1. How do issues of power and authority influence ministry in the church?
2. How are shifting generational attitudes to authority shaping our understanding of faithful models of leadership in the church?
3. What unresolved issues exist between the church's various categories of ministry and how might these issues be addressed?
4. What forms of ministry will best serve the future needs of the church?

Love to hear your thoughts on these questions, James.

1. How do issues of power and authority influence ministry in the church?    

              
Our biggest problem is the belief that we have no authority, that if we exercise leadership, the people will refuse to listen. This comes from a lack of trust in the worth of the gospel as something to guide our lives by. We can lead without being arrogant or intolerant. Leadership does not mean controlling others - it is to inspire others to become disciples of Jesus, to claim their ministry in Christ. To be disciples of Jesus does mean that we must be disciplined in how we follow his example. We need leaders who teach, who encourage, who correct, who inspire.

   2. How are shifting generational attitudes to authority shaping our understanding of faithful models of leadership in the church?                                        

We cannot lead out of a sense of entitlement. We can only lead by example. We can lead by the power of persuasion. We are witnesses that Jesus' sermon on the mountain (Matthew Ch's 5-7) is a credible template for us to live a more fulfilling life. People today are not motivated by guilt or sinfulness, so threats of hell rings empty. The authority of a meaningful, worthwhile and purposeful life in abundance is respected and sought.

   3. What unresolved issues exist between the church's various categories of ministry and how might these issues be addressed?                                           

Do we dare to trust that ordained ministers have something worthwhile to offer? The ordained clergy do not speak with one voice, as do the diaconate. They are not consulted as a body. There has been much mistrust of clergy around the issue of leadership. If we don't trust these people to lead, then let's move on to another better model.

If we are going to be committed to using paid professional clergy (ordained and commissioned) then let's make sure there are viable jobs which are financially sustainable. You can't expect someone to undertake 7 years of education and then only offer them a half time position. I have met a number of 20-something students who are struggling with a sense of call. All of them are doubting their call to ministry as they seriously doubt there will be enough work to keep them gainfully employed. I've been in ministry 22 years and I've got 14 more years to go to retirement, and even I'm worried by what I see.

4. What forms of ministry will best serve the future needs of the church?

As presbyteries and conferences, we need to beyond just being a centrallyorganized model of deploying ministers to established congregations. We need to find room for entrepenurial models of ministry, where innovation and new kinds of contexts are encouraged. We as the courts of the church need to have as part of our mandate to seek out new opportunities for ministry. The job of the courts of the church is to animate & support the ministry which belongs to the congregation and all its ministers, both lay and ordered.

Thanks, James.  I offer these comments not to argue, but to give you the microphone to say more.

1) Is it really our *biggest* problem, that our leader have not tapped into the authority granted them?  My observation is that the problem is our leaders not learning how to use that authority with maturity.

2) If you're framing entitlement as a generational issue, I'll agree, especially as a characteristic of the boomer generation.  What generational issue do you think frustrates younger generations?

3) Whenever I watch a conversation about ordained clergy being set apart or resourced or something in a unique way, the conversation gets derailed in various directions.  In your opinion, why does this happen?

4) Whenever I hear calls for alternative ministry models (beyond congregational), I agree in theory, but viability issues seem to get in the way.  Congregations exist because they are self-sustaining.  But the alternatives seem to rely on the benevolence of congregations.  I can see seeding alternatives until they are self-sustaining...but some proposals seem to suggest the alternatives need never become self-sustaining.  Or that self-sustaining ministries are by nature suspect because they're institutionalized.  Feels like a double-bind is at play: institutions are suspect, so alternatives are needed, underwritten by the institutions, until they can become self-sustaining, which makes them institutions.

Again, not intended as polemic...but to hear you say more.

1. A lack of maturity when it comes to exercising leadership is the result of our not having a mature model of what leadership is. We have no examples. We have no case studies. We have no mentors. Which means it is up to the individual charisma of the minister. It ends up being all about them, instead of being about the gospel.

2. Every generation wonders why they can't be heard. The 20 somethings I know of do not find the church's definitions of sin very compelling, and what we offer as salvation is considered lacking. They see our spirituality as anemic. They relate to the conviction and passion of Shane Claiborne who dares to take Jesus very seriously.

3. Ordained clergy don't know what they are supposed to do. They are highly educated and full of good intentions. But they don't know what works. The church has been in decline for my entire career. Everyone I  know who says their model of ministry is a huge success isn't doing anything different than I am, except they are in a growing demographic market.

4. Not all ministry has to be in congregations. We have figured out a way for congregations to be self-financing. But there has to be room for entrepenurial ministries, tent-making ministries and volunteer ministries. Not all of these will be paid in the same way. We have a truckload of categories of ministers who all do basically the same congregational jobs. Why can't we have a cafe ministry, a circuit rider ministry to house churches, an arts & spirituality after school program, a consulting missiologist, pastoral counseller for hire, and see all these as valid expressions of ministry? Not all our ministries need to become institutions or own a building.

