Special Event for Pastor's & Congregational Leaders
Last week Jan reminded me we needed to get a, "Save the Date" reminder to Synod Leaders. So we sat down and put together a reminder and sent it out on email. Yea, well done I thought. In less than an hour I received feed back which was all over the map. One leader wanted to know if there would be anything of use in this workshop. Apparently they were not impressed with other workshops we have held as having anything useful. They did not want to waste people's time with theory. The next response was why in the heck were we holding this on a weekday? Younger leaders will not be there. Another person requested that we provide something new rather than the same old same old otherwise they would not come. Another leader said they might come but did not want to hear anything about STEWARDSHIP as this was a "dead horse".
Sitting with this feedback and praying about it I decided to create a discussion about what people would like to know. What would be helpful to you and your faith group? Is the time for this event wrong? Is Thursday October 18th the wrong day? The Bishop Convocation is scheduled for October 22-24th. Is this bad timing?
The working agenda is
More Faith, Less Fear about funding...Bishop David
Money is a tool for mission not the reverse...Pastor Keys
It's all relational...Pastor Chase
Possibilities,m energizing and implementation (developing a plan)
Talking about $$ gene rationally...Pastor Reed, Leaven Leader Derrick Fenwick
Partners and collaborators...Pastor Andy Wendell and Pastor Chris Kramer
Well what do you all think? I believe this is a soul filled conversation about what the Holy Spirit is doing. Is Plate & Pledge keeping up with your needs?
I want to hear from you...
Feedback
Hey Glenn:
You know I love you, man, so take this in that spirit as you ask for feedback.
What I think you're missing is pure and simple: solutions.
It's true; don't waste people's time with theory, as per the feedback you've already received. Give us something of value; something we can use. Tell us "what's working" out there in other congregations and synods. Tell us that you're visiting non-denom places that are teeming with young people, and what we can learn from them.
Give us and our leaders something useful. Remember that synod listening thing in Bend last year? I had 5 of our church council people there, and as they left after lunch, 3 of them said, "So tell us again why you thought it was so important for us to be here?" I didn't have a good answer. We didn't talk about the struggles, challenges, and solutions that were working in our congregations. After reporting back to our church council about the worthiness of the event (or last thereof), I don't think I could drag them to another one.
Like at last year's Bishop's Convocation, when Dave had an awesome PowerPoint presentation about the challenges of ministry in our Oregon context, and when he ended, he said something like, "Well, that's our context. I don't know what to do about it, but that's our context."
I was waiting, I really was, to hear something of substance about pragmatic solutions to the challenges that we're all facing, but left with nothing. Even at this year's synod assembly, my delegates certainly enjoyed Sunriver, but wondered why we got so little done in so much time. And they wondered why we didn't pray together as sessions ended to bless the meals we were about to eat. Why didn't we pray?
I don't know, Glenn, but if that's all the better that the synod office can do, it's best to pack up and go home.
You can change it, Glenn. You're the spark, man, and if you light some fires under your equally gifted colleague, Michael, you can set this place on fire. Or come on over to Zion and check out what's happening here. We grew 10% in giving, attendance, and membership last year, and we're growing this year, though the percentages are less than 10% but hey, things are working. Or let's do a Google+ hangout and video chat. Or even better yet, have a workshop with Knapp and Knutson and include the Sunriver team and have them tell us what's working in each of those places.
Finally, Glenn, stewardship is not a dead horse. Why not start a discussion on "Not Your Father's Offering Plate." In the first chapters he offers three things that a congregation must have to have good stewardship. Unfortunately not all congregations have all three, so perhps the best place to start is building on those.
So hang in there, Glenn! You know I think you rock, man. Thanks for asking the question.
Eric Burtness
Zion, Redmond
". . . love the one your with."
I don't have a problem with the Bishop laying out context without solutions. I hear him asking for soluable tries and reports of what does work. I also give him credit for being adventurous with out of the box attempts at community/ministry.
For what it's worth, I thought the cluster conversation I went to was too centrally scripted and directed. Perhaps I misunderstood the agenda, but thought it was to be the Synod listening to congregations and it seemed more the Synod telling us how we should talk. . . without giving quite enough time to talk. BUT -- it was more than we had in the past and I hope it was as much a learning experience for Synod as a fait accompli. (As opposed to a Fiat Spyder.)
