April 1997
Ronald Arms
First, I want to express my thanks for what has been the most inclusive decision making process I have participated in during my nine years of life in our community. I am grateful to the Homemakers Mission Group for their work and leadership. Clearly Seekers has gone out of its way to listen, evoke and gather information, opinions and feelings on the issue of space. The process has not been perfect, but if we have erred we have erred on the side of patience, participation and inclusion.
The last time I wrote about the issue of space, it was out of disappointment. Core members had decided then to reserve for themselves the final decision on this matter. This time I write from a sense of hope. While it is not clear how the community will make decisions in the future, or what its decision will be this time, we have been encouraged to participate. As the May 4, 1997 core members' meeting draws near, I want to express my thoughts and feelings on the issue of space.
Before Seekers makes a major financial commitment on space, issues of belonging, decision making and leadership need careful reconsideration. Few things weigh mainline churches down more than their buildings. Once there is debt to meet, who belongs, how decisions get made and how leadership is handled all tend to be decided in light of the pressing financial demands. We are in a privileged time and place where we can give further careful attention to these key issues. They can lead us to the right kind of space. Seekers' sense of identity is a useful guide in this matter.
Belonging is a key issue. I write as someone who chooses not to be a core member. Call to Commitment is one of our defining documents. It spells out the meaning of the integrity of membership. On the front end it takes the form of necessary preparation. This is a two year process in most cases that requires patience and persistence. At the back end there is a one year limit. Commitment is no longer a life long possession. It is a conscious annual choice renewed when appropriate, and refused when proper.
Membership is about commitment. This is not an easy word. I sometimes confuse it with control. To do so makes commitment a fence that protects members or keeps others out. I want to explore ways to transform the image of commitment as a fence into one of commitment as a springboard. This may help us think of membership in creative ways that further strengthen our community.
Commitment comes from the Latin for mission, meaning to send, put together, to entrust, to undertake, to risk. When we understand this word in its broadest sense it is a springboard inviting participation. In my imagination these possibilities arise: Could we explore levels of membership that incorporate various combinations of participation, responsibility and risk? Might an initial level acknowledge regular presence in any aspect of the community's life and an introductory experience like a confirmation class or an orientation to Seekers? Could a choice to participate in School of Christian Living courses, church school teaching or a mission group represent yet another option? Might core membership be open to those accepting our common spiritual disciplines and the authority to exercise discipline within the community? Could this culminate in the ordination of members who assume any of the leadership functions necessary for our common Life? The future of Seekers may depend on our ability to further elicit the gifts of participation, responsibility and risk from more than our core members.
Commitment should not be a comparison process. The claim that core members, nonmembers, or other types of members, can be counted on more than others, are more reliable than others, are more willing to show up for meetings, carry burdens or shoulder the expenses of the community more than others sets up a process that hinders more than helps. These may all be accurate statements at times, but even when they are correct they turn membership into a privileged, powerful position that is at odds with the life, example and teachings of the One members claim as Master.
The principle of recommitment makes membership a temporary condition. It applies to all levels of membership. It means no one can rightly claim it for the long haul. Time differences are beside the point. The length of commitment is seldom more important than its immediacy. Membership is a type of manna. It does not have a long shelf life, nor does it automatically improve with age. Risk remains at the heart of commitment.
Thus the invitation to review the issue of belonging. Can we understand membership as responsibility rather than control mechanism? As an invitation to participate more than a test? As a risk to share in accountability rather than a struggle over who is in charge? Different levels of responsibility, participation and risk make sense to me, beginning at those we are willing for our children to claim. Our ability to widen the tent, to broaden our circle of compassion, will probably have an important bearing on the kind of space we seek and need.
Decision making is where responsibility, participation and risk intersect with control.
Decision making amongst us happens in a wide variety of ways, at different levels on varying issues. We can exercise control in ways that build community. To do this it must lead to involvement, inclusion and integrity. This will enable people to hold the reins of control with open hands rather than tight fists.
If core membership is about being in charge, it loses its appeal. Closed meetings, holding decision making power tightly, paying core members for leadership tasks, controlling the budget all speak of being in charge. I seem to get stuck on these issues still. They are well within the Church of the Savior tradition. But as this tradition emerged from challenging its predecessors, so too it deserves to be challenged, especially on these counts.