Right- now it's your turn to share your ideas!

I attended the first event, in Winnipeg. A productive gathering of insight from a diverstiy of perspectives. Here are the working notes for my contribution to that event:

Resisting the Seductions of Power and Recovering the Promise of Authority

We now notice the pervasive conflict of local, national and international powers. This leads some among us to raise questions concerning the nature and implications of power. Such questions are perhaps urgent as power struggles reach critical proportions.

My presentation will begin with a consideration of the observation made by Thomas Hobbes in the seventeenth century: "So that in the first place, I put for a general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceases only in death." This will then be contrasted to Paul’s assertion in Philippians: "... being found in human appearance, Jesus humbled himself and became obedient to death even death on a cross!"

Next the presentation will compare and contrast Jesus and Herod. Herod will be presented as one skilled and successful in the restless desire of power after power, as in Hobbes. That Herod fits the pattern given in Hobbes will be supported by a brief consideration of a conversation between Socrates and Callicles in Plato’s "Gorgias". This dialogue carefully analyzes the urge to power and the implications following.

The contrast will be illustrated by reference to Tolkien’s fictional character, Frodo, who is tempted and vexed by power but does not succumb, and so overcomes the restless desire for power after power represented by the arch villain Sauron.

Finally the presentation will consider Hobbes as a determinative and authoritative source for the modern Western Imperial trajectory. In particular I will suggest that the United Church of Canada’s commitments to the Gospel of Jesus Christ are compromised by a gradual and unconscious accommodation to the Liberal Democratic ethos established in the doctrines of power articulated by Hobbes and the tradition of Political Hedonism rooted in the ground of that doctrine.

I will conclude by proposing that a broad critical engagement of foundational ideas and assumptions may open an avenue to the restoration of covenant fidelity and mission efficacy.

I am much appreciating the conversation above my post. Hopefully I have not changed the direction.

Look forward to hearing more from either or other voice.

~bump~

After scanning some of these discussion threads, I'd like to point out that a number of you have a great start on those presentations this post is soliciting...? Anyone?

1.  Leadership, maturity, and authority.  Genuine authority flows out of relationships and authenticity along with essential knowledge and gifts worth employing in the service of the church.  In my experience, I seemed to be able to exercise a degree of authority when I demonstrated openness to other points of view and respectfully engaged them, offer my points of view gently, show a willingness in share in the labour of implementing decisions, and clearly from their experience act out of genuine concern and love.  When I attended AST, a major emphasis of the curriculum was on incorporating what we were learning into our understandings of ministry and on putting our knowledge and beliefs into practice.  We were prepared to participate in and share ministry with the congregations we would be serving.  Rules are important; knowledge is important; a firm belief base is important; the capacity and willingness to engage in real and mutual relationships is essential.  Also essential is a guiding goal or vision, and the willingness to test our immediate actions against that goal or vision.  If the goal is too small, it will not be enough to drive us or inspire others.

2.  Generational issues:  People under 40 need evidence that it is worthwhile to accept the leadership being offered -- for the most part they are not strongly influenced by titles or defined roles.  People under about 30 or 35 need that evidence to include an electronic presence if possible, even if it is just leaders being shown by a projected image during worship or an event.  The day of institutional loyalty is almost totally gone.  As electronic communication connects people to the world, the need for a focus on local relationships becomes more important.  Younger people have as much contact as most of them care for with the wider world.  This makes connection with regional church bodies mostly unattractive for them unless the connection relates to one of their passions.

The sense of entitlement is pervasive in our society.  I thnk of a teacher a few years ago about to retire who was adamant that the local should push hard for as much of a raise as possible because it was going to affect his pension by a few dollars a month.  I thnk of students and their parents who believe they should be able to succeed just by being present and doing an occasional bit of work. 

3.  An important unresolved issue about categories of ministry is adequately defining appropriate expectations for each category as contrasted with requirements and kinds of eligible ministries.  Tied into this we can add one of my favourite issues:  to whom do the sacraments belong?  With whom does the responsibility for the appropriate administration of the sacraments belong?

4.  Forms of Minstry:  I am totally with James Murray on this one..  It needs the willingness of the church hierarchy to trust motivated individuals and groups enough to give them permission to try.  A few decades ago an ordinand wanted to be ordained to street ministry in Toronto, to be allowed to go out on his own to try to build a congregation from nothing at almost no risk to the church, and he was denied. 

I would like the UCC to adopt a denominational version of the Tom Bandy model in which a significant role of one court was to establish boundaries of values, beliefs, and vision; entertain proposals for action within those boundaries; and offer guidance and support to any proposal that met these requirements.  Many of these proposals will fail, and in their failing provide learning opportunities to be employed in developing new proposals. The proposals that succeed will further the mission and ministry of the church, and what more should we demand?

Within the last decade, Toronto Conference ordained someone to a progressive, entepreneurial style community-based seeker ministry. It failed after several years. Lessons were learned.  

And hopefully those lessons will lead to further experiments in the future which will benefit us all.

Thanks DKS!