I agree with Eric that the Assemblies are overblown, over budget, and over time. But I think I'm hearing that's being seriously rethought. I hope so. It would be nice if our small congregations could afford to come to them. I DO appreciate the quality of the main speakers over the last years. That's almost worth the price of admission and, Eric, it is a point at which we are getting useful information and motivation around what is working. Having said that, I don't mind not having to sit through them any more. And don't give me any crap about the "Maas At the Mic" award. I haven't won that in over 5 years. (grin)
Oh, Glenn . . .
The title of the above piece is, of course, from The Stones piece: "If you can't love the one you want, love the one you're with."
It was this Bishop who taught me that if you keep running into walls and closed doors, turn to the doors that are open. Most people bitch as a way to avoid doing anything. focus on those who are open and smile politely at the rest . . . muttering quietly under your breath.
Out here in the fields...
John, I understand your impression that the Leadership retreat was too scripted and developed. I contrast this with Dave sharing with attendees that, starting with the "News From The Field", what we worked on was not at all what the planners had anticipated.
The first work of the Leadership Retreat was this "News From the Field". Five people were invited to present. Pastor Mike Keys shared a summary of congregational realities and what synod staff are hearing and experiencing in their work. Synod Vice President Debby Chenoweth spoke to the ELCA LIFT report and the present state of our churchwide system and changes happening at this level. Andrea Scofield from Camp Lutherwood of Oregon and Lisa Gray, who works with youth ministries synodically as well as in her own congregation, spoke to current realities from key stakeholders representing youth and outdoor ministries.
Other individuals spoke but the argument could be made that more people should have been invited to present. There might have been presentations where "status quo" currently works for a congregation or where "something new" is what works, to compare and contrast with the data that was presented.
We could have tried to listen to many more people at the retreat. Yet simply summarizing and working the data from those five presentations was daunting given the event's time limitation. Discussions like this before and after events might help us use our time at events differently and more effectively.
Opening this discussion provides an opportunity (opens the door as you put it, John) to hone this event to what those invited feel they need. I look forward to other perspectives and suggestions that are posted here. Reviewing the event's agenda (and from what I know of the presenters) I would not expect the discussions to be just theory. Perhaps the goal is insuring they are both applicable and practical to individual situations and under different scenarios.
And, lastly, because of your "Love The One Your With..." I will both continue with a subject that quotes song lyrics and will likely listen to Stephen Stills' self-titled album that contains the song you quoted tonight.
Wrong Group, Wrong Event
I THOUGHT that was Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young, but couldn't get the Stones out of my mind. "Doot doot doot doot . . . .dootdootdoo doot." coda
I think you have the Leadership retreat and the Listening Posts mixed up, Gary. I think the leadership retreat showed the evolution of leadership from Synod. And, Eric -- it was solution and forward movement based. Eric and I were referring to the Cluster Listening Posts that Synod sponsored not long after the Bishop's ascension to the office.
Ascension...
Hey John: Speaking of ascension, when ya going to ascend to become the synod's consultant? You'd do an awesome job!
And Gary, yes, John and I were referring to the Cluster Listening Posts. I was under the impression where we would be listened to, but it was the other way around, and just not a good use of time.
And also, Gary, if you look back on the synod's discussion lists, John and I resolved a whole lotta synod organizational issues related to non-functioning Clusters to become more affinity based groups, led by healthy Team Leaders in vibrant and healthy congregations, relying more on affinity than geography, and utilizing existing and free online communication/meeting tools. There were over 30 notes back and forth about a year ago, and it was a stupendous piece of collaboration with brilliant ideas for revitalizing congregational work and supporting local pastors. And at no cost!
Alas, it fell flat and didn't get any legs.
I appreciate your work on this, Gary, as supporting the work and ministry of the local congregations and pastors should be the focus of synodical work. Grass roots, flat-world networking is what will move things forward, rather than 1980's bureaucratic systems.
Having said that, though, Maas would look good in a Mitre as the synod's Most Excellent Consultant...
Eric Burtness
Zion, Redmond
RE: Maas in a mitre
that will be a cold day in hell! (with apologies to Dante Allegretti)
The only miter I aspire to is a 12", double pull miter saw.