Decision making can lead to involvement. To do this, Seekers might hold business meetings open to all interested on a regular basis. Our incorporation documents could spell out the range of issues and the process employed. The exercise of listing in writing what decision the various groups and people in the congregation are entitled to make might be helpful. If Seekers wants to encourage greater participation, opening up decision making is a good step to take. People who have a choice participate.
Decision making can lead to inclusion. Seekers needs to make many decisions in order to function. How they are made is important. What has impressed me about our current process is not only the attempt to include more people, but the attention some have given to the feelings of those whose point of view is different from their own. Being mindful of minority and opposition positions builds community.
Decision making can lead to integrity. Efforts to broaden decision making enrich the integrity of membership. Choices become the very training ground where potential and growing members will try out the various stages of belonging and levels of responsibility. A core membership that accepts full responsibility without insisting on maximum control over community decisions is congruent with a community that practices servant leadership. Being clear about the ways the community is willing to combine control and commitment will result in the best selection and purchase of servant structures.
Some of our wisdom on decision making is sound. If there is no energy for an activity, it doesn't happen. People called to action use mission groups to gather resources and attempt results. But as we have worked with the space issue it is evident we can better clarify our standards and procedures. The extent to which we continue to use consensus, and the kinds of decisions made at various levels of responsibility warrant reconsideration.
A critical decision many of us make is how much to contribute to Seekers on a regular basis. Core members challenge themselves to look at this particular decision in depth. They bring standards of tradition and spiritual direction to bear on the issue. In the long run, however, how we treat other decisions in the community has as much bearing on regular contributions as does any preaching or practice on tithing and stewardship. People who are involved, included and have integrity give as much as they can.
The call to commitment enables the priesthood of all believers. The elimination of the clergy/laity split allows us to practice what others preach. It empowers ordinary people. We derive much strength from the active participation and the ample ownership that many have in our faith community. Our "do it yourself" faith venture depends on this. Commitment ordains.
While we have gone further than any congregation I have been part of in our practice of the priesthood of all believers, we dare not rest on our laurels. Our paid leadership is a major budget line item. Our current team serves us well. They are not eternal; nor is there any magic in the current configuration. We more than any community I know has the possibility of assuming leadership tasks without paying for them. Should we choose to move in that direction in due course, the financial implications for space and service are great. If, on the other hand, we choose to continue current practice, the costs of this choice are real too. We can be intentional about this choice, rather than risking a building purchase make it by default.
I venture these opinions because of friendships with each and all of our current leadership team. They bring different gifts, styles of service and power of vision to us without which we would be smaller, weaker and less effective than we are. On the other hand, in my nine years of participation here Fred and Kay have left leadership positions and the community. Bob has also left the leadership team. Change happens. It is real.
Seekers' future depends on our ability to change. Traditional religious thinking would have us turn to seminaries or near by churches to search for some bright star to guide us into the future. Or we might hope that those core members currently enrolled in seminary will return to the community to bless us with their respective gifts and visions.
I find it more interesting to imagine a future that further challenges us to assume the responsibilities of organizing, running and managing a faith community without the benefit of paid leadership. Or further minimizing its role. Is it possible for mission groups to be tasked with an essential part of the community's life? Can we believe there is enough dedication and commitment among us to attempt the difficult? Can the work of the people (liturgy) be not just what happens on Sunday, but what we need to keep ourselves functional and caring?
The time to look at these possibilities is now. In the not too distant future,
current leadership will need for us to make changes. We are in a transition process. We are capable people, committed to a common cause. Dare we dream of new ways or organizing ourselves before we commit to owning property and buying space?
The belief that it is possible for individuals to create an organization of their own choosing is radical. The notion that God calls us to do so daring. The priesthood of all believers might profit from a wider interpretation of commitment. People at the center have tremendous impact, yet in very practical ways, the inmates run the prison too. Besides we are all sitting inside open cells. The gospel invites us all to attempt the difficult with hope. How much responsibility each of us is willing to assume without being paid for it has direct consequences on the kind of space Seekers can best use.
For these reasons I sense we have important work to do that will shape and help us select our space still. To buy now, to move now, will instead allow space to lead us into a more limited future. The Homemaker's Mission Group has launched us on an important journey. We have used this process for much that is good and beneficial thus far. Working with the new possibilities it offers us can lead us to the proper decisions on space. For these reasons I am opposed to the purchase on Pennsylvania Avenue, or other property, by Seekers at this time.
I remain excited about the possibilities that are ours.