It seems that "power" raises it's ugly head, seeler.

Hi seeler,

The more the merrier.  What do you want to do?  When do you want to do it?  How can I get out of your way?  How can I support your ministry.

It isn't supposed to be my load alone.  It is supposed to be our load together.  If you want to roll up your sleeves and pitch in, I'll gladly move over and give you all the room you need.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Seeler - I'm sorry you had that experience.  CrazyH seeme to have summed it up right away - power. 

It is another example of what many have experienced at church.  Rev Whowever wants the freedom to do everything the way they want - no discussion, no sharing of helpful hints.  Mrs Kitchen Queen wants to control everything that happens in the kitchen even if this means others in the congregation can't gain access for legitimate reasons.  Mr Commiteechair keeps his role long past his ability to hear or recall what happens at meetings. 

As an outsider it puzzles me (and it is a big part of what pushed me out).  It seems that Studies, Surveys, Inspirational meetings etc don't change anything within the organisation.   

Dcn. Jae wrote:

revjohn wrote:

Hi seeler,

 

seeler wrote:

This is mainly a question for clergy - how do you feel about lay people assisting in the leadership of the congregation?

 

The more the merrier.  What do you want to do?  When do you want to do it?  How can I get out of your way?  How can I support your ministry.

 I want to preach sometime, what do you say.

In a UU church, the answer would be to pull out the calendar of services to see what Sundays are in need of a leader.

Mendalla

Hi Dcn. Jae,

If you are asking as a member of the congregation I say, "certainly."  We pick a date and at the next meeting of the worship committee I bring that information forward for their approval because it is the Worship Committee which has final say.

If you are asking as a visiting preacher I say, "I'll pass your info along to the Worship Committee."  They might or they might not contact you to provide pulpit supply when I am on vacation.

Here's the catch.  They don't know you so they will ask if I do.

What would you have me say?

My reputation and integrity would be in your hands.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hi "seeler"...

Your question and circumstance notice matters close to my heart. I could think of no finer answer than:

Let me put my theological start point on the table. In the gospel I see the exemplar Jesus in tension and conflict with a professional clergy. This perception is rooted in my practice and reflection while sojourning in the company of persons comprising the United Church of Canada.

I came to the UCC by the leading of the spirit, as one called to a purpose. That purpose is expressed in the name given me early in my Canadian experience; George. George is from the Greek and suggests one who plows the land so that it may produce a bountiful harvest.

Some one left a door opened and I stepped through to take on the responsibility of a lay pastor with a two point rural charge. By the time Presbytery noticed, the communities had embraced the presence of my partner and I. We are each the oldest of ten, with a knack for negotiating competing claims for the sake of harmony.

Nearing the end of my first appointment, I was approached by persons from another rural two point charge. My name and my word were making the rounds by then. I was asking questions about the paying of money to ordained persons for service at the table and the font.

My private and public reflections on the presenting lections made clear that there is no warrant in the gospel for exclusion of lay presiders at the table. This was followed by conversation with members of the presbytery. Again, wondering what principle was in play by excluding the laity from expression of the sacraments. This taking place over a ten month period and proceeding by small increments.

By the ninth month, I was working to determine either a challenge to the polity with the presbytery, or take personal practical steps to remedy the stigma of "lay entitlement". There was ample conversation about what it cost the ordained to preside at table and font. The very idea that lay persons preside, persons with no material investment in the process and cost of seminary instruction.

The liberty and responsibility of lay persons does not fall far from the Reformation tree. It falls directly from the tree of life given in the name much venerated and flattered, but not much heeded or obeyed.

I base these observations on my theological start point, which is noticed above.

George

Lay people do not "help" ort "assist" in church leadership or life.  Lay people ARE teh leadership and life of teh church.  SOme tasks are shared with someone who is paid, some are delegated almost wholly to that person.  ANd how that sharing and delegation happens is a matter of discussion as the position description is built, lived out, and tweaked.

Is that theory or practice, though? Leaning on paid staff to do work that rightly belongs to the whole congregation is a habit that even we highly congregationalist UUs can get into. Our history of being lay-led (ie. having no paid ministry staff) for long periods  tends to make it less likely but it happens.

How does a church ensure that it doesn't happen? Leaning on paid staff is the easy way out and sometimes boards and committees are bad for taking the easy road even if the intentions of the individual persons is good.

Mendalla

I recall being surprised by a minister who mentioned how hard the job was - when in the Office there were constnt interruptions by people asking for photocopies to be made.  The minister likened the process to a Bush Telegraph - once one person knew everyone who wanted photocopies showed up.  I asked why they didn't do the copies themselves and the reply was - because the machine is in my Office and the Board haven't given permission for other people to use it!

To me this sounds bizarre.  The minister is paid (I thought) as a spiritual leader, not an office assistant.

THat is a danger.  And often the best way is for the paid staff to be clear about wht they should and should not do (and be supported in that by the structure of the congregation)

I think that conversations need to be initiated that often are not. The mole hill becomes a mountain. When it hits critical mass, all hell breaks loose. We all do this, at home, at work... we humans struggle and often fail at conversation.  At home, we assume things we don't think we should or know we shouldn't... we push things off on someone else that we really don't want to do... then, someone feels taken for granted and overworked and under appreciated. I let it be known I expect to be part of a team. People who are shut in need to see more than just my ugly mug. I can talk about spiritual matters and I am not bad company. But, I did not rehearse and sing beside them in the choir for decades. I never was their bridesmaid and I did not peel potatoes and share laughs making all those raost beef dinners. I was not there when you two consoled each other when so-and-so died. And, I cannot make them feel less abandoned by their church family when you abandon them. Funny how they got it....

