Re Impressions of a Time (not) Well Spent, July/August
As one of the principal authors of one of the three overtures Glen Davis refers to in his critique of General Assembly, I want to assure him that the motive was not about getting the structure right. Nor would I characterize the overture from our presbytery as a “cry for help.” I don’t think the national organization can effect much help in a top – down way, nor is that what is needed.
We do need a reimagination of our national structure, but not for today as Dr. Davis suggests. Today is already history, and by the time any reimagination happens, today will be long gone.
I agree with Dr. Davis that this should have happened 20 years ago. It wasn’t for a lack of trying and it’s worth recalling a few of the efforts. In 1989, the then Board of Congregational Ministry presented the church with an excellent vision, but its priority was lost in the midst of the difficulties of restructuring the national office.
In 1995, commissioners were so critical of the recommendations in the State of the Church report that the committee withdrew all its recommendations fearing they wouldn’t pass. In 1996, ideas from the think tank were lost in a debate over process. The ideas were turned into themes for the FLAMES years, but they didn’t seem to have much impact in any congregations I was aware of.
By the time a demographic study was presented in 2001 to assembly, all people could do was surpress a collective yawn. Many more excellent reports were produced in the last decade, but with no results.
It was not for lack of trying, whether top – down, bottom – up, focusing on local impact or national impact, initiated by national staff or coming from grassroots. Personally, I think this tells us something about ourselves and change.
Every year of inaction makes thoughtful change more difficult. I expect Presbyterians Sharing will continue on a bumpy decline. Because of complacency, we do not have the vision and priorities commissioners were asking for this year.
Given the brief history I have outlined, I believe it is highly unlikely that such things can be developed with the wide kind of concensus needed to truly make them motivational and enabling for our church, all in the limited timeframe we have for action. Consequently, the overtures have asked for the simplest of priorities just to get things started: let’s remember the congregations and presbyteries. They can’t be rescued, but there are many ways to help them cope, adjust, learn, adapt and for some perhaps even to thrive.
With this simple priority as a starting point, let us finally get on with it. If not, then the inevitable will happen: Assembly Council will find itself with each passing year asking, “How do we cut things back $250,000 this year?”
The church—at every level and in every place—is always entrusted with the stewardship of its own future. Each generation has done that—at times well and at times not so well—and then they have passed that trust on to the generation to follow. It is now entrusted to our stewardship. What do we want to pass on?
