Building Our Home

Sermon

My spiritual practice includes reading this little contemplative journal and, using the breath prayer suggested for each week. Last week it was "thy guest", words from Psalm 39. We were to say "thy" to ourselves when we breathed in, and "guest" when we breathed out. I used this breath prayer as a centering device when I meditated and as a walking mantra during the rest of the day.
The first day I used it I focused on the first word, "thy." I let whatever images wanted to come up for me come up. Often, for me, the sacred reveals itself in nature. So it didn't come as any surprise to realize a tactile image was coming to me -- one of standing barefoot on the earth, sensing the firm ground beneath me, supporting me and providing grounding energy. What startled me was the realization that the ground I stood upon was made of sand! I guess I'm more rooted here than I realized.

The next day I focused on the word "guest". I understand what the Psalmist intended -- that we did not create ourselves, that our very existence is a gift from the Universe. However, a different image came to me -- that of minister as guest and you, this church, as my host.

Usually when we use a metaphor to talk about the relationship between a minister and a congregation we use a marriage metaphor. In a culture which considers both parties in a marriage has having equal power, the marriage metaphor would suggest that a congregation and its minister work together in mutual empowerment, with neither exercising more power than the other. The guest imagery, however, suggest a different relationship. The guest enjoys the hospitality of the host as long as the rules and culture of the home are observed. Hosts are called to offer their very best to guests -- in Arab culture, even if they be enemies.

Because I am a new congregation minister rather than a called minister here, I consider myself more of a guest than a spouse, and so I found meditating on the words "thy guest" very helpful. I'd like to use this metaphor of guest and host as I discuss with you several concerns some members have about my performance as your minister. In the last few months five people have written letters to the Committee on Ministry and the Board stating that I abuse my relationship with the congregation by acting inappropriately. In other words, I am not a good guest. I have broken the rules. At least one of the five authors believes it is important to air these concerns now, during our canvass, lest the pattern of my participation as your minister adversely affect our every-member canvass.

I want to share with you some of the concerns, confess ways in which I have behaved to suggest these conclusions, and ask for your help moving us past the current difficulty. I will keep confidential the names of the authors.

The concerns fall into five categories: pastoral care, communication, power and authority, worship, and my alcoholism recovery. I will take them in reverse order, beginning with the fact that I identify myself as a recovering alcoholic and did not mention this fact until four months after I had been appointed and affirmed as your minister.

Since I consider my recovery process something that has enriched my life and my ministry, something that has given me wisdom and compassion and vital ministry skills, it did not occur to me that it might offend anyone. I have 15 years of sobriety this month and would be happy to speak with anyone who would like to know about the recovery process. I apologize to anyone who wishes they had known sooner. I do want you to know I had nothing whatsoever to do with the new church policy that alcohol not be served at events sponsored by the children's religious education program.

The second cluster of concerns has to do with my worship style. Concerned members have stated that our services are too ritualistic, include anti-male ideology, assume those in the congregation know nothing about Unitarian Universalism, include too many new hymns, are not inspirational enough, and are not intellectual enough. I will be happy to address these concerns once I combine them with the responses on the worship surveys and discuss suggested changes with the worship committee. The surveys have been analyzed, and the worship committee is in the process of reviewing and assessing the analysis. I expect the results will be available for you to study in a month.

My experience tells me that it is likely these concerns, while very real, are offset by those who think our services don't include enough ritual, are too male focused, don't give enough information about Unitarian Universalism, use too many old hymns, give good inspiration, and are too intellectual!

This is the curse of preaching in a UU church, where theology is diverse. My mentors, some of them with 40 and 50 years in the ministry tell me that if ten percent of the people loved the service, another ten percent hated the service, and eighty percent say nothing, then it was a good service! Indeed, my preliminary study of the survey analysis indicates that eight people want more intellectual content in the service and 11 want more spiritual content. I came to this conclusion by noticing how people answered the questions, "What, if anything, is missing from the service for you?" Those I classified as wanting more intellectual content said "Solid sermons on current issues, debate, intellectual stretching, and more in depth discussions." On the other hand, those at the opposite end of the continuum said what is missing from the service for them is "Peace, reverence, God, silence, a sense of oneness, and poetry."

Another question on the survey asked people what they would change in our service if they could. I have arranged a few responses to demonstrate the breadth of the continuum here: (1) Smoother transitions, fewer innovations or digressions -- streamline. (2) There is too much obvious "control." Let some stuff just happen. (3) Minimize ritual. (4) More spiritual focus.

It seems our congregation fits the patterns my colleagues discussed. The theological diversity we find here is both a challenge and an opportunity.

