Collaboration 201

Collaborating has costs. It requires a lot of time and energy. And that means the parties involved need to have the willingness to engage in structured conversations. We need to be willing to work face-to-face with those we disagree with and to listen to them. Another possible cost is that those involved may suffer stress and emotional pain. Collaboration calls for vulnerability and vulnerability carries the risk of feeling weak and exposed. To be vulnerable is to open yourself to the possibility of hurt.

An example –

It’s an Anglo-Catholic parish. A dispute has developed over whether to use incense at all primary liturgies (9 and 11 am). It’s a debate that erupts in some parishes during times of transition or stress. The debate usually takes shape along these lines -- "there are some people in the parish who are allergic to incense and therefore we should not use it." The response may be, "we have used incense for many years and that is part of the tradition here at Saint Mary's."  There are variations on and cases to make related to each position.

Stepping aside from positions and looking for our positive underlying interests

By focusing on positions we tend to set ourselves up for a win-lose outcome. Someone gets to have incense or they don't. Or maybe there is a compromise in which we use incense on major feast days and one or two seasons of the church year but not at other times. Compromise by definition means both parties walk away unhappy. Sometimes it’s the best we can do but by its nature a compromise is an unstable solution. Because we want to be able to be together as a community we all need to accept the compromise.  People remain dissatisfied and usually a time comes when the issue is reopened.

Collaboration is the path if we want both to get the issue off the table in the short term and also establish longer term stability while increasing trust and the abilities of leaders to manage differences. The skill at the center of that is our ability to identify our positive and underlying concerns and avoid jumping to a position. When the parties lock themselves into expecting a particular outcome it becomes much more difficult to keep conflict at a lower level and manage it effectively.

Seeking the positive underlying concern of each party involves empathy and a willingness to set aside for the time being our positions. If we are to collaborate and find or develop an approach that is more likely to be owned and sustainable in the parish we need to find within ourselves some degree of respect and love toward those with whom we disagree.

We need competence

We also need a few other skills to make collaboration work. Collaboration is not just a feeling or a hope but a set of skills, it’s a competency. For example, we need to be able to imagine the other person’s positive underlying concerns and withhold our assumption that they have poor intentions toward us and our concern. We need the capacity to clarify and share our own positive underlying concern and for the moment set aside are impulse to push a position. We need to manage our own emotions and any tendency to play the victim. And we need the skill to shape an integrative approach; in which we can adequately address the positive concerns of all parties. We need an integrative solution that truly respects the interests of the people with investment in the situation? [Note: in this work it is important that we not over-involve all those who have little investment in the outcome. If we do over involve them it's likely to tilt things to one side or the other and accomplish little.]

As people seek ways to express their positive underlying expressions there’s an exploration of the context, feelings and needs

On the one hand it does matter if people have allergies, especially if they don't have other reasonable alternatives for worship. In that case the positive underlying concern might be along the lines of wanting to feel valued, as though their well being matters. For others the incense might represent being part of a long tradition of spirituality in many religions, certainly in catholic expressions of Christian faith.  This can be a matter of identity for some people. They may have a difficult time expressing it but the fact is that identity is usually upheld through various artifacts, ways of behaving and shared practices. So, if we let go of incense are we really Anglo-Catholics anymore?

It's easy for the conversation of underlying concerns to move into a place where each side attempts to dismiss the concerns of the others – “take your allergy pills, come to the early Eucharist where we don't use incense and it won't be lingering in the building or on the other side” or “you mean your sense of some abstract identity is more important than my health.”  There will be no collaboration if we are focused on making the case for our position.  

There are many, many issues around which these dynamics will play out in the parish church. Do we serve alcoholic beverages, ever? Should the vestry primarily focus on property and finance or share in the broad oversight of the parish? Do we express our concern for inclusion by having people receive communion before baptism and having people not baptized serve as wardens and vestry members or do we express our concern for inclusion by shaping a climate of acceptance with a clear and inviting pathway into baptism and communion?

In any disagreement within the parish there will be times when the outcome simply needs to be a win – lose result. There will be times when we simply need to suck it up and put up with the situation that makes neither side entirely happy. However, if what we want are outcomes where the decisions have a higher quality, where people find their relationships enhanced and strengthened, in which what we have decided upon is more sustainable, and in which we learn something about how to be together in community-- then collaboration is what we will work to do.

So, how might that parish approach the incense issue?

