Pastors and denominational leaders face tough decisions right now. The Christian faith is inherently embodied; we gather, we meet, we celebrate the Incarnation – the Word Made Flesh. For millenia, we’ve celebrated the Eucharist, finding Christ’s presence in the tangible – wine and bread, a burning grace.

The Christian faith is also inherently self-sacrificial; we mend, we serve, we search out the vulnerable, we protect, we value. We “look out not only for (our) own interests, but also for the interests of others,” being told, “let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus…” who “took the form of a servant.” (Phil. 2) Early Christians rescued abandoned babies on hillsides and cared for their own plague-stricken members as well as caring for poor members of the Empire (to the Empire’s chagrin).

In gathered worship or scattered and serving, Christians have been told that whatever we do, we should do with good cheer. Rejoice in worship, rejoice in giving. Rejoice in getting together, rejoice in serving others. Grumbling is apparently not a Fruit of the Spirit. We value creation; and we show it by serving.

The Body of Christ is essential even if meeting together is interrupted. Churches are essential insofar as the Body of Christ is essential; but access to church buildings is not an absolute, essential piece of the puzzle. While the Body of Christ, existing in the life of congregations, is essential, congregants are not expendable. We are a people who value life and promote its flourishing.

The Christian faith is inherently embodied; but it is also inherently self-sacrificial. And so many face tough decisions. Leaders of all denominations have an opportunity to take strain off of individual clergymembers by continuing to create contingency plans and best practice protocol:

plans, practices, and protocol that cheerfully look out for the value and dignity of each church member and potential visitor.

When the strain is greatest, let’s continue to forge ahead with creative resilience.

By doing so we march hand in hand with the midwives of Egypt, who protected vulnerable newborns at risk to their own lives, thwarting the easy call of casual contempt, by the burning grace of God.

By doing so we march hand in hand with Moses and Miriam, called to distance from the land of their upbringing, caught between warriors and water, carried to the other side on dry land by the burning grace of God.

By doing so we march hand in hand with Elijah, who poured water on his altar, making sure every single witness knew that it was only God who could make the fire fall, watching the revelation of God crack the sky, vindicated by the burning grace of God.

By doing so we march hand in hand with Esther, who found herself vulnerable in halls of influence and power, carried by the urgent encouragement of one who saw clearly the stakes for a whole people group. She found favor with the powerful, toppling corrupt schemes and protecting the innocent by the burning grace of God.

By doing so we march hand in hand with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who found themselves caught in the crucible but discovered in it the presence of a fourth – “I see a fourth man, who looks like the Son of God” – rescued from the inferno by the burning grace of God, not even smelling like ash.

By doing so we march hand in hand with Paul, who cried out in his letter to his fellow church members in Philippi how much he longed to see them face to face, person to person; how intently he prayed for them, by the burning grace of God.

By doing so we march hand in hand with John Wesley, who as a child was rescued by community members during a roaring house fire, grabbed from a window, a “brand plucked from the flames.” His early memories were seared by other people sacrificing in order to protect him; later he experienced his very soul being warmed, not by trauma but by the burning grace of God.

We have nothing to fear from closed doors; we have everything to fear from closed hearts.

Our hope is not in “business as usual,” our hope is in the fourth man, who looks like the Son of God, wandering around casually in the crucible with us – the Ascended Christ.

Our hope is not in the Pentecost banners we’re accustomed to seeing in church sanctuaries, our hope is in the Holy Spirit, who descended on believers – only to scatter them.

In this moment we still have a choice of what we are going to be: a dead, rotted stump of former things, or potent seed bursting with latent life, willing to live scattered by the Spirit.

By the burning grace of God, we pray, Christ Ascended, that you will char away our bent to dry rot; scatter us like fresh, powerful seed, holding the promise of fruit we can only imagine, because it is only possible through the radiance of your Holy Spirit.

We do not like feeling scattered, God; we would rather stay close to each other.

Remind us that You are enough.

Remind us that you bind the stretches of the universe together and you bind us together, too.

Remind us that your Holy Spirit is faithful to keep us sensitive to each others’ needs if we will listen to Your Spirit who binds us together.

You are not just God who sustains gravity; you are God who knits with quantum entanglement for fun. Entangle our spirits with Your Holy Spirit, like particles that, “cannot be described independently from the state of the others even when separated by large distances;” entangle our hearts with each other.

Christ Ascended, in you we find wholeness; Holy Spirit, entangle those of us who feel distanced, lonely, despairing, afraid.

By the burning grace of God, keep us from being overwhelmed by distancing; sustain us with Pentecost entanglement that scatters and connects at the same time.

Through Christ our Lord, the only open door we need – Amen.

 

If you are you struggling to make decisions about policy and how to communicate those decisions to your church during this chaotic time, you are not alone. In this new normal of remote church, much consumes our day-to-day activities. It is difficult to plan and communicate future steps, sometimes even seemingly futile given the rapid changes occurring around us.

