relevence to the ministry I did. Having said that, there are noteable exceptions and an in-house publishing company should be a major asset for an organization as large as our Church.

MIF also seems to be a spotty organization. But they are a key source of low cost financing for church organizations. They seem to be pretty good at building consultation and lending, but my experience with the investment side is not so good. But, again, it is an important resource for a national church.

I serve on OR Synod Endowment, so I know how important the expertise is of the ELCA Endowment. There are some really top-knotch estate planners and consultants. Unfortunately, we are losing them to budget cuts and retirement.

I'd throw LDR in here -- Lutheran Disaster Relief. I worked on the Gulf Coast post-Katrina. The best, most consistant on the ground work was done through congregations. But LDR served as a coordinating body. They could help get people where they needed to be, provide a place through which funding could be channeled and had enough disaster relief experience to help put together contexts. The problem at Katrina was that the scope was SO huge that NONE of the helping agencies were equipped to cope. Normal protocols just were overwhelmed. Unfortunately, when the protocols of very big organizations get overwhelmed they seem to cling to those non-functioning protocols even harder. This applied to LDR, Red Cross, FEMA, Salvation Army, etc. As things settled down these groups became more efficient. But LDR serves a very important world-wide purpose that no congregation or Synod could perform on its own to the scope that is needed.

I think that last sentence sums up the purpose of these National level groups -- they fulfill functions on a large scale that could not be done to that scale by congregations or Synods.

Useful?

John (Happy Valentine's Day -- hug someone who loves you.)

That's helpful

Submitted by Eric Ohrtman on Wed, 02/15/2012 - 9:09am.

John,

Thanks for the reply. I am in total agreement about realities and potentialities. It seems to me that we are uniquely gifted as a denomination to work on not one or two geographical levels, but five. Our combined resources create some dynamic possibilities, but too frequently I see them fail. I guess that I would like to push at the word 'mission'. Despite their external missions to publish, empower congregations, or serve those struck by disaster that as these are organizations of 'the church' their primary mission should be the proclamation, by word and deed, of Christ crucified and resurrected for humankind. It's akin to Luther's explanation of baptismal vocation versus avocation for the believer. We are all called to the same thing at our baptism, but what it looks like is enormously different per the individual. So, as I think about these organizations I want to continue to push their leadership toward a constant refinement that better enables the proclamation of the gospel in their daily work.

Eric

"What does this mean?"

Submitted by jtrev on Wed, 02/15/2012 - 10:55am.

What, exactly is "proclamation by word and deed of Christ crucified . . . "? Does it mean we have to vocalize those cores of Christianity? Does having a core mission statement on the side of the LDR van in Biloxi count? . . . or having the logo on the ELCA web site?

We are probably on the same page here. I would love to see our members -- individuals and mission units -- acutely aware of living lives that are the gospel. I think we see ourselves as matronly old women sitting in our parlors looking out our windows on a world we don't understand anymore instead of seeing and behaving as unique creations of God who have the realization of salvation and live that sense in everything from our daily work to our time in a traffic jam.

I'm much less interested in how I can get the name of Jesus in a conversation and more interested in how my life (our corporate lives) can cause people to ask, "Why do you do that?" which gives me the chance to respond with the name of my Savior instead of using it as a trip-wire on people.

This could be quibbling, but it comes from having a mother and a sister who never missed a chance to push Jesus on their grandchildren and children . . . 3 of the 4 of which remain unchurched and/or hostile to the church. The 4th has just wandered back into the church because her friend, a former catholic, started back on her own and HER experience allowed Rach to say, "Why did you do that?"

Just sayin'

Intentionality, St. Francis, and Churched

Submitted by Eric Ohrtman on Wed, 02/15/2012 - 11:21am.

One of my favorite quotes is attributed to St. Francis, you know it, "Preach the gospel at all times, if necessary, use words."

To me the quote speaks about intentionality, clarity, and joy. Your sentence is perfect, "I would love to see our members -- individuals and mission units -- acutely aware of living lives that are the gospel. "

Finally- have you read the book, "Churched" by Matthew Paul Turner? It sounds a lot like your family situation.

