The Presbyterian Outlook

News and Articles from the The Presbyterian Outlook

Register Login Donate Subscribe

Top Search/Contact Area

  • Be A Fan

  • Follow Us

  • Photos

  • Pin It!

    • Home
      • About us
      • Advertise with the Outlook
      • Submissions
    • Presbyterian Hub
      • Editorials
      • Outlook Features
      • Digital Issues
      • Editor’s viewpoints
      • What’s right?
      • Let’s connect
    • News +
      Current Affairs
      • Outlook Reporting
      • Presbyterian News Service
      • Religion News Service
      • News from other sources
    • Ministry + Theology
      • InSights Opinions
      • Benedictory
      • Guest commentary
    • Faith + Culture
      • Book Reviews
      • He/She Said
      • Movie Reviews
    • Ministry Resources
      • Outlook Standard Lessons
      • Outlook Horizons Studies
      • Worship Resources
      • Looking into the lectionary
      • Bulletin Inserts
      • Webinars
      • Hymns
      • Faith Formation Resources
    • Outpost Blog
    • Classifieds
      • Classified advertising

    Turning the Holy Spirit loose in our polity

    August 27, 2019 by The Presbyterian Outlook Leave a Comment

    Over the past eight years, I have had the opportunity to work as a consultant with numerous congregations and presbyteries around the country, trying to help them face directly into the adaptive challenges all churches face.

    Each church presents a unique case based on factors like size, average age of its membership, financial resources and location. However, there are also a few basic issues with which all churches wrestle in common. One of these basic issues is a shift in our polity that took place many years ago, but into which we have not yet fully lived. Two stories will help illuminate this issue.

    Case study: Committee on Ministry

    I was asked by a presbytery to work with its Committee on Ministry. Like almost all Presbyterian leaders, the members of the COM knew they need to do things differently in the future than they had done in the past. Almost everyone across our denomination agrees things need to change; we just don’t know what those changes ought to be.

    These COM members had read and discussed Tod Bolsinger’s book, “Canoeing the Mountains.” They could do a pretty good job of describing the difference between technical and adaptive change. They could talk about the importance of helping congregations make the turn from an attractional to a missional emphasis. Nonetheless, they felt stuck. Stuck and frustrated —and edging a bit toward despair.

    As we talked, I asked them how many times they thought the phrase “Committee on Ministry” appeared in the Book of Order. The guesses ranged from 10 to 25. I then asked them to look up the phrase in the index at the back of the book, so that they could locate all the citations for it. There were some flummoxed looks as people began to thumb through the index.

    “There aren’t any citations for ‘Committee on Ministry,’” one of them finally said. “There’s only a note to look up something called ‘Pastor, Counselor, and Advisor to Ministers of the Word and Sacrament and Congregations.’”

    When they looked up that phrase in the index, they were directed to G-3.0307; but they still couldn’t find the term “Committee on Ministry.” Instead, the section charges each presbytery to “develop and maintain mechanisms and processes” to support pastors, commissioned ruling elders, certified Christian educators and the congregations they serve. Clearly defined COMs, they discovered, had become a more general “mechanism and process.”

    As my time with the committee drew toward a close, I said I had a single recommendation for them. I asked all the committee members to bring their COM policy manuals with them to the next meeting, go out to the parking lot, put the binders into a pile and burn them. They began to laugh, but became more subdued when they realized I wasn’t laughing with them. Not much more was said about my recommendation. As far as I know, they have yet to light their policy manual pyre.

    Case study: Transitional co-pastorate

    A year later, I was helping a session explore the possibility of using an intentional transitional co-pastorate, a model for pastoral transition to which a growing number of presbyteries are becoming open.

    The church had all the marks of being a good candidate for the model. Its pastor had announced his retirement date a bit over a year in advance. It was a healthy congregation and clear about what its mission was going to continue to be. The congregation deeply appreciated its pastor’s service, but knew both he and it would be fine when he left.

    The session’s primary worry for the ensuing transitional period was that if the church went through a traditional interim pastorate, it would lose much of the momentum it had built over the past several years.

    The congregation planned on forming a Pastor Nominating Committee (PNC) and finding their next pastor while their current pastor was still in place. The two would serve as co-pastors for a few months, after which the longer serving pastor would leave. The more-recently-called one would then become the church’s solo pastor.