If the parish has three Sunday masses as they do at Christ Church, New Haven (8:00, 9:00 and 11:00) you could make the 9:00 am Eucharist always incense free and also maybe a bit less formal overall and the 11:00 am Eucharist always a high solemn mass with incense. Incense lovers at 9:00 could move to the 11:00; incense haters at 11:00 could move to 9:00. When a few complained that this was inconvenient the rector would need to say, “Yes, I do see how this is difficult for you. I ask you to be gracious and accept the arrangement as a good for our common life.”

But if that’s all we did as an outcome it would be a compromise and not a collaboration.

What would make it a collaboration?

One element would be taking action that compensates or balances the situation. In the example above, if we decided to never have incense at 9:00 and to always have it at 11:00 that would address one element but not others.

So, if one of the underlying concerns had to do with maintaining Anglo Catholic identity we might take a series of actions to strengthen that identity by increasing practices of sacramental life and the formation processes that assist people to live that life—have a daily mass, schedule times for confessions, on Sunday have a priest at a side altar available for anointing as people return from communion,  frequently have training in how to say the Daily Office and in contemplative and reflective methods included in the formation offerings, offer more quite days, bring nuns and monks in to lead retreats, arrange for silent retreats at a convent, and so on. The identity issue would seem to be an addressable underlying concern. The desire of some people to not have to go to mass at a different time is an example, in this case, of something that isn’t addressable.

That’s just one example of a possible result that would be an integrative solution in regard to the content of the situation. In itself it’s not enough if the parish is to gain the multiple benefits of collaboration. That requires more attention to process matters.

The second thing that would make the solution a collaboration is the process used to get to the result. If collaborative methods were used effectively the result wouldn’t just be the off-set of adding catholic practices but also increased trust, improved relationships, more confidence in our ability to manage disagreements and a few new skills and methods.

How do we set up a collaborative process?

Basic structure 

Collaboration requires face-to-face conversation. It needs to be a structured conversation creating a zone of psychological safety. That safety is in part facilitated by providing a defined structure—stated outcomes being sought in this conversation, the anticipated sequence of activities posted in front of the group, a skilled facilitator who will keep control of the conversation by enforcing norms and coaching as needed.  Psychological safety is also advanced by the competent use of methods, skills, and a climate and stance appropriate for a church.

The conversation needs to focus on those with an actual investment in the issue. People who don’t really have an investment in incense or no incense might be invited to be present but they should be observers and at most participant-observers (in that case they sit in an outer circle and maybe once during the session are invited to respond to a question like, “What do you hear as the positive underlying concerns of each party.”

Methods

Methods are the steps in the conversation based on sound theory and the wisdom gained from reflected upon experience. Related methods might include connecting exercises (maybe in the form of faith sharing), Force Field Analysis, Testing Process.

Skills

Effective collaboration calls for people willing to use basic communication skills – paraphrase, active listening, itemized response, making statements and rather than asking questions, and offering integrative solutions once they have heard and empathize with others.

Underlying theory

It helps if those leading a collaborative process, and a critical mass of those participating, understand a bit of theory. I use models and frameworks such as the Relationship Cycle, Intervention Theory, TKI, MBTI, Self Differentiated Leadership, and the Drama Triangle.

Appropriate and good theory helps us see more complexity in the situation than we might otherwise see. It also offers us a way of giving order to that complexity. That can allow leaders and participants to adjust more easily when the conversation doesn’t go as we hoped.

In the church system

Nurturing a spirituality of surrender, mercy and grace rather than law and judgment. Grounding the parish in norms derived from our Anglican ethos  and Benedictine spirituality (listening with the heart, humility, no grumbling in combination with taking counsel)

An earlier posting that explores the above from a slightly different standpoint is - Caesura: Methods for “taking counsel” ..... Part One

Collaboration – dealing with resentment

A well done collaboration process can help a parish community more effectively cope with underlying resentments and annoyances. For example, in the incense case – there will be people who are thinking “Why did you join a parish that uses incense routinely if you can’t stand it? Why do you think you now have the right to impose your views on the rest of us?” or “If you don’t like the incense here at Saint Mark’s, Philadelphia there are four other parishes in walking distance without incense. Go there!” or “I understand that you want to attend Saint Mark’s because of the wonderful music. You can walk two blocks and go to Trinity with its great music.”  In a parish like Saint Mark’s the number of people wanting an incense free parish will be few.

The overwhelming majority of parishioners will see incense in the Liturgy as a “given.” So, what are examples of likely resentment from the other side? – “Incense makes me ill. Is that okay with you?” or “Incense is not true inclusiveness. Saint Mark’s is known for accepting and welcoming people.” Or “There really are many people upset by the incense.” 