What would inspire me for stewardship
Hi Glenn, thanks for asking--and for planning this event. I did save the date when I got your email, and I bet a lot of others did too, thankful that you are offering help with this challenging ministry area. (We are not the people who emailed you... but there are lots of us out here. ) On scheduling, October 18 is okay for me, though September would be better, because that is when we will plan our fall drive. A weekday works better for me, as a pastor and mom of school-age kids. A full Saturday (day off) is tough. I would be helped by two things:
1) Ideas that are working in other parishes similar to mine. For me it doesn't have to be a full Stewardship 101 course. Doesn't have to be earthshaking either-- if there were one brilliant plan to solve this issue we would have heard it already. So this could be about small tips or discoveries. I'd appreciate hearing the story of a parish that has revised its stewardship approach, and why, and how. Brief reflection on a book someone read and one way it will change their practice. A pastor dealing with the complexities of preaching on money. I can learn from approaches that are vital for others -- presented in a non-know-it-all fashion. Are there some parishes where there's a spark of life around stewardship? A person with a genuine passion for this? A good-hearted giver who could testify? We should hear from them. (These would not be the "dead horse" people, naturally.) I am thinking of presenters rather than round-table experiences, but small group conversation could be part of it. Maybe each participant could bring one positive insight or discovery to share in a 1-2 minute "lightning round" format.
2) Inspiration from other leaders. Yes, Spirit has to be in this. Stewardship can be wearying, but it can also be an energizing challenge. What I need is to be around others who are creatively engaging this task, and people who have a sense of hope and faith around it. Scripture study would be great-- perhaps Bishop Dave already has this in mind.
I think the outline you present is a good one. I like the "Faith not Fear" theme and the prospect of hearing from Melissa Reed, Derrick Fenwick, Andrew Wendell, and Chris Kramer. I have a hunch that a shorter day might draw more participants, say 8:30-2 pm? One thing that matters is that our time be used well and the schedule move along in a purposeful way. Thanks again.
Working models of creative stewardship
Pastor Chase & all:
As we prepare to lead this stewardship event in October, I am excited to not be part of another rollout of the upcoming model of pledge card, offering plate motivational stewardship. I am excited to contribute to showing creative, evolving finance models for congregations that not only work, but work sustainably and simultaneously also benefit community beyond the local ELCA congregation.
This event assumes that you are already faithfully attending to engaging God's faithful people with ample opportunities to gratefully give their lives to the service of their Lord. Perhaps we will have good resources there to keep your edge honed... But -
The center of this stewardship event is to first showcase functioning new congregational stewardship moves that supplement congregational mission capacity, then to practically and theologically reflect in community on how models like these could enhance ministries in other settings like yours.
Come and see!
-Chris
What has worked well with responsive Christianity (giving)
Thinking...
Hey John: I think those each are necessary components, but in my experience, they're secondary, or a subset of stewardship.
In "Not Your Father's Offering Plate" then mention three critical things if a congregation is going to grow their levels of stewardship. Summarizing here (since I've given 5 copies to our Finance/Stewardship team),
1. Trust in the pastor and the congregation's leadership. Without trust, stewardship simply sucks. Mere transparancy doesn't build trust if it's not trustworship.
2. A clear and discernable vision, trumpeted and clearly articulated by the pastor. Vision is different from mission. And, IMMHO, vision is challenging to discern, but when you got it, you know it.
3. Reliable financial accounting and accountability.
Then, once those are in place, the three you mention are very necessary components. In my experience, the three I mention should come first, and then the three you mention flow from that.
People financially support congregations that are making a difference in changing people's lives of faith in discipleship, and are touching lives in the community. People no longer trust institutions, I think we'd agree, and congregations have to gain people's trust, as it isn't a given any longer.
At least those are the things that are driving the growing stewardship emphasis at Zion, and we're seeing the results, and have plans for the next couple years of growing our giving.
Oh, and Glenn, dude, where did you go? John and I are fully capable of solving the synod's stewardship issues, but only if you jump in on the conversation!
Eric Burtness
Zion, Redmond
Amen to showcasing working models
Hey Chris,
Presentations of new, working finance models to fund ministries that benefit communities beyond the congregation?
I do want to come and see.
Gary
Vision
Hi Gary: I got an email note from you that there's a note from you to me about vision development/discernment, and I can't for the life of me figure out where it is on SoulCafe. Oh well....
No, my upcoming book doesn't deal so much with vision development, but rather on asking solution-based questions, based on the way that Jesus asked questions in the Gospel. It's a fascinating concept and discovery that, I think, changes the way not only that you look at the questions of Jesus, but how you approach congregational life, especially in times of conflict, or vision-casting, or counseling, or just in general life.
But there is a whole lot that goes with vision discernment that I think can be learned. Many people think vision and mission are pretty much the same thing, but once you separate them, discern them, strategize on how to accomplish each, you pretty quickly discover how different they are.