In his book In the Leadership Mode, Don Dunoon provides a helpful path forward, beginning with the difference between leadership and management communication. One is not better than the other. “There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens,” both leading and managing.

There are times when a leader has to put on a management hat and focus on processes. Right now, many pastors are engaged in process management. The tasks of initiating online services and producing content each week have taken precedence. Management mode focuses on “things” – technology and systems, strategies and plans, and the measurement of how well those things are working. Completed tasks become a measure of productivity that help managers to feel effective. Management problems are solved through technology and a focus on the explicit problem at hand. Managers rely on their formal authority to get things done, delegating tasks and taking action. For example, in Exodus 18, Jethro gives great advice to Moses about delegation and decision-making.

There is a lot of management required during this time of change in the church, but leadership is needed even more. Dunoon has created a process for leading through contentious change, and one could argue that there is no time more contentious than the present. The rate of change has been increasing exponentially. It took over a millennium for the church to embrace the organ as a worship instrument, and another millennium for some churches to be convinced that it is not the only instrument that can be played in church.¹ But along came the coronavirus, and it only took a few weeks for church leadership to figure out that the internet was a positive way to connect with parishioners.

Interestingly, many pastors during this time of Covid-exile say they most miss relationships, but relationships are often the one thing absent from our decisions about what to do next. If we operate in management mode, we may appear to be detached, problem-solving machines. In leadership mode, we comprehend that the problem isn’t technology, systems, or the need for a new plan, but the problem is perception, paradigms, and relationships. People don’t need to just understand the explicit problem (e.g., “we can’t meet in person”); change is needed in behavior and thinking. And if the church tries to change systems, people get defensive (if you don’t believe me, try changing from the organ to electric guitar), and defensive people defend systems.

Dunoon’s process to work through contentious change is ARIES: Attending, Reflecting, Inquiring, Expressing, and Synthesizing. It’s a relational process, and managers struggle with this because listening and reflecting doesn’t get the content produced for the next livestream. But if pastors spend some time processing what is going on within people instead of video content to push toward people, you will make better policy decisions that will be received, not without pushback, but definitely with more understanding.

Attending

Dunoon encourages us to set aside our achievement orientation and truly connect with others. Attending requires interaction. There is a setting aside of our agenda. Instead of producing a weekly church service, a daily devotional, and online small group interactions next week, could you have a town hall Zoom meeting where members can communicate what they’ve been going through and their perceptions about how the church could respond to this crisis? Could you make some calls? Attend to the perceptions of those in the church.

Reflecting

After we hear people, we need to reflect on what was unstated. Are there ways that people of faith are expected to act, in order not to be judged, that leave gaps in our depth of understanding of true feelings? People need to have a safe space to think, process, and continue the conversation. Is there a path you can create for congregants to communicate their fears to you? Can they tell you how they really feel about what might change about the church, moving forward? Create a safe space for those in the church to reflect.

Inquiring

Leaders often feel pressure to have all the answers. People come with us with questions, not for questions. Managers have answers because they have been given formal authority over systems that are static. But in chaotic times, we don’t always lead with answers; leaders ask questions. Contentious change means there is no perfect answer. There are myriad perspectives represented in the church, and by asking relational questions, shared meaning is developed. Inquire, listen, and allow the congregation to teach you and communicate back with you.

Expressing

In our sermons, the goal is to preach truth. But generally, pastors don’t just get up, read the lesson, and sit back down. We spend time fashioning our words in a way that will help the listener understand that truth. We give the history, the context, tell stories, and offer take-aways. We care enough about each person that we take the time to craft our message in order to persuade them of this truth. The message matters because the people hearing it matter, and this is the case for all church communications, not just Sunday morning. Expressing involves building a shared meaning, including our own views, so that individuals know they have been heard and are a part of the solution. Everyone’s view matters, including our own. Policy changes that result from this process are not dictated by managers, but rather develop as expressions of our collective fears, assumptions, and hopes that demonstrate a relationship with leadership.

Synthesizing

Task-focused decisions about things like systems and policies that are communicated from the top-down will be met with defensiveness. Even decisions that are made through relational processes as described above will not be received without pushback. There are no perfect answers, but when problems are solved together and people feel they’ve been heard, the solution can be communicated as a shared vision for moving forward. Ongoing discussions about the changes will continue in relationship because, even though everyone may not agree, they know there is a safe process for them to participate in church leadership.

 

¹ See https://westfield.org/programs/curious-facts/ for fun facts about the organ in church.

Among many angles of spiritual formation during societal and global upheaval, these reflections from church leaders examine dynamics like community disruption and anxiety; the illusion of security in leadership best practices; pastoral wisdom from the Congo; and a community guide for praying during pandemic.