There may be reasons to not attempt a collaboration even if it will more effectively address underlying resentment and nudge the parish community into a healthier place. For example,

• There’s not an obvious way out of a basic win/lose, or lose/lose (compromise), in the situation. If the parish only has one primary mass at 10:00 am a rector in a parish like St. Mark’s would wisely decide on the use of incense at all celebrations. Time to use the rector’s authority.
• Too many people are trapped in a Drama Triangle. There’s an intense commitment to being the victim and/or the persecutor and/or rescuer. In the triangle people tend to move from one emotional position to the other and back again. If we can’t reasonable anticipate that people will move beyond that drama, we are better off avoiding a collaboration attempt. There’s too much likelihood of it backfiring.
• The issue is not one that people have strong feelings about (so you will not get the necessary investment to do the work)
• It is already a high level conflict. That's not just about some people having strong feelings and opinions. It's an assessment to be made using models such as the Relationship Cycle and/or Conflict Levels.
• The conditions needed for effective collaboration are simply too weak (see above for “How do we set up a collaborative process?” and below for “Other conditions that will help collaboration.”

At this point the time and energy is needed to deal with a crisis or another developmental opportunity.

Other conditions that will help collaboration

• A leader willing to be firm and directive about the process that is needed.
• Setting a tone of empathy, curiosity and openness.
• Presenting the situation as one that is a problem or challenge in our common life.
• Paying attention to the process reality that an owned, sustainable outcome is more likely if it is built upon the base of adequate and useful information, an exploration of many options, and a sense of free choice.
• A specific process in which the positive underlying concerns of people get identified and tested. 

The questions parish leaders might ask themselves is these, “Is there enough of the parish community that would enter into such a process of learning and openness to make this work? Am I willing to do that myself?

rag+

Collaboration 101: Taking a position vs. working with underlying positive concerns

There are a number of skills and methods that are useful when you're trying to have more collaboration and/or to reduce the level of conflict in the parish. Collaboration is probably the hardest conflict management style to use because it requires more skill and emotional intelligence than other styles. Collaboration calls for a high level of assertiveness and an equally high level of cooperativeness. You are trying to address both your own concerns and those of others.

      Collaboration: Easy to be in favor of--hard to do in practice.

To get collaboration you need a positional leader and a critical mass of people with the required skills and the stance. Possibly the most important skill is learning how to seek the positive and underlying concerns of the parties involved instead of jumping to a position.

Our tendency is to start with our position on an issue. We explain what we want and why what we want is reasonable and just.  Our positions are usually rather specific.

Interests or underlying concerns are what sits within or under the position. Most people find it difficult to identify their interests as they tend to be elusive. They are connected to our hopes and dreams, our fears and anxieties. At times we resist exposing them because we fear we will not get what we want in the situation. We fear that letting others know will make us vulnerable.

Our positions are what we want. Our positive underlying interest is what we need. As in “We want the parish to have ten minutes of silence in the Sunday Eucharist” vs “We need less rush and business in our lives; more calmness and stillness.”

An example

I had a consultation with a small parish on a Maine island. I worked with them off and on for several years. I facilitated their vestry retreat and a few whole parish conversations and worked with their parish development team. They were a fairly cohesive group with a desire to become healthier—deepen their spiritual life, add a few more year-round members, and so on. They also wanted to address a few issues--Managing the shift from a small year-round congregation with an average attendance of maybe 20 and a summer congregation of 80 or 90; not having their own building and the impact of that on activities, membership growth, and being trusted on the island (for most islanders the lack of a building signaled both instability and oddness; “you’re all very nice people but you don’t have the same stake as other churches.")

This example has to do with a small thing – the longing for, and fear of, silence.

During a vestry working retreat I had them break into small groups. They exploring their “likes and concerns” about the parish. I wandered from one group to another. It was all fairly routine stuff. In one group a person said, “I’d like to see more silence in the Eucharist. It feels rushed to me.” To my surprise everyone else in that small group quickly agreed.

When the whole vestry was again gathered I had the groups report on their conversations. The group I had been observing included the desire for more silence in their sharing but didn’t indicate the emotional investment that had been expressed. I decided to raise that and to test the issue with the whole vestry. Here’s the result.

Regarding more silence and stillness during the Eucharist.

I’d like a lot less					I’d like a lot more
1	2	3	4	5	6
		/	/	/	///// ////

The vicar was stunned. He talked about how it never occurred to him to provide much silence and stillness in liturgy. Apparently in his last parish it faced several very upset members when he attempted to introduce it. He was temperamentally a cautious person. He expressed his concern that some in the parish might be upset if we introduced more silence. Even though anxious he was prepared to move forward.