    I encouraged the session to take its request to the next COM meeting to seek the committee’s blessing. The subcommittee that reviewed their request voted to recommend that the full COM allow it to proceed.

    During the discussion of the motion before the full committee, the presbytery’s stated clerk said, “I know Jim says he is aware of other presbyteries that have allowed this process to be used; but I’ve talked with other stated clerks, and none of us see where the Book of Order permits it.” The committee took her concern into consideration, but still voted to allow this particular congregation to follow a different path.

    Freedom and flexibility

    Here’s the issue both of these stories help reveal.

    The Book of Order developed for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) after the 1983 reunion of the northern and southern streams of the American Presbyterian family followed the pattern of the documents used in both former denominations. Its Form of Government (all the “G” sections in the Book of Order) read like a regulatory manual, giving us pretty detailed rules about what we could and couldn’t do.

    Over the years, amendments to it were typically prompted by a bad thing that had happened in a particular church, presbytery or synod. We made another rule everyone had to follow, a rule that usually had the effect of adding one more entry to the list of things we couldn’t do. It enabled a form of ecclesial gatekeeping based on case law precedent: encouraging doing the things “we’ve always done” and discouraging innovation.

    In 2010, the General Assembly voted to approve a new Form of Government, a vote that was confirmed by the presbyteries the following year.

    The “new” Form of Government (I hear some people using that adjective even today) was developed for the purpose of shifting the spirit of our polity, so that it would become a far less regulatory, far more permission-giving one. A document developed by the Office of the General Assembly to help sessions understand the intent of what is still our current Form of Government summarized that intent in this way (emphases are original to the document):

    With greater freedom and flexibility, the new Form of Government encourages congregations and councils to focus on God’s mission and how they can faithfully participate in this mission. In offering a structure that is more horizontal than hierarchical, the new Form of Government encourages the church to be open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit as it seeks to be Christ’s body and live out its calling as a community of faith, hope, love and witness.

    It is this greater freedom and flexibility, shaped by a focus on the needs of the mission of the particular church or presbytery and open to the life-giving, innovative winds of the Holy Spirit that is the hallmark of our Form of Government. That freedom and flexibility is what many of us still fail to live into fully.

    My sense of what happened is that this new freedom scared many of us to death. The new openness of the Form of Government meant that we were going to have to discern the way forward for each particular request presented to us, rather than having a set of rules that would excuse us from having to do that often-messy work. We find it hard to say “yes” to one church and “no” to another, even when it’s clear the first church’s mission would be enhanced by what they ask for while the second church’s would not.

    So what did we do in the face of this tension? Most of the groups with whom I have worked will say they want the freedom to do whatever is best for a church’s or pastor’s ministry. However, they continue to take a regulatory approach to their work. The primary way they maintain their status as a regulatory body is by using the operations/process manual they developed under the older Form of Government.

    This is the reason I recommended the COM with which I was working burn all their policy manuals. Presbyteries, sessions and committees need to let go of their older, more regulatory policy manuals and develop policies rooted in the radical freedom our Form of Government gives them.

    Unless they free themselves to discern God’s will on a case-by-case basis, they will almost always unconsciously default to a conservative, regulatory approach. Until our councils learn how to “focus on God’s mission and how they can faithfully participate in this mission,” we will continue to struggle to discover those new forms of church God is so desperately trying to show us.

    The Spirit’s leadership

    If you’re not quite ready to burn all your policy manuals, let me make an alternate – perhaps gentler – recommendation.

    If we want to be open to the future-facing leadership of the Spirit more than to the precedents of the past, then we need to turn the Holy Spirit loose.

    One of the best ways we can turn the Holy Spirit loose is to change our way of reading the Book of Order from “I don’t see where it says we can do that” to “I don’t see any place where it says we can’t give that a try.”

    Making the shift from the language of “shall,” “must” and “cannot” to the language of “why not?” will make it more possible for us to notice where the Spirit is at work in innovative and life-giving ways.

    Will this permission-giving approach create some messes along the way? Sure, but so does the regulatory approach. Will it be hard to say “yes” to one church but “no” to another in a very similar situation? Sure, but the work of true discernment always includes having the courage to say either “yes” and “no,” based on which answer will better enhance the church’s mission.

