The two greatest fears in Church

The two greatest fears associated with "change" in the Church today are: (1) there will not be enough change take place and (2) too much change will take place. Factor into this the idea that the Church is a living organism filled with free floating anxiety as a result of ongoing challenges and disappointments ... well you can see why people in the congregation search for what is wrong and try to fix it.

A lot of what the Church deals with is external in nature however. The world we live in is ever-changing, requiring the Church to adjust her methodology in order to address her mission. Change however makes people feel uncomfortable and most will try to hang on to the staus quo if they can. Instead of viewing change as an opportunity to "grow and go" into greater effectiveness many will look at the changing world and the emotional impact it is having on the local church and view it as a problem. We know from studies in conflict management that the emotional impulse of people prompts them to search for what is wrong. When they do not find clear and agreeable answers, they quickly try to determine who is wrong and label them as the problem. One of the basic principles in conflict management is to separate the people from the issues and to teach them how to talk about and address change focused on the issues and not personalities.

Rendle states in his book "Leading Change in the Congregation" that an emotionally/spiritually immature Church will generally follow the "Three P approach" when charged by the pressure to change. Rendle says, the three P's are "often quick fix exercises intuitively designed not to bring any real change to the congregation but to offer the feeling that a problem has been identified and something has been done. The three P's of problem solving in the Church are: people, programs and policy (page 34-35).

Rendle continues by saying, "The most popular people for congregations to change are the clergy. They often will call a pastor to change the staus quo but collusively enforce old rules that make it impossible for any real change to occur. A new strategy sounds and feels good until it confronts the old rules of people's tradition" (p. 35). Generally this leads to the demise of the change agent.

The second P is programming. Rendle states that because most anxiety "stems from poor attendance and money a congregation will invent a program to address the problem. For most, a common solution is to invent a ministry as a way of increasing growth in attendance and giving" (p. 36). However, "the rush to do something, to come up with a solution to decrease the anxiety of the congregation, subverts a solution to the deeper issue at the heart of the people and leads to greater loss of motivation, trust and intimacy (p. 37). The third P is policy. "The rush to do stimulates activity that leads to further discomfort among leaders so policies are created to control the anxiety" (36-37).

How do we avoid the "Three P's" at WHFC? Embrace anxiety as normal and view it as a sign of a healthy church. To remember that the Church is a living organism and not a business. Some business practices will prove valuable and some to be fatal. We must discern wisely between the two.

We must consistently remind one another that the intelligence of our Church is determined by our ability to communicate effectively throughout our organization and to gather, process and respond to information based upon our vision, mission and objectives. We need information! We must also frame anxiety that occurs in the fellowship as God presenting an opportunity for our greater effectiveness and unity rather than as a bone of contention and just a problem to be solved.
------
Adrian