I suggested that they enter into this with a stance of experimentation and action-learning. We decided to go ahead and introduce it and after four months to assess how it was working. The vicar was to work with a few people on how to introduce it. They provided for silence before beginning the Eucharist and after the sermon.

The assessment four months later involved having people complete a brief survey and then we discussed it at coffee hour. Here’s the survey.

 

At coffee hour we made some attempt to have people speak to their positive underlying interest. One person did acknowledge that he felt disturbed during any silence. A number of others talked about how it helped them experience the liturgy in a calmer and more grounded manner.

In a follow up meeting the vicar had to deal with his anxiety about the two people having the most difficulty with the silence and stillness. Others listened to his concerns while urging him to stay with the change. In response to the concerns of a few the vicar became more disciplined about the length of the silences (so people knew roughly how long they would be) and he offered to meet with anyone having difficulty to see if he could help them deal with the anxiety or depression they felt during silence.

By the time they checked in after Epiphany the congregation had settled into the practice. 

Figuring out positions and positive underlying concerns

Positions are solutions. The are descriptions of what we want – “I want more silence in the Sunday Eucharist.”  Or “I want no silence in the Sunday Eucharist.” If our feelings are strong and we have lost patience they may take the form of demands or ultimatums. For example, “If we continue with this practice I may need to go to another church.” Or, “This could damage my emotional health. Do you all want to be responsible for that?”

To figure out the positive underlying concerns in a disagreement

You might begin with yourself. Look for your own interests. What is your longing or fear in the situation? Understanding your own concerns are just as important as understanding those of others.

Early in this process I invited people to share what they got out of having more silence and stillness? I repeated that invitation each time they discussed it. Over time they increased their skill at sorting out positions and positive underlying concerns.

To identify the interests of the others you need to do things such as:

• Ask them what is the concern under or within the position they are taking. “I understand that you’d like more silence in the liturgy. Could you share what impact such silence has on you?” You’re not asking for the person to make a case for their position. You’re trying to understand their needs in the situation.
• The stance needs to be empathetic. You are trying to understand the person’s hopes, fears, anxieties, and needs.
• It may help to ask open ended questions or about feelings – “Will you share how silence sometimes cause anxiety in you and at others times peace?” or “What do you think will happen if we increase the amount of silence and stillness?”
• Be especially alert for basic needs being expressed – safety, sense of belonging, impact on relationships, issues of personal or parish identity and integrity, sense of accomplishment and competence, a longing for holiness and wholeness of life.  

This takes a lot of time

Collaboration takes more time than any other approach to conflict management. Parish leaders need to decide if the issue is worth the time. That will often depend on what other pressures are being experienced by parish leaders and more generally how well those leaders manage the parish “demand system.”

I think the parish stayed with the issue of silence and stillness for two reasons. Most of the members wanted more silence in their worship.  I, their consultant, offered safe, structured ways to address it.

An opportunity for learning

So, why did I do that? Why did I enable them to spend so much time on the issue? My approach to pastoral and ascetical theology and practice does have a strong bias toward liturgy with flow and grace, beauty and balance. I see silence and stillness as an element of that. But the more important reason for me had to do with wanting them to increase their skills for collaboration. For them this was a relatively low threat issue. People aren’t very open to learning new skills when the issue being faced has the potential to create a higher level of conflict. This was a perfect opportunity for learning the skills and stance of collaboration.

rag+

Resources

Collaboration 201

An Overview of the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)

Distinguishing Between Compromising and Collaborating

Ken Leech, Rest in Peace

Father Ken Leech played a significant role in my spiritual life beginning in the 1970’s. I read Soul Friend when it first came out and True Prayer a few years after. I and others from the Order of the Ascension visited with him in London in the mid 80’s and the Order asked him to lead our retreat before first taking the Benedictine Promise in 1988. Later we used his Subversive Orthodoxy as our common reading.

When I think of Kenneth what first comes to mind is his humanity; he was fully human. Then what comes to me is his deep longing after God. I trust that both are now complete.

The word he offered that I believe the Episcopal Church most needs to hear is written in Prayer and Prophecy (1986 booklet) 

Radical action can only begin with radical contemplation.