So that's what I could have emailed you back if I would have been able to see your email somewhere on this SoulCafe system.
Oh, and by the way, an Oregon Synod Facebook group could be awesome, and much more accessible than SoulCafe, IMMHO. There's an ELCA Clergy List that has almost 4,000 people, and it's very active. It's a good model for collaboration.
Rock on, Gary.
Eric Burtness
Zion Lutheran
Okay
Yeah, I buy that, Eric. Transparent chicanery doesn't help anyone -- neither those who see it nor those who get caught.
Eric's New Book
Before you read anything else I write you should know I'm half Jewish . . . on my mom's side.
So Eric is going to write a book for the goyim about something all Jews know. Example: A Lutheran Pastor (maybe Eric) comes up to the Rebbe and asks, "Why do you Jews always answer a question with a question?", to which Rabbi Cohen replies, "Why do you ask?"
I dunno, it just struck me funny. But, what the heck, Eric, if the book sells well send me some royaltys for using a concept of my people. Well, half a share, I'm only half Jewish.
Oh, and don't tell Hitler I'm a Jew.
Half...
Hey Gary: Well, as far as I know, Jesus was half Jewish and half Norwegian. That's how we get lutefisk. So you're in good company.
And yes, the book is kind of based on the Jewish methodology of asking questions, but Jesus actually did something more/different from that in asking solution based questions. Hopefully it'll be something your congregation uses in Lent, as the publicity for it will start to come out in the next month or so. Much more about that in the book, but it sets the stage for many things that are helpful in a congregation's move toward health. It's great, transformative stuff.
I could say much more but then it would seem like I'm writing a book, and heck, I just did that!
Eric Burtness
Zion Lutheran, Redmond
Where Was Pastor Glenn?
Eric reminded us that in the first chapter of, "Not Your Parents Offering Plate", on-going researchers kept asking, "Why do people give"?. The answers were rather consistent through out the years:
1. people believe in the mssion of the organization
2. there was a high regard for staff leadership
3. people trusted the fiscal responsibility of the institution
This applies to non-profits, churches (which are non-profits) and synods too! I believe there is no better way to talk about the mission, develop/redevelop belief in the leadership and build/rebuild a culture of turst in fiscal responsibility more that face-to-face visits. When we first visited clusters the Bishop's message was,"we are here, we care and we will be back". Being there with each cluster showed that the Oregon Synod Staff and leadership were there.
Recording all the responses we put them up on the walls of the Synod Conference room and not only studied them we also prayed with them for weeks. We did care about what was happening in each of the diverse parts of this great state.
In response to,"we will be back" the whole staff has been on the road much more re-visiting and listening. I was recently in Roseburg, Albany, Hood River, Hermiston and tonight Junction City. At one location I had meetings. At another, conversation with lay leaders. In Hermiston I sang in the choir. In Junction City I will be helping with the annual fund raiser duirng the Scan Fest. I am not alone. The staff has been on the road. Bishop David, Rev. Kintner, Pastor Keys, and Jan Wierma have been traveling, visitng and sharing what we are learning.
This is my testimony to the mission of our congregations, large and small, here in Oregon.
Glenn
Why People Give
This is right on, Glenn. We also know that people give different depending on their age or generation. "Builders" give because it is the right thing to do. "Boomers" give if they believe in the project, program or local expression of the institution. The under 40 crowd gives differently again, but out of a severly limited financial base. What we're not dealing with realistically as a church is the fact that our giving - no matter what model we use - comes from older generations and will not easily translate to the generations coming up, who are largely un-churched and carrying significant personal debt.
A pastor friend recently referred to "last standing" congregations or pastors, that is those who continue to function because they are at least more functional that other surrounding faith communities. That is to say that they function largely from members of other congregations who are pre-trained and pre-inclinded to function in traditional ways. That strategy is time limited at best.
I'm excited for the upcoming Money and Congregations event because for the first time we'll be dealing honestly with the question of how do we fund ministry (not just the congregation) taking into account the realities of the world in which we live.
Very true. But...
Hey Dave:
You have some good points, and I'm like to augment a bit of what you say.
Yes, the under 40 crowd gives differently, and yes, out of a severely limited financial base. However, in my experience, the under 40 crowd is very philanthropic and they give of their time and energy to causes that make a difference in people's lives that are unincumbered with bureaucratic systems. They're tired of political infighting, do-nothing systems (like congress), sandbox fighting (like sexuality), and money that's wasted on red tape rather than on getting things done. Personally, I don't think they're liberal in their thinking, though their passion for tolerance and respect has often been seen as "liberal".
