UUCGT Home | UUCGT Member Portal | Return to Sermon Index

Here We Stand Today; Where Shall We Stand Tomorrow?
by The Reverend Don W. Vaughn-Foerster
January 30, 2005

Therefore, today I want to look at where this congregation is at this point in its existence and affirm where its present dynamics are leading. It is time that I share my perceptions with you as a whole congregation rather than only as individuals and groups, as has been the case so far. During these six months I have learned a lot; but also, I've experienced the truth of a bumper sticker I once saw. To experience that truth yourself it isn't necessary to have seen that particular sticker, if you are involved in this congregation's current activities and projects. As one deadline after another has come and passed, you have, probably, already been made aware of its message: "Warning: Dates on Calendar Are Closer Than They Seem."

At this time, things can look pretty much like a jumble: So much is going on! So much seems left to do! Such a condition can be either heartening or disheartening, depending on your "water glass theory" on whether the glass is half full or half empty. The calendar may suggest that your glass may be half full while my glass may be 60% full, I see this situation in "heartening" terms.

From my point of view, you have a great thing going here. What I see here is a healthy, growing, inviting, and inclusive group of people. I have to admit that when I talked by phone with the Interim Minister Search Committee last spring, this congregation was pictured in such utopian terms that my UU penchant for not taking things at face value slipped a bit of doubt into my mind. I came here wondering if another shoe would drop. After all, this congregation is made up of people and people will act like people in spite of their aspirations to be saints or humanists -- two parallel categories depending on your theology. And, I have to admit that I have heard a couple of shoes at least stubbing into each other. However, I do have to go on record and say that this is one of the more thriving, inclusive, and stimulating congregations with which I have been involved.

The friendliness here is especially noticeable. Most people here enjoy one another. And, among people I have met, this friendliness seems more than a superficial phenomenon. The few instances of discord I have seen have been handled with more civility than I have often seen in other places. And, so far I haven't encountered much discord -- not as much as I expect an interim year to bring out. But, then, we still have the rest of the glass to fill up, don't we? Just be assured that the last half- glass will fill up well, if everyone continues to listen to one another with that deep respect which produces friendliness and compatibility and seems to be a hallmark of relationships here.

Out of this basic friendliness and compatibility is growing a steadily expanding concept of your over all ministry. The concept of "the ministry of the whole" is taking firm root here -- meaning that there is an increasing sense of mutual support and commitment to one another. This is most obvious in the area of pastoral care, a dimension of congregational life that seems to be strengthening every day. But the concept of "the ministry of the whole" goes beyond internal congregational dynamics. The message seems to be coming through that, as one liberal wag put it, "I want to be my own individual, but I can't do it alone." I see growing here a solidarity of mutual support that can, increasingly, enable this congregation to have significant intellectual, aesthetic, and ethical impact on the community at large.

As for organization and program, things are in basically good order. The lay leadership I have encountered is committed, competent, and flexible, characteristics that appear to have characterized your leadership for a long time. The office staff operates effectively and efficiently despite their cramped quarters. The religious education program is doing well and creatively. Despite its own inadequate space and the distractions of its own self-generated noise, it continues to attract young families. The musical aspects here, probably, are the greatest avenue this congregation has into things of the spirit and have an over-all degree of artistic excellence not often found in UU societies.

"Intentionality" is one of the most noticeable aspects of this congregation. The intention to grow is clear. This motive has been pursued so well in the past that larger facilities are now necessary. Along with this desire to grow and to proliferate, there is an accompanying openness to that which is "new" -- not that some older members are all that comfortable with the changes that have come but that those who are still around seem to accept change as inevitable. Perhaps the greatest difficulty this congregation is having with change is in moving from small group thinking to big group thinking. There are good intentions here and much has been done to move along these lines. However, there still are some practices and behaviors that require some tweaking. This brings me to the next area of what I want to talk about.

I have been talking about some of the "heartening" aspects of where this congregation currently is. Now I move to other aspects that could be called disheartening but that I prefer to call challenging. They would be disheartening only if you are a pessimist; and it is as another bumper sticker declares: there is "No Sense Being Pessimistic; It Wouldn't Work Anyhow.

Transitional periods (i.e. years of interim ministry) are, almost by definition, challenges of the first order. Moving from one familiar situation into a new and unknown situation inevitably increases stress. People may be eager to change. They may work hard to bring change about. But, when change comes, there is oftentimes a "buyer's remorse." Some persons, in fact, step aside from the onrush into a new situation. Some do so because what it seems this congregation will be in the future does not promise a warmth and closeness that brought them here in the first place. Some may do so because they were so personally identified with the former long time minister that they can not entertain the notion of identifying with another minister, either an interim or a newly settled one. Others simply ran out of energy and time. That's called "burnout."

It's at times like this that factions can develop and organizations can fall apart. The parties to such divisiveness may believe themselves to be acting in everybody's best interest because they think they see the issues more clearly than everyone else. This is only to say that the stresses of transition are especially susceptible to enabling individual agendas to show themselves. Perhaps the best guard against this happening is not to forget how to listen to one another with respect and patience. The challenge here, as one of my favorite church consultants has put it, is to learn how to "count the 'yes' votes" without derogating the "no" votes. This means, essentially, that what is important is to maintain positive forward momentum by building on and enhancing the positive commitments of those enough committed to the process to see it through without ostracizing those with more negative feelings.