In this he was one with Evelyn Underhill –

One’s first duty is adoration, and one’s second duty is awe and only one’s third duty is service. And that for those three things and nothing else, addressed to God and no one else, you and I and all other countless human creatures evolved upon the surface of this planet were created. We observe then that two of the three things for which our souls were made are matters of attitude, of relation: adoration and awe. Unless these two are right, the last of the triad, service, won’t be right. Unless the whole of your...life is a movement of praise and adoration, unless it is instinct with awe, the work which the life produces won’t be much good. …

For the real saint is neither a special creation nor a spiritual freak. He is just a human being in whom has been fulfilled the great aspiration of St. Augustine – “My life shall be a real life, being wholly full of Thee.” And as that real life, the interior union with God grows, so too does the saints’ self-identification with humanity grow. They do not stand aside wrapped in delightful prayers and feeling pure and agreeable to God. They go right down into the mess; and there, right down in the mess, they are able to radiate God because they possess Him.

Esther de Waal notes the lack of contemplative grounding in our parishes.

It is very fascinating to see how, in the ten years since this book was first written, increasing numbers of lay people like myself are turning to the monastic tradition. Here they find support on their Christian journey which they often fail to find in the institutional church, where parish and diocesan life can be extremely busy, and seemingly lacking in any sort of contemplative focus. [Esther de Waal in "Living with Contradiction: An Introduction to Benedictine Spirituality" 1997 edition]

In one of Fr. Leech’s addresses to us in 1988 he said this –

Any authentic priesthood must derive from an inner core of silence, a life hid with Christ in God ...Only those who are at home   with silence and darkness will be able to survive in, and minister to, the perplexity and confusion of the modern world. Let us seek that dark silence out of which an authentic ministry and a renewed theology can grow and flourish.

I invite you to join members of the Order of the Ascension in silence this week. In the joyful and unsettling silences of tomorrow’s Eucharist I hope you’ll remember Fr. Ken Leech.

Ken died this past Saturday (September 12). In recent times Ken has been part of the Eucharistic community at St Chrysostom’s in Manchester.  Fr Chris Hartley, one of the curates, gave him the last rites a few hours before he died.

May his soul, and the souls of all the departed,
through the mercy of God, rest in peace. 

rag+

Here’s the Order of the Ascension web page in memoriam for Kenneth.

Prayer and Prophecy (a short booklet published by Ascension Press in 1986. There is a book with the same name now available Prayer and Prophecy: The Essential Kenneth Leech )

Shape of the parish: The longing for holiness

Some new Anglican Christians have a longing for holiness.[1] They enter the parish seeking to become different and better persons. As the months go by they face two temptations.

The first temptation is a longing for an unattainable purity. The longing may be focused on themselves or on the church. They are so excited and invested in the Christian enterprise that hope may outrun reality.

The second is cynicism. As they spend more time in their parish church they begin to see the flaws of people and of the church as a whole. Feelings of discouragement can set in that undercut the new Christian’s progress.

The second may rise out of disappointments from the first or may be a product of individual temperament.

Ways to vaccinate the new Christian

First and most important – do not invite them onto the vestry, into a discernment program for holy orders, to offer homilies at the weekday masses, or to run the Godly Play program. They need time to attend to their spiritual life in these first years. Even though they may agree to serve, and in fact feel honored at being asked, when we do this we do them a disservice.

These invitations to serve the parish can confuse the person’s grasp of the primary rhythms of Christian life. Instead of learning to enter fully into the cycle of their own baptismal renewal and their apostolate in daily life, they are welcomed into the upkeep of the institution. Instead of having the time and coaching to establish routines of saying the daily prayers of the church, spiritual reading, and reflectiveness about life, they find their time used in going to meetings and their minds and feelings centered on parish finances and property.

Give them at least two or three years. They will be better able to see if giving their time and energy to the parish is what they are called to do. And if it is, they will come at it from a more grounded faith and practice. They will understand the essential “businesses of the parish church from a base of faithful and proficient practice.  There is an exception to this rule of thumb. For some of them it will aid their growth if they can serve the parish in ways that are directly connected or grounded in core spiritual practices. For example, serving on a daily office team, or assisting in adult formation programs they have gone through themselves, or working with the homeless program but only if it is a requirement that all serving in such work have a rule of life that roots them in Eucharist, Office and reflection.

Beyond that there are several traditional ways to vaccinate the new Christian against cynicism and this longing for unattainable purity.

We can invite them to look upon the Saints of the church. These heroes of our faith in the fullness of their humanity and holiness show us a way through cynicism and naïve religiosity. An example: For many Christians Dietrich Bonhoeffer has served as an antidote to these temptations. He provides an example of humility while engaged in political struggle.