Great comments, SG. Absolutely true, and needed to be articulated because the other thing humans are is oblivious.

I am glad when people communicate with me, because I too can be oblivious. It does not mean I am insensitive or unconcerned. It may simply mean I am unaware.

I do not get phone calls from hospitals saying, "The soprano in the choir with blonde hair has just been admitted". They do not know that the patient in 214A is the sister of the guy who sits in the back of the church. I do not have a crystal ball to peer into or an angel that comes and says, "Do you know ___ has ____?"  I cannot read minds and I am not listening in on a telephone call ala party line. Sometimes I will hear __ had surgery when you say they are home during announcements. I may hear that someone's family member died when you mention the funeral in announcements. Do not assume the hospital called or the family called or that I read the funeral home website daily or that they call me everytime anyone dies... or that someone told me. Certainly, don't give me heck about what I did not do because you didn't tell me and I couldn't know it existed, let alone, needed done.

Just keep communication open and know it is two-way.

SG - I agree that it is up to each and every one of us to keep the minister informed about things that are happening in the congregation.  Just yesterday I ran into the minister and told her "I just learned that Tom's mother died recently."  She replied "Yes, I know.  And I've talked with Tom.  Thanks for telling me."   I was not embarassed.  I would have been if I had found out and not shared the knowledge and in a few months she ask "Tom, will you be spending Christmas with your mother?" 

The congregation should be helping out with this type of communication, I think.  Probably the minister knows right away if the minister is officiating at the funeral.

All the funerals don't necessarily happen at one's local church with a familiar minister. 

A just bereaved person may not be capable of phoning the minister as they frantically make travel arrangements and/or arrangements for care of family members who cannot travel to a funeral far away.  When they return, maybe several weeks later, they may be exhausted from the actual arrangement and attendance at a funeral plus possibly emptying out a loved one's home and dealing with all the treasures and junk.  They may not even have the energy to show up at church for quite a while - by which time their loss has become 'ancient history' to everyone else.

Thanks seeler and kaythecurler for seeing that aspect. 

Folks can tend to think the minister knows all and the minister can also tend to think folks in the pews know it all.

I listened to a person "discover" someone was seriously ill. They knew the person no longer came to church, that was all. The person might have not liked the clergy. They might have gotten busy. They might be going to church someplace else... it is among many things that "they might be sick". Some folks knew and thought everyone did. They even talked about the folks who didn't know, but they thought must have.

I have stood up front during announcements and heard something I did not know. I have to try not to kick myself for what I didn't do and remember I didn't know. I have to try not to kick someone else for thinking I knew. I am, after all, the minister and am supposed to know. I know I can't know if nobody tells me.

I have also sat in the pews and heard, "____'s funeral went well." I have had to try to not kick myself for not knowing and remind myself that we have a weekly paper where obits can often appear after services and nobody told me.I have had to try not to kick someone else and remember that they couldn't know I didn't know.

Our long time and much loved neighbour died. The church people (clergy and laity) I can only guess assumed that I knew (even though I am now 2.5 hours away). They didn't think my wife would tell me, because they had not told her either. I guess they assumed she knew. A message was eventually left on the answering machine late Friday afternoon that the visitation and funeral was Saturday. My wife was at work...It is a good thing that someone "unchurched" texted me right away and let me know. I was able to contact the family, etc. Otherwise, my wife and I would have driven home on Sunday to find out... and you can bet folks would have been talking about our absence.

If each one tells one... well....

While I am enjoying this discussion and learning from it, it doesn't seem to be addressing the problem that I tried to put forward in the opening post. 

/
I cited two samples. I'm sure there are others. I think that others on this site have experienced it.
/
Why would a church (clergy or council or people in charge) refuse help from lay people who are ready, willing and capable - who have the time and talents - who will work for free - why would their offered talents not be welcomed and put to work?
/

I hear that the church needs the laity.  I hear that the church is the laity.  Some church bulletins state:   Ministers - all of us.   But when a person completes a course that qualifies them for doing much needed pastoral care, and volunteers their time - and several months later hasn't been given anything to do, at the same time as the council is concerned that  the clergy person is overworked, I wonder what is going on? 

Seeler,

I would say a lot of it is likely about liability and insurance.

I perhaps see both sides since I recently went from long time laity to minister. I am now paid accountable staff. If I mess up, so I am held accountable and I can be dismissed, etc. When I was laity, yes, I could lose my license as a Licensed Lay Worship Leader, but that was basically about a list Presbytery published for congregations. A congregation is not forced to only call those people. They can invite anyone they want to guest speak or lead worship.  

We acknowledge that there are good clergy, ok clergy and bad clergy... and those in between. There are clergy with good boundaries, bad boundaries, no boundaries... As an employer on can have "mandated" training required of an employee.
 

If someone goes to a home and gets out of line, they cannot really be disciplined. The most one can do is complain about it, unless it is so bad that they are excommunicated. I know of a lay visitor, Stephen Minister trained, who folks did not want to visit them and the church itself struggled in how they could prevent someone from visiting.

All the training in the world may not make one good at something. Example- I could be trained for decades and would not be a good ballerina. Some folks will never be good with pallative care issues, addiction....

This thinking, for me,  applies for clergy or laity. Folks who are sexist, racist, homophobic... can be clergy or laity. Someone who abuses can be clergy or laity.
 

If the person with the training says, "nice boobs" it will be the church held responsible. The church will struggle on how they have that person volunteering, in the pews....

If it is the minister, the church can fire the minister and make sure they don't get another position.

They can mandate training to show an insurer they are limiting the risk and liability.

If it is not paid staff, the church may still be on the hook for a settlement and the church and insurance companies know that.