The first stewardship challenge we face, I think, is to model the kind of vision for the church that they support, that is, preaching the Gospel in such a way that it upholds a higher moral standard that they're looking for, while upholding tolerance and respect. I think Rick Warren has done a great job with that with Saddleback's focus on fighting HIV/AIDS in Africa, while upholding a higher moral standard.
The second stewardship challange we face, I think, is focusing on the stewardship of "builders" who give because it is the right thing to do. In my personal opinion, the 2009 CWA alienated many of the builders (our largest demographic) because, in their minds, the CWA voted on something that they were fundamentally opposed to. While we can argue all day long about the issue of sexuality, the result is that it alienated our base, and there are many who don't give, even though they once thought that it is the "right thing to do."
You heard me speak against the 2009 CWA decision many times at synod assemblies, but you never heard me speak against people who are gay. Never once did I equate "what the Bible says" with the issue of sexuality. Multiple times I said that pragmatically and strategically it was a poor decision as it would alienate enough people that it simply wasn't a prudent move to make.
Some congregations have chosen to set up a dual track of giving to support the local congregation, with the option of the percentage of congregational benevolence going to, or not going to, the Synod/ELCA. Those congregations have seen an increase in overall giving as people feel they have a personal option to support the ministry of their local congregation without having their benevolence portion go to a "cause" they don't feel they can support. Irrational as it is, some people quit giving to their local congregation because of CWA 2009, and this dual option has restored their financial support.
It's a very challenging church world out there, as we all know, and even more so in Central Oregon, where unemployment/underemployment is much higher than in "the valley." Nonetheless, we're making progress here. Our council leadership has read "Not Your Father's Offering Place" and it has really helped our focus and vision, and has raised the level of giving even in these tough economic times.
So. Just some morning thoughts over here in God's Country.
Eric Burtness
Zion, Redmond
Same page
Hi Eric,
I don't think we have a lot of disagreement here. I wholly agree with what you say about the under 40 crowd. The fact that they don't have a lot of money doesn't mean they're not generous with their time and energy - not at all! I'm a big fan of these folks. We need to listen to them a WHOLE lot more. They think differently in many ways, and they're on target.
How many of our builder financial base have been alienated by the 2009 churchwide decisions is, to my mind, not as clear as a lot of people wish to make it. People also don't factor in the increased health and vitality in congregations due to these very chagnes. There are many pieces of social change in play which cause traditional church members to engage or disengage, but this isn't the point. If the topic is funding ministry than we need to be looking long term. How will we in the church fund ministry 20, 40 or 50 years from now? It will not be from the largess of the builders. Now is not too late to realize that funding ministry through plate and pledge will not take us very far into the future.
I find Not Your Father's Offering Plate a helpful book. We're employing much of the perspective here to our engagement with congregations around Mission Support. The heart of all this is around being strategic about individual givers and sources of funds. Gone are the days we can just pass the plate (or the pledge cards) treating everybody the same and assuming everything will come out in the wash. We need to not be afraid of money talk and calling out peoples unique gifts. Sounds like that's what you're doing at Zion. That's great. Now the question is 20 year into the future how many of those supporting . . . (you fill in the blank) will still be doing so? And what sources of support will fill the void?
Two "For What It's Worths"
Regarding what, why, and how many have left.
For me it is more important to focus on moving forward with the ministries that have been laid before us through these decisions and less important to keep hand-wringing about those who left or want to. I think of what Gameliel said to the Sanhedren when they were considering what to do with the post-resurrection/ascension Apostles. His salient point that was to leave them be, because if they were of God, to oppose them was to put themselves in opposition to God and if they were not of God they would fail.
I think we have to assume that our choices are of God and to discover how that plays out -- including the funding of ministry -- and let those who see their choices being in a different direction go in that direction with our blessings . . . whether that's reciprocated or not.
Like I said . . . for what it's worth.
One "For What It's Worth"...
Hey John:
As always, You The Man.
And I do think that the accumulations of factors since 1988 has something to do with the loss of membership in the ELCA, and it isn't just the issue of sexuality that "split the sheets". Many of the disagreements in the ELCA go way back to the fault lines of the PCB ALC/LCA. I think that most of us would agree that we haven't done a very good job of blending our families.