Bonhoeffer's trust in God is apostolic. His participation in a plot against his government, and in an assassination plot of the government’s head, does not bring him to rationalization and self justification, but to confession and faith. Bonhoeffer does not engage in a scrambling for his own purity but looks to God and God’s mercy. He seems to move forward in responsible action accepting that in such action is always the reality of human limitation and sin. He depends “on a God who demands responsible action in a bold venture of faith, and who promises forgiveness and consolation to the man who becomes a sinner in that venture."

We can also focus their attention on faithful practice. Provide them with the training and guidance needed so they might proficiently participate in the Eucharist, daily prayers of the church, a pattern of reflectiveness, the community of the parish, and service in their daily life of work, friendships, family and civic life.  The new Christian, or new Anglican, or even those simply new to the parish having transferred from being active in another parish, are all at a place in their growth when they may be most open to learning the competencies of Apostolic Faith and Practice.

If the opportunity is missed the person can too easily drift into and, for the time being, become stuck in their development.[2] Their growth gets short circuited. Instead of moving from experimenting to progressing and into a proficient apostolic practice they can find themselves settling for a stable and possibly static sacramental faith. They could even find themselves drawn into an immature or tentative expression of faith and practice. Some in their cynicism may drift away entirely or become Christmas and Easter people.

Send them on retreats to SSJE and SSM. Have a strong foundations program. Before Lent begins have a two session offering on developing/revising a rule of life. Within the first six months see that they have had an experiential program on participating in the Eucharist and the Eucharistic life.  Develop a fund that allows the parish to share in the costs involved.

Finally, priests can take notice of the new Christians and members. We can quietly pay attention while applying a bit of pastoral and ascetical theology in each case. I’d avoid creating some public formal structure in favor of an unobtrusive monitoring of the spiritual well being of people. When we do that we are able to avoid drawing them prematurely into roles that will distract them from their need and willingness to grow in the spiritual life. And we can collaborate with them in their own spiritual development.

rag+

Resources

Shape of the Parish model – Can be useful in assessing what kind of guidance may be useful for the new Christian, new Anglican, or new parishioner.

In Your Holy Spirit books     On individual formation   On parish formation 

---

[1] Not all new Anglican Christians share the longing. Many arrive seeking something more conventional and even superficial. Others arrive with a formed faith and practice as Roman Catholics or evangelicals and aren’t very aware that the Episcopal Church and Anglican spirituality offer much more than the liberty and openness they found missing in their former homes. Those matters aren’t the topic of this posting.

[2] See Shape of the Parish model

Caesura: Methods for “taking counsel”

The Benedictine tradition includes a promise of stability, obedience, and conversion of life.  That "promise" is not only a commitment made in community, it is a lens into the inner life and dynamics of a community. We have seen the health of a parish that is grounded in a rich and complex prayer life; in which there is deep listening, both interpersonal and in communal discernment; and where there is an openness of minds and hearts to the future that God offers. We have also seen parishes that seem to express a shadow side - where stability is turned to frozenness and obsession with parish traditions; where obedience has either become legalism or has no hold at all; where conversion of life is the cover for self-absorption in which change is driven by sentimentality or political ideology. We know of the parishes where there is an obsession with change or/and others with maintaining traditions. Robert A. Gallagher, Fill All Things: The Spiritual Dynamics of the Parish Church.

Saint Benedict knew something about shaping a Christian community. Benedictine monastic communities have existed for over 1500 years now. The spirituality of Saint Benedict is seen in Anglicanism’s Book of Common Prayer and orientation toward balance and moderation. I believe it’s in our DNA as a Communion. Parishes move deeper into their best selves as they come to understand and reflect both the more obvious, as well as the more hidden, aspects of Benedictine spirituality sitting within the deeper underlying assumptions of Anglican parish culture.

Meetings of the Parish Community 

This is the big one for most parishes. It means breaking out of the once a year, scripted parish meeting called for in your by-laws and engaging gatherings that are face-to-face, two-way, structured conversations. Of course you need to have the annual meeting; just add three other meetings. These are occasions when the parish community is invited to “take counsel.” Along the way change the process and tone of the annual meeting to fit the new way of doing things.

Three of four meetings/year about 1 ½ hours/meeting

Put all these meetings on the parish schedule at least a year ahead of time. Knowing that there will be times for conversation will help contain the tendency to grumble. It also allows leaders to point members in the direction of those meetings as the time when issues will be raised and explored—“Please hold onto your idea and come to the meeting. You can offer your idea, hear the ideas of others and possibly get a sense of what others make of what you’re suggesting.”