INDIVIDUAL SOUL POSTURE

Disruption, Solitude, Anxiety

How is it with your soul right now? Rev. Ashlee Alley Crawford, Clergy Recruitment and Development Coordinator for the Great Plains Conference of The United Methodist Church, took to social media to encourage reflection on the state of our hearts. She writes,

“The chaos of the external world means we’re all going to be staying home more in the weeks ahead. That’s perhaps a bit of a scary thing-not to mention that for many, that means loss of income and loss of essential connection with others. Is there a gift in the disruption of our rhythms? I absolutely believe there is, but it will not be easy. Thinking about those most financially fragile and finding ways to cultivate hospitality and generosity in this time will require something of us.

Not to mention that we’re likely going to be alone with our own thoughts a bit more. Solitude and silence as spiritual practices are the best teachers, but it can take a while to make friends with them. These new disruptions and the anxiety they produce tempt us into creating a hurry of a different sort.

But I’m convinced that this season of cancellations and more time on our hands-even though it’s most unwelcome-has a gift for us.”

Rev. Crawford’s insights on disruption, anxiety, community, and mindfulness are a timely call to lean into silence, or solitude, or self-awareness.

Deepening Character when Strategy Implodes

Meanwhile a gripping narrative has emerged from The Wesleyan Church, pivoting from personal quarantine to profound reflection. Rev. Ben Ward, Asia-Pacific Area Director and Director of Development and Communication for Global Partners, discusses imploding plans and emerging realization:

“On March 9, I was issued a home quarantine order from the Ministry of Health here in Singapore. This means I essentially can’t leave my bedroom for the next eight days. I was on a flight from Istanbul to Singapore on March 3. Apparently, a fellow traveler developed COVID-19 symptoms on the flight. The government began contact tracing to identify those who had close contact with the passenger, issuing quarantine orders. They tracked me down.”

Aside from the personal impact, Ward goes on to share the frustration of watching teams sent home and cancelling a major event that had taken months of resources and planning. With gracious transparency, he teases out a moment of clarity:

“Beyond the inconvenience the Coronavirus has created for me, it is also causing me to rethink what effective Christian leadership looks like.

I used to think an effective leader set a plan and then implemented that plan no matter what circumstances arose. Thinking through scenarios that could derail the plan and creating contingencies were essential leadership practices. If unforeseen events occurred and derailed the plan — well then, the leader must not have planned well enough.

But no one saw the Coronavirus coming. My best-laid plans were shipwrecked.

Ward goes on to share the keen awareness that,

“Planning is harder in the majority world than in the developed world. My Christian sisters and brothers in developing contexts have many more variables to consider that can derail their plans. I have enjoyed more stability than the majority of the world’s inhabitants. I repent of my arrogance, for thinking my hyper-planned-out approach to life is superior. I have more grace for my colleagues who keep loving, learning and leading in contexts marked by uncertainty and instability.”

He concludes with a sharp call to new perspective: “the thwarting of strategy is an invitation for God to do a deeper work of character.” (Click here to read Rev. Ward’s piece in its entirety.) What a beautiful posture toward spiritual formation when our best-laid plans go out the window.

When Lent Means Fasting from Easter 

Over the weekend I saw comments online wryly expressing that people hadn’t meant to give up quite this much for Lent. Today (March 16), tired pastors woke up to new CDC recommendations for the next eight weeks and realized that Sunday gatherings may be suspended over Easter. When I saw the comments on fasting and Lent, a memory stirred: last spring, Rev. Carolyn Moore asked me to write for her series on the Lordship of Christ, and I sent her “Jesus is Lord of the Valleys,” which expressly calls out what happens to fasting and Lent during upheaval, unpredictability, and loss. I wrote,

“Out of the corner of our eye, we have peripheral awareness of how close to being faith consumers we really are. We choose to go to a conference so we can grow spiritually. We choose to show up to Bible study so we can grow spiritually. We choose to read a book so we can cry or become more efficient or grow spiritually.

We choose.

We choose the parameters of our growth. Where we next discern/feel/think that God is leading us. What we will “give up” for Lent.  The problem is the insidious mindset that is entangled in our approach to faith: that we set the table, invite the guests, and choose the menu of our own spiritual growth. That we can choose what outcomes we want to see in our spiritual life. That we control how we want to be made Christlike. Lent changed from practices I chose to something outside my control, and I didn’t like it.

God allowed my chosen self-denial to be replaced with real desperation. I can’t guarantee you stability in this life. I can’t guarantee you won’t face tragedy. I can witness to the goodness of God, though…”

When the shape of spiritual formation is taken out of our hands – what is left? Grabbing onto Christ, proclaiming the goodness of God.