Plus, even here in the Oregon Synod, the loss of ELCA members has been dramatic. When I came to Oregon 13 years ago there were about 52,000 ELCA Lutherans in the state of 3.5 million, representing 1.8 percent of the population. Now there are less than 40,000 ELCA Lutherans in the state of 4 million, representing 1 percent of the population in 2012.
So, in a sense, we're almost 50% less of the Oregon state percentage of the population in 2012 as we were in 1997. And the total number of ELCA Oregon Lutherans has dropped about 25% in that time.
Now I fully suspect you're thinking, "Hmmmm....if all that happened "while" Burtness was here, maybe it happened "because" Burtness was here."
Ah, John, I hope you're not thinking that. So stop on by on one of your trips to Prineville and I'll buy you a strong cup of morning coffee. I think we can get all the synod's issues resolved in about 2 hours sitting on Main Street. We'd just have to get someone to listen to us, though...
Eric Burtness
Zion, Redmond
Glenn's Post, RE: Synod on the go
Good on ya.
Keep it up.
All speaking the same language
Good afternoon. I have been silently following your thread with interest, mostly because as a development professional this issue interests me and as a member of the church, I pray for the advancement of our ministry daily.
There have been some wonderful issues brought up here, but as per usual it seems we Lutherans once again are straying from the main point here, which is stewardship. Why are Lutherans afraid to ask for money? We all know that in the outside world, without money it is very difficult to accomplish anything. Why in the church do we think that all we have to do is pray for something and things will change. I don't believe that. I believe that we are the makers of change. Until the church starts asking for help from its membership, along with prayer, of course, nothing will change.
The younger generation is having a more difficult time giving money, but they are easily activated for a cause to work for change. Shouldn't we be helping them when they want to help? Shouldn't our older members be giving to aid the younger ones to work? The Red Cross is a wonderful agency, but without money, they can't help anybody and without younger volunteers, nobody can work with the money they are given.
Until we ask for money with a purpose, we are doomed to not receive any. We can not continue to be afraid to ask. Maybe someone needs to teach us how to ASK.
"With a purpose"
Hey Mieke:
Great points! I wasn't comfortable with "the ask" until we did a 1.2 mil capital campaign at St. Matthew about 10 years ago. Since then I've become very comfortable.
However, your point of asking for money "with a purpose" is spot on. It's not just "the ask", it's the purpose and vision toward which the money is given. Once that's there, "the ask" becomes much easier, and people give beyond their means.
IMMHO that's where the synod could use some help. Budget presentations should be the most exciting time of synod assemblies in showing the results of what people give with specific and attainable solutions for how the budget can grow in the coming year. But alas, at synod assemblies we have a line item budget and presentation that makes me feel like I'd rather be getting a root canal than listen to it.
"Not Your Father's Offering Plate" offers a great alternative to the line item budget presentation, which is akin to paying taxes, or paying the light bill. You pay both, but there's no joy in Smallville for doing so.
What I did here at Zion when I started is gave 'em figures of our 25 drop in worship attendance, giving, and membership and said that if those trends continue, in 10 years we'll be a two-point congregation with 65 in worship and we'll struggle to pay the light bill. OR....we could make some dramatic (albeit slow), specific, systemic changes and be a congregation that worships 250 on Sunday mornings in 10 years.
It's a choice. But the first thing to do is recognize that there's a dramatic problem, that there is a solution, and that there are specific steps towards that solution.
Again, IMMHO, until we take seriously that in 13 years we've lost almost 50% "market share" in Oregon's population, that there's a dramatic problem and that we can't keep doing "business as usual", and that there is a solution, and there are specific steps toward that solution, there's no real progress to be made.
At Zion the "problems" were systemic, and required a systemic solution with specific steps. We had a great council meeting last week (90 minutes...) and approved two huge steps toward the solution. Two weeks ago at a congregational Town Hall Meeting I laid out a 1, 2, and 5 year vision/solution plan that was very well received. People personally didn't agree with every part of it, but there's enough trust here that they affirmed it in principle. As we live into that this fall with our Stewardship Emphasis, "the ask" will be much easier.
Because it's giving "with a purpose."
I think there's something to be learned from what we've done at Zion for what can happen in the synod. But it requires first acknowledging that the patient is on hospice life support, in need of a heart transplant and a blood transfusion, and that band-aids ain't gonna work anymore.
It's working at Zion. Perhaps a systemic new vision solution could work in the synod, too.
Eric Burtness
Zion, Redmond