    The wind of the Spirit is blowing through the church today with the gale force power of Pentecost. Let’s take the risk of unfurling the sails of our churches into that wind and see where God wants to take us.

    JIM KITCHENS co-founded PneuMatrix to help presbyteries and churches engage adaptive change. He lives in Sacramento, California.

    Share this...
    Share on Facebook
    Facebook
    Pin on Pinterest
    Pinterest
    Tweet about this on Twitter
    Twitter
    Share on LinkedIn
    Linkedin

    Outlook Features Tags: More News - Homepage

    Leave a Reply Cancel reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Related Posts

    • Pastors and the Sabbath: God set the example

      Summer is supposed to be a time when time almost stops, with long slow days spent reading books and picking berries and fishing and hiking and drinking an icy something and yakking with the relatives. You're supposed to be able to eat dinner in your bathing suit or your pajamas…

    • History, Mystery and the Christmas Story

      Wise men from afar, angel visitors to shepherds in the night, a child cradled in a manger — through what lens shall these stories be viewed? Are they to be placed in the same mental file with "The Legends of King Arthur" — or are they events with names and…

    • Earning hope

      These are cynical times, and this is supposed to be a season of hope. We have people who’ve worked hard all their lives not sure if they’ll be able to afford medicine and health care in their "golden years," even with the changes in Medicare. We have people who get…

    Current Issue

    • Feb 22
    • Feb 8
    • January 18
    • Dec 28
    • Subscribe
    • Give a Gift
    • Read Online
    • Most Commented
    • Most Popular
    • GA meeting site in Baltimore to be converted into field hospital A decision may be getting closer about whether to hold the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) – set...
    • Moving Forward Implementation Commission takes administrative action The Moving Forward Implementation Commission voted June 18 to take administrative action in five areas — with some of the...
    • Debate over relationship between San Francisco Theological Seminary and the PC(USA) may rise at General Assembly  When is a historically Presbyterian seminary no longer a "Presbyterian seminary”? That question is on the docket for the 224th General...
    • Churches go back to the future with drive-in services in the time of the coronavirus (RNS) — When it came time to pass the peace Sunday at Pathway Baptist Church, Senior Pastor Mike Donald didn’t...
    • Advent devotions — 2020 (Year B) Advent time: Devotions for the congregation Are you looking for theologically sound, inspiring and affordable Advent devotions for the congregation? The Presbyterian...
    • PC(USA) General Assembly affirms that Black lives matter; pledges to work against systemic racism The 2020 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted overwhelmingly June 26 to approve a resolution declaring that Black...

    Keep the Faith

    Sign Up for Updates and Breaking News in your inbox

    Facebook

    Tweets by presoutlook
    Follow Us

    View Stories From

    • Presbyterian Hub
      • Editorials
      • Outlook Features
      • Digital Issues
      • Calendar Check
      • About People
        • Anniversaries
        • Ordinations
        • Retired
        • Deaths
        • Transitions
      • Archives
    • Faith + Culture
      • Book Reviews
      • Movie Reviews
      • He/She Said
    • Ministry + Theology
      • InSights Opinions
        • For Church Leaders
        • Faith Matters
        • Multichannel Church Report
        • #amen
        • Commentary
        • Benedictory
      • Liturgical Year
        • Advent
        • Lent

    The Latest:

    Conservative United Methodists announce new name, logo, website for planned denomination

    March 2, 2021

    Video: J. Herbert Nelson reflects on 35 years of ministry

    March 2, 2021

    Wright, Henderson increase roles with Office of the General Assembly

    March 2, 2021

  • Tweet With Us
  • Be A Facebook Fan
  • Our World in Photos
  • Pin With Us
  • CONTACT US:

    1 N. 5th St., Suite 500

    Richmond, VA 23219

    T: 800-446-6008F: 804-353-6369

    [email protected]

    Or ▶ Fill Out Our Contact Form

    © Copyright 2021 The Presbyterian Outlook. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Statement. Website Design by Poka Yoke Design

    • About us
    • Presbyterian Hub
    • Ministry Resources
    • Classifieds
    • Advertise with the Outlook
    • Submissions
    7ads6x98y