COMMUNITY SOUL POSTURE

Shared Prayer Guide for the Coronavirus Season

As we see the season of Lent turned inside-out, one way to witness to the goodness of God is through the discipline of shared prayer. Early on Rev. Pete Grieg shared a prayer resource as a community guide for praying about the impact of Covid-19. At the time, the likelihood of Coronavirus disruption had barely punctured American consciousness, but Grieg is quite in touch with global developments – the 24/7 prayer movement he helped to found stretches around the world. What seemed a bit early was, in retrospect, very timely: a lesson in itself perhaps. (Checking the calendar, “a bit early” in reality was just a week and a half ago.) Here is an excerpt:

“JEHOVAH SHALOM, Lord of Peace, we remember those living in Coronavirus hotspots. May they know your presence in their isolation, your peace in their turmoil and your patience in their waiting. Prince of Peace, you are powerful and merciful; let this be their prayer – ‘May your mercy come quickly to meet us, for we are in desperate need. Help us, God our Saviour, for the glory of your name.’ (Ps 79:8)

JEHOVAH RAPHA, God who heals, we pray for all medical professionals dealing daily with the intense added pressures of this crisis. Grant them resilience in weariness, discernment in diagnosis, and compassion upon compassion as they care. We thank you for the army of researchers cooperating towards a cure – give them clarity, serendipity and unexpected breakthroughs we pray. Rise Sun of righteousness, above this present darkness with healing in your rays. You are powerful and merciful; may this be our prayer – ‘Sovereign Lord, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and outstretched arm. Nothing is too hard for you.’ (Jer 32:17)

(Click here for downloadable slides for the entirety of this excellent prayer guide to use in community prayer – even if praying together occurs in virtual worship, and not in person.)

Spiritual Formation Lived in Shared Membership Vows

For congregations, Rev. Andy Stoddard reinforces community spiritual formation through the lens of membership vows, organizing congregational communication and resources through prayers, presence, gifts, service, and witness, with resources linked in each. He writes,

“There’s an old hymn of the church that reminds us: “The church is not a building; the church is not a steeple; the church is not a resting place; the church is a people.” We all believe that, we all know that, but in a season of “social distancing” it can be really hard for us to remember what it means to be connected.  That, in many ways, is my worst fear. We need each other.  And we need the church.  The church will continue to be at work, and we each can continue to do our part, and remember vows that we made on joining the church. In this time, in this moment, we continue to need God and need each other.  I love our memberships vows, and I believe that in this time, as we keep faithful with our prayers, presence, our gifts, our service, and our witness, these vows will hold us together more and more.  I want to share some useful resources that can help you and me live into our calling in this and every season. This will be a growing list in the days to come.”

What a great way to order posture for the days to come: to remind people of who they are, what they have committed together, and who the church will continue to be.

When Prudence and Cooperation Are Spiritual Formation: Wisdom from the Congo

Often community is pictured locally; but people of faith constantly affirm the unity of the global church. We are part of a local-global connection tying us to believers around the world. We all follow Jesus: it’s that simple.

While weighing the challenges of Coronavirus-related restrictions, Rev. Beth Ann Cook reached out to a clergy friend from the Democratic Republic of Congo; he has pastored people, “in the midst of war, economic and political unrest, and a cholera epidemic.” She expressed, “I was so very grateful to be able to ask, ‘what do I do?’” He responded,

“In such a situation we ask people not to panic but to be prudent.

Help people as Christians to turn our faces to God in prayer and ask for his wisdom to face the situation.

Mobilize the community and congregation to follow instructions given by health authorities.

Develop an excellent communication network.”

The posture suggested by a pastor who has led during war, economic dives, and cholera? Be prudent rather than panic; help people turn to God in prayer and to pray for God’s wisdom; use influence in your region and congregation to follow health authorities; and invest in a strong communication network.

If energy spent in helping people to be a non-anxious, careful presence or promoting health authority protocol seems separate from spiritual formation, it’s not. Centuries ago, the Apostle Paul wrote to Christ followers on the edge of the Mediterranean, “Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”

As we form and grow, Paul – and a pastor from the Congo – remind us of the value of practicing mental habits and choices that the Holy Spirit can empower and illumine: in the middle of difficult circumstances, we can take joy, let gentleness be evident to everyone, resist the nagging call of anxiety, and in every situation, present our requests to God through prayer with gratitude. These postures are both individual and communal, hammered out personally and corporately.

In Matthew 22, we read, “Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?” But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?” “Caesar’s,” they replied. Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”

Building a posture of humility includes mindfulness about Christians’ presence and witness in “the public square.” In times of outbreak, a response of simple humility might be, “of course we may have the right to do something, but we love our neighbors with the sacrificial love God has shown for all of us, and our actions must not ever be only about our own interests, real or perceived. And for the sake of our congregation and our community, we happily submit to anything that does not require us to deny Christ. We can easily worship Christ in our homes just as easily as we can in one building. We have nothing to fear by worshiping at home and serving safely wherever we can.”