The third area of concern has to do with my abuse of power and authority. The most serious of these suggests that I take over and control committees, and, sometimes, the board. This would be analogous to a guest walking into her host's kitchen without invitation, changing the menu, revising the guest list, and otherwise disturbing the host's plan for a party. It's a serious allegation, and I think it is partly correct. I believe I have mistaken my role as a new congregation minister.

Within the Unitarian Universalist movement there are two kinds of parish ministers -- those who are called and those who are appointed. We are most familiar with the called minister model. A congregation forms a search committee, and the committee receives a list of ministers which fit its criteria. It screens the people on the list and interviews three to five. From this group, it selects one to be the congregation's candidate. The candidate visits the congregation for a week, preaching twice. Following the second service the congregation votes, deciding whether or not to call the minister. Depending on how favorable the vote is (90% or better is often the criterion), the call is extended. If the terms are acceptable to the candidate, she or he accepts. When a congregation searches for an interim minister, they use a modified form of this process.

Ministers are appointed by the UUA in at least two situations: (1) when an existing congregation has not previously had a minister and wishes to enter into the UUA's subsidized extension program; and (2) when a group of UU's wish to start a new congregation by entering the UUA's subsidized new congregation program. In both cases, the congregation must vote according to its bylaws to invite the UUA's participation in the process. In the case of the subsidized programs the congregation foregoes a search in return for financial assistance, relying on the Director of the Extension Ministry program to make an appropriate match. So it was that this congregation voted to enter the new congregation program and asked Margaret Beard to appoint a new congregation minister to begin working with the congregation in January, 1998. I was Margaret's choice. I visited the congregation in early December, 1997. You affirmed my appointment by a 98% vote. I started my contract with you on February 1, 1998. It expires on June 30, 2002. Sometime before then we will make a mutual decision about whether or not I will stay past that date as your called minister. If our mutual decision is that I not stay, then your congregation will begin the process to find a called minister.

In this matter of selecting a minister I hope you will note that it is the congregation that selects or affirms the minister. The congregation chooses whether to enter the new congregation or extension program and postpone a search or not. The congregation chooses its search committee. The congregation affirms the extension or new congregation minister. The congregation calls the called minister. Our polity has a stringent demand for a democratic process in the matter of selecting a minister, and in this congregation that polity informed every step of the process before I joined you and will continue to inform any decisions you make in the future.

In January, 1998 I attended new congregation and extension ministry training in Boston. There I learned a basic difference between called and new congregation or extension ministry. When a minister is called, he is usually advised to enter the congregation gently and easily, not making any changes for one year. When a minister is serving a new or extension congregation, she is advised to help a congregation grow as quickly as possible.

I want to step back a moment from this analysis to explain some basic patterns of how a congregation can relate with its minister. The smallest congregation (under 50 active members) is known as a family church, with the minister serving at the pleasure of the matriarchs and patriarchs of the church. If these elders and the minister get along, the minister stays. If they don't, the minister goes.

A second stage of development is the pastoral church (50-150 members) . Here the minister's role is to be in good relationship with everyone in the congregation, focusing on individual needs. In olden days, a good pastoral minister spent his week dropping in on folks at home, enjoying a cup of tea and chatting about this and that. Nowadays, with so many people working outside their homes, ministers are more apt to form relationships with those who serve the church in leadership roles or who attend classes the minister conducts. A minister also visits homes when invited. Rarely are relationships forged during coffee hour, however a minister may use sermons and newsletter columns to reveal herself more and encourage others to do the same, with her and with each other.

The next stage of growth is the program church (150-350 active members), where the minister becomes more executive in style, working with leadership to create programs which will provide the small group experiences people need to stay within a congregation as it grows. Pastoral care becomes a program, involving many people, rather than something the minister does alone. The minister focuses on supporting and motivating leadership.

Using the guest metaphor, a minister is definitely a guest on his or her best behavior in a family church. Form is sometimes more important than relationship. In a pastoral church, a minister is still a guest, however the emphasis is on relationship rather than form. In a program church, the minister might still be a guest, however the host is more interested in the minister's skills than in the minister's person.

This is the fifth church I have served as a professional. Four of the others were program churches. The fifth transformed from a family to a pastoral church while I served it.
During my training as a new congregation minister I got the idea that I was to take this congregation to "program church" mode as quickly as possible -- in Star Trek terms, I was to operate at warp speed. However, I now understand that what we are called to do is move through the stages of family and pastoral without stopping and then move on to program.

So in at least one situation, rather than support the committee chair, I have urged action to assure results. The outcome was that I pushed those in leadership beyond their comfort level -- something a minister in a family or pastoral church would never do, and something a minister in a program church would do only as a last resort.

I am sorry for this behavior. While it might be more understandable in a program church, it is certainly not the appropriate way for a guest to behave in a pastoral church. My hope is that I will be given a second chance with this particular host.