A happy aspect of the transition times here is that new, responsible leadership keeps stepping forward -- people who seem to have the ability to keep things in balance. Visitors keep coming and from time to time they join. This is bringing an invigorating openness in which people look forward to a new situation in which they can enhance and even reorganize their relationships. This is especially helpful when, central to those relationships, is to be a newly settled minister. Such openness to change can bring great steps forward in both congregational and personal life.

Organizationally, there are a number of challenges that, to my mind, rank more as second order than first order challenges. These are aspects and issues of congregational life that can be handled procedurally for the most part. For instance, there is some unclarity about how to advance social action and social justice projects within the congregation, especially as such projects relate this congregation as a body to the larger community. A carefully thought-out resolution by the board or by the congregation could resolve this problem. Another issue that has arisen that could be handled in the same way is the clarification of the function of the Administrative and Program Councils. The blue book on procedure describes these councils well -- up to the point of fully clarifying the question: Are they reporting, deliberative, or legislative bodies, or do they have all of these functions? Related to this issue is the makeup of the board itself. Everyone of its voting members is an officer with a portfolio. I'm used to seeing a few at-large members of the board whose only portfolio is to keep a finger on the pulse of the congregation -- to know "how things are playing in Peoria", as it were. This consideration might be of less importance were the role of the councils better understood.

There is another organizational aspect that needs mention. It is the holding away from congregational premises meetings that conduct the business of the congregation. This is apparently a long-standing practice here and it is something I have encountered in several other UU groups. As a way to encourage informality and ease among committee members, for instance, it has a lot of merit. I have always found it interesting and enjoyable to go to such meetings in peoples' homes. The problem, however, is that it is usually assumed that meetings dealing with the business of the congregation should be open meetings. When such meetings are held "off premises" they become difficult for a member of the congregation who is not a member of that committee or group to locate and attend. A more open practice would be to hold as many such meetings as possible on the congregation's premises. That way a member interested in "what's going on" doesn't have to track the meeting down and feel he or she is intruding into a private home uninvited.

I don't raise this issue at this time because I think much can be done about it now. The reality is that the physical premises of this congregation are not well given to accommodating every committee meeting that should be held. But, the larger you get, the more necessary it is to keep such meetings open to the congregation. To me, the situation here is that this congregation has been trying to be -- or has actually been -- a program church for some time. But it is still employing pastoral church behaviors in many ways. The best way to put it may be this: off-site meetings discourage open meetings and are vestiges of small-group thinking.

Actually, it seems to me that the greatest challenge facing this congregation is easily identified but is not easy to overcome except by single-minded diligence. You have all bitten off a big two-part bite to chew. You are in the midst of building a sizable addition to this present building and you are in the midst of a search for a new settled minister. Either one of these projects is a major involvement for any congregation. To undertake them together pretty much squares the time, energy, and volunteer effort required. There is nothing much to say about this situation except this is where you are. You have to do both; your are doing both. I just want you to know that when both are accomplished, as they will be accomplished, you can all wear super-hero T shirts and Spiderman tights if you want to.

But there is one further major challenge you face that is not easy to talk about. It is the subject of finances, money, that green stuff you used to carry folded in your handbags and billfolds but now usually access through little plastic cards. Money is a challenge because money and openness seldom go together. Money is a very necessary public tool but also its possession is a very personal thing. Most of us are usually very secretive about what we have, whether it is little or lots. Thus, straightforward talk and open attitudes about what is really needed and what is really available are essential to prevent barricades to progress from developing. Being coy and secretive on this matter won't help at all.

This congregation faces some strenuous challenges, obviously. Getting through the transitional period and still liking each other, sorting out what organizational tweaking can and should be done in this period, following through on the building project and the ministerial search, and being straight with one another about what money means to all this and how to get it: all this is quite a bit to swallow and digest. But, as I said in the beginning, you've got a great thing going here. You have the energy, you have the resources, you have the healthy, welcoming spirit, you have the leadership. And, through the careful and substantial work of the Ministerial Search Committee you will have the opportunity to call a settled minister who appreciates your qualities as a congregation and is eager to engage the challenges you face.

Of course, things can look pretty much like a jumble. Things can be either heartening or disheartening, depending on your "water glass theory" on whether the glass is half full or half empty. But let's exchange the water glass analogy for one I used last September when I first talked about interim goals. It is an analogy I picked up at an interim ministers' meeting. It explains why things can seem so jumbled. Many of you have heard this, but let me spell it out again. Envision the patterns, norms, and habits of a congregation to be like a supersaturated solution of some chemical compound in a beaker. Now, drop into this solution a crystalline solid of the same compound and ching! The contents of the entire beaker crystallize around this seed crystal. Such, it can be said, is the response in a congregation to a new minister when the match is good. Over time, the crystalline shape of the minister has a profound influence on the shape and style of the whole congregation. Once the crystalline structure in the beaker is fully formed, you can take a surgical saw and pliers to remove the seed crystal (or the minister may resign) but the crystalline structure doesn't change except for the hole in it. Now, imagine a solvent in the form of an interim minister. You pour this onto the crystallized solid, apply warmth, agitate gently (we hope), and a new supersaturated solution is formed. Now, take a new seed crystal (in the form of a newly settled minister), drop it into the solution and a new crystalline structure forms, differently configured from what went before.

Let me suggest that, during the time the interim minister is part of the solution, things begin to break up, become more fluid, and so are less predictable and more stressful. Now, if things become fluid enough when the appropriate settled minister comes, they will take on a more secure and beneficent shape and all the stress and difficulty of the interim will coalesce into a new and vibrant and forward-looking congregation. That, my friends, is where all this is leading.

UUCGT Home | UUCGT Member Portal | Return to Sermon Index