Have most of these meetings on Sunday after a Eucharist with a short homily and very shortened coffee hour.

Broad overall assessing and conversation

One meeting needs to be a broad assessment – action planning process. Use a channeling process that begins with something along the lines of “Likes/Concerns/Wishes” and proceeds to prioritize items. Items that “belong” to the rector or the vestry are “channeled to them. There may be some items that are the work of an existing committee and others around which a new working group is formed.

This kind of gathering allows the community to offer anything on its mind. Anything it likes and would like to see continued or built upon, anything that they are concerned about, and any new wishes and hopes they have. Because the lists are prioritized we end up with a narrowed down set of possible action items. In the process everyone has had an opportunity to be heard (briefly) and the mind of the congregation gets expressed. Most ideas will not receive enough support to end up being worked on but those proposing the ideas will know they had the opportunity along with everyone else and can of course return next year and offer the idea again.

At times the whole parish community is invited, at other times a congregation within the parish. That will depend on the issues to be engaged. These meetings need to make use of the methods known to facilitate dialogue and listening.  

In some parishes there will be good reasons to have such a meeting for the individual congregations. For example, at St. Paul’s, Seattle where I attend it might make sense to have a general meeting for just the 5:00 congregation because that group has a somewhat different liturgy and culture than the other three congregations.

Specific issues 

These are opportunities to have all those willing to gather to focus on one significant issue. They will usually be smaller gatherings than the broad overall meeting. I’ve seen parishes do it around things such as hospitality, membership growth, and finances. The meetings are usually about 1 ½ hours long. They may include “channeling” (gathering prioritized lists of issues to address and moving them into a channel for action) and ”testing” processes or some other way to gather information related to the topic for that occasion.

Take the opportunity of being gathered to have a sheet of newsprint hanging off to the side. Some people have called this the “parking lot” conversation sheet. On it people can note any concerns or wishes they’d like to call to the attention of the leadership. Usually none of the items on this list would be addressed in the meeting called for some other specific conversation. The list would later be reviewed by the rector and wardens (or another group) and appropriate action taken—do nothing, refer to an existing working group, use as the base for a testing process at an upcoming coffee hour, etc.

Conversation not debate

It is important that these meetings not turn into “town meetings” with their image of a contentious and argumentative spirit.  This is a process in which we are called to “listen carefully” and to invite members to “incline the ear of your heart.” [1]  It’s a time for humility. We share what’s on our heart and we let go of it. We accept that the rector or vestry are likely to make the final decision about most matters.[2] It’s all in the spirit of Benedict.

It’s also important that these meetings not undercut the responsibility of the rector and vestry for decisions they have to make. The gatherings are an opportunity for leaders to test things with the community and for the community to hear its own voice. The effect of such regular assemblies is usually increased trust and commitment.

Other elements

You want to establish a strong face-to-face norm. Being able to see one another, to be aware of body language and expressions, helps people stay connected. They are more likely to be be self reflective and take into account the impact they have on others.

Avoid using social media for these purposes. Much of the time it might provide useful information and even be fun. But if it turns negative a great deal of damage can be done to individuals and the parish community in a very short time. Let social meeting be “social” and not a way of undercutting the parish’s capacity for conversation and collaboration.

It’s common for issues to be raised at these meetings that lend themselves to using a testing process method (see below). That might be a tool used during the meeting or if the issue isn’t related to the topic of the meeting it might be done at a another time.

In designing the meeting ask yourself, “Is this something that requires the Rector and or the vestry to vote on and approve or is this an opportunity for people to form teams in which they pursue work on behalf of the parish within the parishes overall sense of direction and culture?” Be clear with those gathered as to which it is.

Testing Process

A “testing process” can be done for a few minutes at coffee hour, at vestry meetings, in working teams and at parish community meetings. It will usually be most effective if done when the group is gathered and can respond and discuss the result, formally or informally.

Face-to-face processes are usually more effective in promoting careful listening and effective response. A rule of thumb might be to use a “testing process” about four times per year with the whole community and possibly ten times with the vestry.

The testing process is a way to find out where the larger community stands on certain questions or issues. It helps both the community and the leadership get a sense of where the group is collectively.  It’s important for parish leaders and the congregation to understand that the testing process is not a way to shift decision-making authority to a vote of the congregation.  The results do not mean that any particular change will take place.

Examples of useful areas to test: satisfaction with the amount of silence in liturgy; sense of understanding and competence with using the Daily Office; satisfaction with existing methods of reflection; should we have announcements during the liturgy or at coffee hour, and so on.