One final comment about the guest metaphor as it applies to the relationship between a minister and a congregation. Ministers come and go. The congregation remains. This is especially true in small congregations. According to one expert, the average length of time a minister stays is 3-5 years. In this district there are 11 full-time called ministers. The longest serving is Jack Donovan in Gainesville with 13 years. The average length of time the currently called ministers in Florida have served their congregations is six-and-a-half years. The average length of time the eleven congregations they serve have been in existence is 42-1/2 years. Although some would think 6-1/2 years an inordinate amount of time for a guest to stay, the point I'm trying to make here is that currently there are no congregations in this state about to celebrate their silver anniversaries with their called ministers.

Two clusters of concerns about my ministry remain -- communication style and pastoral care style. They are so close to one another, I will talk about them both at the same time. Let me share one particular concern. This person observed that following the service on Sunday mornings, when I greet you, I don't focus on you. I let my attention wander, looking over your shoulder as I hug you to see who else may want my attention. This is true. Since this concern has been brought to my attention I catch myself doing it. So I've been practicing focused attention, with peripheral awareness of who else might want to speak with me, but not making eye contact with the second person until the first person and I have completed our conversation.

What I have discovered is that I enjoy coffee hour more using this technique. Instead of feeling fractured, pulled in several directions at once, I feel gratified by the genuine connection I make with people, one-at-a-time. It's sometimes hard to shift my focus. During the service my attention, of necessity, scans the room, checking in briefly with all of you, sensing the pulse of the congregation. However, I'm practicing this new mode of concentrating on one person at a time during coffee hour, and I'm excited about what I'm learning.

Other concerns about my communication style may stem from scanning rather than focusing in group settings. I'm described as intimidating, abrasive and insensitive, snubbing people rather than connecting with them.

This leads me to the issue of pastoral care. It is difficult to form relationships during large gatherings. Think of the last cocktail party or reception or conference you went to, where there were about 100 people in the room. Was that atmosphere conducive to forming relationships? I think not. We need to meet each other in small groups or in one-to-one settings to know each other. Therefore, with my partner Pat's support, I intend to invite everyone in the church to our home over the next year. We will have a dessert and coffee gathering once every three to four weeks in our home. We will try to mix newer and more seasoned members and friends. Our hope is that we will all come to know each other better.

Finally, I want to address pastoral care as the formal process whereby a minister devotes attention to people who are experiencing difficulty in their lives. In my last board report I noted that I had had twelve significant conversations with twelve different people in the congregation that month. Most of these conversations occurred because I was invited to give pastoral care, either by the person who needed it or by a close friend or family member. I also dropped by to visit people who normally attend church every week who had been absent for several weeks.

Sometimes it is a church member or my colleague, Terry Duncan who alerts me to a pastoral issue. In these cases, I make phone calls -- trying to call at a time when someone answers. If I reach a message machine, or no one answers, I call back, at different times of the day, until I do reach someone. On at least one occasion, I disturbed someone who was trying to rest and whose caregiver was not at home. I responded to a reminder of the hour (it was ten o'clock at night) insensitively, focusing more on my need to connect, rather than on the other's need to rest.

All of this is to say I have not been a perfect guest. I did not share with you information you would have liked to have had before you invited me over. I have talked and behaved in a way that has made you feel uncomfortable or demeaned -- both as a preacher and a pastor. I am sorry. I have made mistakes. My hope is that we can begin again in love. Because this is a crucial time for us as a congregation.

Together, we want to build our home. We want to create a thriving program church, growing from pastoral to program. We want to reach out to those who seek a spiritual home. We want to build and sustain an open, caring, and acepting community for all ages. We want to explore and experience diverse beliefs together so we may grow spiritually. We want to work in the larger community to extend these values into the wider world. To do this effectively, we must be sure our relationship is in balance.

Beginning this afternoon, if you have not already made a pledge to the church, a canvasser will contact you and ask to speak with you in person. This will be important conversation. Not only will you hear something about what financial support will be needed in the coming year, you will be given an opportunity to reflect on your relationship with Community Church. What is working well for you? What could be working better? What changes do we need to make? The feedback you give is every bit as important as the pledge you make, for with your comments you shape the quality of our church, just as surely as with your pledge you create the foundation for our programs.

I began this sermon with two readings. One introduced the guest metaphor. The other tells us that "Imagination is better than a sharp instrument. To pay attention, this is our endless and proper work." I invite you to consider what sharp instrument you might put aside in favor of imagination as we pay attention to one another, saying Yes! and No! To create relationships is our endless and proper work. I invite you to suggest ways in which our relationships here in this community might be strengthened during a discussion following the service. We will meet outside on the breezeway to my right.