The Discomfort of Spiritual Growth in an Outbreak: Wisdom from the 1500’s

About two weeks ago, Wesleyan Accent shared an adapted piece written during the Ebola outbreak, on Martin Luther’s pastoral responses to contagion in the form of the plague. People of faith don’t only have global connections during crisis; we affirm in the Creed, “we believe in the communion of saints…” The Body of Christ stretches across space and time and sometimes there is wisdom to be found from voices through the centuries.

“Even if people are accustomed to relative health and ease – or especially if they are – it is impossible to insulate any life from certain realities: illness, vulnerability, lack of control, mortality. Pastoral care during outbreaks is in part the quiet calming of deep existential fears usually ignored, avoided, or drowned out by many people in the Western world.

In addition to taking sensible precautions and exercising common sense and good cheer, we can outfit ourselves with wisdom from church history. Perspective is never so valuable as in a time of panic, warranted or unwarranted or somewhere in between. So let’s inoculate ourselves against denial, on one hand, and fear, on the other, with a visit to the Book of Common Prayer and a cantankerous German monk, Martin Luther.”

Luther gives counsel on the shape of prayer in the face of contagion; he offers frank advice on the social and ethical responsibilities of serving others if it puts you at risk; and he comments on pragmatic angles of dying well – a deeply ignored element of spiritual formation in the U.S. Despite the difference in what we now know of disease spread, a great deal of his insight translates remarkably well – and sometimes with unexpected kindness toward those who feel themselves faltering.

A Note to Tired Pastors

There are times that church leaders are tempted to grow discouraged; we know how much energy ministry can take when things are going well; will people turn toward their faith if there is no Sunday gathering, if the activity calendar suddenly goes silent? But activity and spiritual growth are two different things.

The question of whether people will grow or wilt may be thrown into clearer relief when business as usual is disrupted; but it’s not a new question, it’s an old question. And there is nothing that pastors have ever been able to do to guarantee that the people who often sit in the pews will push deeper into their faith in moments of chaos.

Fear that people will fall away from church because a time of outbreak occurs is the same fear that a person will fall away from faith because of a cancer diagnosis. We cannot inoculate believers from loss, challenge, or hardship. Some people may have casually engaged with faith communities, and they will become more invested, more active – they may even discover a call to ministry through this time. Others may have casually engaged with faith communities, and they will become less invested, less active – their belief may diminish in the face of self-preservation or trauma.

In your work to strengthen communications, encourage prudence over panic, support health initiatives, and lead into deep and regular prayer, be at peace. Do your best to support spiritual formation in the face of quarantine, and trust that while the congregation may look different when all is said and done, you will have new and more reasons to witness to the goodness of God than you can imagine right now. The well-being of your congregation and community is not all on your shoulders; so commit with boldness to stretches of rest, and let your spirit be formed.

Note from the Editor: It can be difficult to discern timely responses when so much shifts in just a week. Equipping yourself with resources is challenging when you not only must sort facts, probability, and panic, but you must also keep up to date with relevant developments. And so everyone from Old Navy to Christian denominations to the NBA is forced to rely on phrases like, “we are closely monitoring…” and “we have been in contact with” (which probably means an intern was on hold for 90 minutes) and “it is an evolving situation.” Yet there have been some beautiful responses from a variety of Wesleyan Methodist denominations to the spread of Coronavirus. Certainly many communities have been stepping up in a variety of ways; it is heartening to see. Christians certainly aren’t alone in that. Yet I have been moved repeatedly to see excellent resources and postures recommended and shared from a place of deep thoughtfulness, compassion, historical awareness, and humility. What was intended to be one post has grown into two: one focusing on Coronavirus communication tips and another reflecting on intentional posture and spiritual formation in the midst of outbreak disruption and upheaval. I hope these voices expressing Coronavirus communication resourcing for Wesleyan Methodist congregations will encourage, guide, and inspire. – Elizabeth Glass Turner

Every denominational connection and individual congregation is assessing how to engage with emerging needs during a crisis, without worsening difficult circumstances or contributing to virus spread. Depending on the local context, that will look different from town to town, city to city, where dynamics differ. Naturally, resources for pragmatic service will continue to be driven along existing lines – relationships with food banks, local schools, senior citizen centers, ministerial associations, and chaplains in hospitals, public service agencies, incarceration facilities, and so on. (If your congregation would benefit from a Coronavirus-specific disaster preparedness plan, see this resource from the Wheaton College Humanitarian Disaster Institute – with an eye for highlighting a few of the most relevant/pressing sections.)

Given that local relationships will drive much of the local response, the following examples help address a couple of immediate needs faced by clergy and congregational members: church Coronavirus communication and communicating with vulnerable populations with proactive hospitality.