Examples of ways of framing questions or the discussion that are not useful include setting up binary responses, such as, “I would prefer piano music to the organ at 10:30.”  Similarly, you don’t want to test in areas where the group is not competent to respond. 

Context matters.  It might, for instance, be very useful for the rector to gather specific feedback about liturgical issues or her sermons from a small, trusted group of parishioners who know something about liturgy and about homiletics.  This would not, however, be a useful exercise if expanded to the parish as a whole.

In some cases the testing process can be an alternative to community meetings. For example, when I was vicar of a Trenton parish we had two congregations within the parish. The larger had a shared homily[3], a lot of silence, a jazz musician as the parish musician, and occasional jazz masses using local groups. We would do what looked like a Greek or Jewish line dance as we moved from the Liturgy of the Word to our places around the altar. There was also an 8:00 am congregation that did Rite One from the pews in front of that altar. They didn’t exchange the Peace but did often go to breakfast together. They didn’t want to have meetings or group conversations. If I wanted their thinking about something I’d use a short testing process. For example,

I’d like us to:

Continue using Rite 1 all the time ….. Use Rite 1 only in Advent and Lent …. Use Rite 2 all the time

        A PDF on the Testing Process

Leadership Conference

Each year have a leadership conference. This is a time for leaders to get their “heads above water” and to see the parish in broader and deeper ways. This can be at a retreat center or at the parish. While many parishes have such retreats with just the rector and vestry you might consider opening them to anyone in the parish who was willing to fully participate and help with follow-up work in the three months after. It helps to use an external consultant at least every two or three years.   

         A PDF on Leadership Conferences

Informal conversations

The rector invites groups of 8 – 15 people to meet for conversation. In a parish with an average attendance of 150 that might mean 5 or so meetings each year. Spread the meetings over the course of the year. Have some food, a structured conversation, and end with an Office. Not everyone will want to be part of these conversations. Over a two-year period, you will end up including just about everyone interested in participating. Then do it again. And again. It’s all rather informal. Do it reliably over several years and you’ll have a pretty good sense of people’s thoughts and feelings.

Seniors 

The seniors are the “wise ones” of the parish. They may be former wardens, active priest associates or retired priests. There may be a person or two with advanced training in parish development or organization development. The rector might meet with the group three times a year. A vestry might devote one of its meetings each year to such a gathering.  All this is very informal and is not advertised to the whole parish. The rector and/or the vestry can legitimately ask for the counsel of select groups as they see best.

Considerations

Taking counsel with the larger parish community means using methods that help parish leaders better understand the hopes and concerns of people and have ways to gage which are held by many and which by few. It’s also a way for the parish community to hear its own voice and engage in mutual obedience and accommodation. I may think my view is correct. I may even thing most others share my view. These methods are ways of getting a better sense of how others actually are responding to my thinking. Giving myself to the processes of  “taking counsel” is an act of humility.

Remember that the primary ministry of the baptized is in their daily life. While it's important to have methods to consult with the entire parish we need to keep in mind that many, and probably most, members will not want to participate except on special occasions.

Consider reducing the number of vestry meetings each year to five. Have fewer committee meetings. Reduce the number of standing committees use more short term working groups. Look into methods that allow for more self management by working groups.

Rectors, vestries, and parish committees and working groups are pretty much able to make reasonable and confident decisions without input from others in the parish. It's not that we have to have the input to get things right. Though there will be occasions when the additional input does help us get it right, improve the idea, or avoid some pitfalls. Maybe that’s why Benedict wrote “do everything with counsel and you will not be sorry afterward.”

The willingness to take counsel with the larger parish community increases a sense of ownership for decisions that are finally made. It may bring some improvement in the decision-making.  It improves trust in the parish leadership.   It also becomes a form of what is called graduation in organization development. Graduation is the process of systematically developing future leadership in the system. As we see how people handle themselves in these processes we get an idea of who might be good members of the vestry and other committees in the future

rag+

---

[1] RB Prologue Vs 1 Listen carefully, my son, to the master's instructions, and attend to them with the ear of your heart. This is the advice from a father who loves you; welcome it, and faithfully put it into practice.

[2] RB Chapter 3 4 – 5 “The brothers, for their part, are to express their opinions with all humility, and not presume to defend their own views obstinately. 5The decision is rather the abbot's to make, so that when he has determined what is more prudent, all may obey.”

[3] Shared homily - sort of like a Quaker meeting, not like a New England town meeting. It was sharing not discussion or debate