Eric

Clusters

Submitted by ejdull69 on Wed, 02/15/2012 - 5:56pm.

I have been following the conversation on clusters and won't directly responds to anyone but will generally respond to everyone. I have served as cluster dean and also been a part of a cluster that was very important for my connectedness. My experience has suggested that clusters have been very valuable for pastors in regards to text studies and pastoral support type groups. I have not seen a really strong cluster in regards to mission and ministry.

Part of this has to do I suspect because we are becoming increasingly busy as a people. Very few younger people (under 50) are drawn to figuring out a spirituality beyond a congregational level. Let's face it, people in the pews often have a difficult enough time connecting in our congregations. Our ecclesiology gets caught up in business and while important, rarely hits peoples self interest.

I am part of a larger congregation for the Northwest. If I am honest about my self interest as compared to my congregations self interest it is often not in the same place. I want to connect with other congregations, other pastors and see the value in that. My members have a hard enough time connecting in a congregation let alone wanting to connect in an even larger setting. I believe in our synod cluster deans have seen themselves as a listening post and convener for pastors but little else.

I am wondering if there is a way to think of our structure considering mission while practically talking about finances, the business of lives, and what our goals are. Too often we couch things in church language without being practical about the lives we are facing. Should a synod have a different mission than a congregation? Does the congregation serve a synod or the synod a congregation. I don't think we are always clear on that. Or, if we serve each other what does that look like. I know I didn't get any response to this the first time, but is it clear to everyone that all expressions of the church should all be doing the same work of the church? I don't think that is a very efficient way to go. Yes we are all to be about mission and ministry. Yes, we are all to be about serving Jesus. But to often we try to be all things to all people.

Role of Clusters

Submitted by jtrev on Wed, 02/15/2012 - 8:30pm.

You've packed a lot in a short piece.

Here's what clusters could do for congregations and grow church and mutuality:

training -- ganged resources could bring in good trainers for . . . what ever -- council, teachers, treasurers, endowments.
a sense of mutuality for small youth groups -- fun events, mission/service events, etc. Also -- taking advantage of major events like the National Youth Gathering to bring kids who have had that sort of taste into a local setting with the same sorts of goals and visions.
worship -- in Salem one of the Mo. Synod churches has a "battle of the bands" in the spring -- churches are invited to bring their bands, Thrivent pays for hot dogs and pop. What about maximizing the talents we have for a mutually uplifting worship?
Four of our congregations have made trips to disaster areas. Two of the congregations have formed an informal allience. One year when one was going and the other not, the when who didn't go ponied up over $1,000 to help the other group.

I think one of the keys to this is someone who finds out what's going on in our congregations. When I was a working Pastor and a Dean I didn't have much energy for this. But why not take advantage of the retired men and women who could be deans? I now have the time to fiddle around like this.

There is a key word here -- mutuality. I don't work for the Bishop but I serve under him and I expect him to be responsive to my needs and the needs of the congregations. That, too me, is mutuality. What could congregations do that is mutual service, mutual benefit beyond our parish boundaries? Perhaps we need to get past ourselves and the old forms and simply ask, how can we more effectively serve Christ . . . together.

About Reading

Submitted by jtrev on Wed, 02/15/2012 - 8:17pm.

I haven't read "Churched."

I try to avoid reading either biographies or technical/trade material. I'm much more comfortable in fiction. The actuality of life is to close otherwise. (grin)

Altho . . . I'm just about through with "Dilemma," by Father Albert Cutie'. It's his story of a passionate call to priesthood, his passion for ministry, his dissallutionment with the practices of the Roman Catholic church, falling in love, being caught, and becoming an Episcopal Priest. It's a good read, if a little florid. I think it's good for those who are ordained to read and see the parallels -- as such it is germane to our conversation.

I picked up a Doig novel at a library sale. He's one of these guys out of Wallace Stegner's writers' stable at Stanford. Some of his stuff is excellent. Some is okay.