As we survey some great examples of communication under pressure, let’s keep in mind a United Methodist congregation in South Carolina has two confirmed cases who, along with the pastor, are currently self-quarantined: so pastors, develop a contingency plan in case you personally have to be physically isolated at some point.

Communicating Changes in Gathered Worship Routine:

A week ago, Rev. Eric Huffman, Lead Pastor of The Story: Houston was one of the first clergypeople on my social media feed to announce substantive changes to Sunday gathering practices. Just a few days before, the first confirmed case of Coronavirus had popped up in the high-density population area of Houston. Though some state governments are requesting limitations on public gatherings to fewer than 250 or 100 people, others haven’t yet; this puts congregations in a tricky situation. Do you keep the doors open or not? For churches in regions where public gathering hasn’t been addressed officially, The Story: Houston church made some sensible changes and communicated them clearly:

Five ways COVID-19 will affect tomorrow’s events:

We’re still gathering as scheduled – 8:45, 9:45, 11:05 in the morning. Things will mostly be the same as usual, with some exceptions:

1. Hugging is not allowed. Not even side hugs. If you attempt to hug someone, one of our several Krav Maga Houston specialists will respond accordingly.

2. We will not share Communion tomorrow. There will be a way to share Communion safely in the future, but until all our volunteers are up to speed on new processes, we’re not going to risk it.

3. OFFERING-FREE WORSHIP TOMORROW!! Kinda. Not really. Instead of passing the baskets, we’ll encourage you to use the wall boxes to make your offerings!

4. Hand sanitizer will be everywhere. We might even start baptizing with it.

5. We’ll worship Jesus. We’ll pray for those affected by Coronavirus, for those paralyzed by anxiety, and for those who are working to treat the ill and to develop vaccines.

If you’re sick, stay home! If you’re well but anxious, join us online at 11:05! If you’re well and you want to join us in person, I’ll see you tomorrow!

Announcements like this balance humor with respect for the gravity of unintended consequences: no one goes to church planning on unwittingly exposing everyone to illness just by taking the offering plate when it’s passed and handing it to the person next to them. This points to another strength in this communication: contamination hubs have been identified, analyzed, and named so that those who attend know what to expect. Passing the peace, passing the offering plates, and passing Communion elements all put people in close contact or involve multiple people touching a shared item. In the conclusion, an alternate mode of participating – “join us online” – is mentioned so that people can be comfortable with whatever decision they make about attendance even if they’re not ill.

Some regions have moved beyond these precautions to banning large gatherings and others are likely to do so soon. In the meantime, it’s still valuable to identify practices prone to spreading contamination and then proactively communicating planned adaptations.

Communicating District or Conference-Wide Worship Cancellations:

On a different level of church Coronavirus communication and preparedness, yesterday morning (March 13) an episcopal communication helped shoulder the burden of congregational decision-making: Bishop Mike McKee of the North Texas Conference relayed news of prohibition of large gatherings in Dallas County, given the announcement of a state of emergency.

The Bishop requested that all churches in metropolitan districts, not just large ones, cancel services for the next two Sundays at least and asked that rural district congregations choosing to gather provide additional sanitizing resources. He further requested that all church members in the conference over 60 or with vulnerable health conditions stay home and join worship virtually online, linking to a document providing a list of congregations offering livestream. (Since yesterday, I’ve learned of other Bishops requesting services to be cancelled.)

Bishop McKee wrote, “In this moment, the way that we as people of faith can do the most good and do no harm actually is to refrain from coming together. Practicing social distancing can be a way for us to prevent further infections and literally save human lives. While worship services and other church gatherings are canceled, it will be even more important for pastors and lay leaders to be attentive to our older and more vulnerable members. The ramifications of this pandemic are more than about health. People are at risk of loneliness and of suffering economic impacts.
 
This unprecedented moment gives us the opportunity to witness to our faith in ways other than gathering for worship. Pray for healthcare workers, community leaders, those suffering from the virus and their loved ones, and those who are being negatively impacted by this pandemic. As individual disciples and as churches, keep your eyes open for emerging needs and find creative ways to meet them. Be a source of hope in your circles of influence.
 
You will hear from me again soon as this situation continues to unfold.”

We live in interesting times when Bishops request that people stay home from church, but it is extremely valuable when leaders pave the way for a sensible response. Through this announcement, the Bishop has taken responsibility for closures (because there is usually some resistance from at least a few church members when services are canceled, no matter the reason). In doing so, he has also given permission to earnest church-goers and conscientious pastors to stand down from stoically carrying out weekly worship.

This is a slightly different angle from which to approach faith-based Coronavirus communication: when leaders carefully gather and analyze information and proactively collaborate on a clear response, they can be ready to implement a plan when officials announce and enact a policy. (As someone who expresses criticism of the episcopacy from time to time, it is important to pause and express appreciation when I believe something has been done especially well. Thank you, Bishop, for taking leadership on this matter.)

For Bishops or General Superintendents or District Superintendents, implementing decisions at a district or conference-wide level can alleviate stress on their clergy and congregations. Additional statements from Methodist denominations with an episcopal form of church government include this one from the College of Bishops of the Christian Methodist Episcopal (CME) church and this one from the Board of Bishops of the AME Zion church (under Focal Point – statement on the Coronavirus).

At the time of publication, several queries have been made with pastors and leaders in a couple of Wesleyan Methodist denominations with congregationalist-style forms of church government. Responses indicate that communication from District Superintendents has been limited to encouraging clergy to follow any official protocols on public gatherings. (These queries were not exhaustive; in a “rapidly evolving situation,” it is probable we will see more statements in the days to come from district leaders in these denominations. Let’s hope that we do, for the sake of the decision load their clergymembers are carrying.) Official statements from denominational leadership teams include this one from The Wesleyan Church, these daily statements from the Board of General Superintendents of the Free Methodist Church, this one from the Board of General Superintendents of the Church of the Nazarene, and this one from the Church of the Nazarene on local church recommendations.

Communicating Virtual Worship Tips:

A lot has changed in just a week, and a large number of churches are livestreaming worship this weekend (even small congregations can put a phone on a tripod to livestream to their Facebook page: click here to watch a short simple video called “Local Church Guide to Using Facebook Live”). My own pastor emailed a worship guide file, with prayers, responses, texts, and sermon included so that it’s easier to follow along with the livestream.

Livestreaming is a good move in the current circumstances but in the past, watching a livestreamed service sometimes emphasizes the gap between presence and absence, simply because many worship leaders or pastors forget it’s happening and don’t address remote, virtual participants! For pastors preaching from empty sanctuaries or their living rooms, it will now be difficult to ignore the remote, virtual participants.

Enter this helpful reflection from University AME Zion in Palo Alto, California, where Rev. Kaloma Smith is Pastor. It’s a unique congregation that often practices fresh communication takes. Yesterday, the church shared these virtual worship tips: We know watching church service online can seem distant and impersonal, so we put together a list of tips to help you get the most out of this experience.

Here are simple tips to get more out of virtual worship:

MAKE IT COMMUNAL: As you get ready to watch a service on live stream, don’t do it alone. Invite those in your house to join in watching the worship service, invite friends and family to watch it even if they’re not in the same house, or start a watch party on Facebook.

GET IN THE RIGHT MINDSET: Say a prayer before you start watching, asking God to allow you to be brought to a place of worship, where you can experience his glory and presence.

REMOVE DISTRACTIONS: Treat this time as special and Holy. Stop scrolling, turn off the news, don’t multitask, let those around you know that this time is sacred, and you shouldn’t be disturbed. You will get so much more out of this experience if you focus and allow yourself to connect with the worship and God in a new way.

INTERACT WITH THE SERVICE: When you start watching, say hi in the chat and let people know where you’re from, type in your prayer request, respond to the praise team and preacher with emojis and gifs. We are a community, and we want to hear from you.

PARTICIPATE IN THE WORSHIP: Sing along with the music team, clap your hands, open your mouth in prayer and praise, write notes from the sermon. The service is not a show to be watched, but an experience that you are an essential part of.

SUPPORT OUR MINISTRY: During these difficult times as you’re watching University, we really need your financial support. You can give the following ways…

Not only was it savvy for this congregation to address what are often invisible or unspoken hurdles in joining worship online, it’s also a church that is already well poised to remove hurdles to giving when physical gathering is limited. The avenues to continue financial support included traditional snail-mail and a link to give through the website but most notably mentioned the “text to give” option. (In fact, Rev. Smith was quoted on the situation a few days ago in USA Today, here.)

Let’s name this as part of congregational Coronavirus communication: during uncertainty characterized by “panic shopping,” if you’re a part of a faith community whose budgetary decisions you support and trust, it’s important to continue whatever capacity of giving you’re able to exercise. Many faith communities will be front-line resources partnering with local efforts to protect and shield vulnerable church members and community members.

A quick note on utilizing technology for virtual worship: some church members may need guidance on how to find the church Facebook page. If congregations tap a few people to make quick phone calls on Sunday morning to assist any who struggle to navigate emerging technology, a quick, easy walk-through or step-by-step instructions before service begins could help everyone be prepared to participate. (For instance – in a time when many grandkids might help a grandparent navigate technology, some grandparents live in assisted communities that are now closed to visitors.) If those who are livestreaming begin the stream early with music, greetings, or announcements, it will help people know they’ve arrived at the right “place” virtually.

Communicating with Vulnerable Community Members:

After processing many ramifications of disruption likely to accompany the spread of illness, Jennifer Crispin shared pragmatic Coronavirus communication insight about living well individually through intentional community in ways that support and serve others. Her thoughts have been echoed by others who similarly spent the week thinking through the likely scope of impact:

“There are still ways you can continue to SHOW UP for people, even if you can’t show up in person:

*Donate cash to your local food shelter. A whole lot of people are about to get more food insecure, and cash donations go so much farther than canned goods. Plus, you’ve spent enough time at the grocery store already.

*Get take out from your local Chinese restaurant. You may not have seen people being racist in your community, but lots of these businesses are taking a hit.

*Call your friend with a chronic health condition that you probably don’t fully understand and say, “I am going to the grocery store, what can I bring you?”

*Write a letter or call your loved ones in retirement centers, assisted living, long term care. Many are or will soon be curtailing visitors, and these folks are socially isolated enough. Remind them they are loved.

These are all different forms of communication. Financial support of food banks, organizations, and local businesses communicates; contacting someone in a vulnerable health position communicates; contacting loved ones or church members or simply any residents who are shut-in or live in long-term care facilities – that communicates.

What do these actions communicate?

They communicate solidarity and community identity. They communicate welcome (through hospitable gestures), humility (through the willingness to serve), and value (through reinforcing the worth of those whose actions are limited in public and community space). A hospitable posture isn’t solely practiced in welcoming people to a center of activity, like a church building; a hospitable posture actually reaches out and engages people where they are. (Engaging people doesn’t have to be a physical action, exposing a body to added risk factors.) It may sound odd to say that communicating with people who are isolated is an act of hospitality, because we think of hospitality as hosting people in our space.

But what if we think of it this way?

When I call aging adults in my family, faith community, or extended community – when I speak to them over the phone, which may be their default communication style more than it is mine – I am saying, “you belong here, you are welcome here, you are a gift here. You are not forgotten or irrelevant. You belong; you belong; you belong.“

When I donate cash to a food bank or to my faith community’s emergency fund – when I give to a stressed organization with stressed volunteers or employees who are working long hours on policies that inevitably will be criticized by some – I am saying to the organization, to the ministry, and to each person depending on it, “you belong here, you are welcome here, you are a gift here. You are not taken for granted or at fault. You belong; you belong; you belong.”

When I contact friends who have a kid who’s immunocompromised or text someone going through chemo – when I tell them what I’m praying for them, and ask them to tell me something to do on their behalf – I am saying, “you belong here, you are welcome here, you are a gift here. You are not a liability or hassle. You belong; you belong; you belong.”

When I order take-out from a restaurant owned and staffed by immigrants – when I show up or delivery arrives and I smile and make eye contact and say thank you – I am saying, “you belong here, you are welcome here, you are a gift here. You are not alone or unwanted. You belong; you belong; you belong.”

Many of these dynamics – church communication, what it means to extend hospitality – aren’t new to our sisters and brothers in the faith who live in different parts of the world. It seems appropriate to acknowledge and repent of times when, in our distraction or self-centered routine, we displayed casual disinterest when other regions have been rocked by outbreaks, sometimes of illnesses much more devastating than the Coronavirus.

Mother Teresa shared a great deal of wisdom on many occasions. Several of her insights are timely right now; one in particular comes to mind as we consider how we communicate and what we are communicating.

“If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other.”

Today’s piece is adapted from “Pastoral Care and Contagion” which originally appeared on Wesleyan Accent in 2014, when Ebola was wreaking havoc. It should not perhaps come as a surprise that while the disease may differ, the topic re-emerges in bleak relevance every few years. Certainly, it may seem counter-intuitive to consider church history in any discussion of outbreak, pandemic, or plague; we live in an era of hazmat suits, microbiology, and gallons of gelatinous hand sanitizer. But while our approach to disease containment and pathology is far different than you would find in rural Germany in the 1500’s – while we know so much more about the value of quarantine or the spread of disease – still, there is profound if sad wisdom and perspective in reflecting on the posture of faith communities in our past. These ancient faith communities encountered epidemics without access to antibiotics, antivirals, IV bags, or basic sanitation. The wisdom echoing through church history like a wail in the catacombs remains relevant partly because areas of the world still lack access to medical supplies, physicians, or hospitals; pastoral care during outbreaks is a quite urgent topic for many Christians. It is also instructive to note the panic that grips even people who do have access to health care best practices, because in the age of globalization, supply chains are vulnerable. Independent of actual risk, fear itself can cause markets to yo-yo or consumer hoarding to worsen shortages. Even if people are accustomed to relative health and ease – or especially if they are – it is impossible to insulate any life from certain realities: illness, vulnerability, lack of control, mortality. Pastoral care during outbreaks is in part the quiet calming of deep existential fears usually ignored, avoided, or drowned out by many people in the Western world.

Even though we are equipped to know more about disease outbreaks faster than ever before, human nature hasn’t changed: the response is still fear, even if the risk is much lower than it would’ve been a few centuries ago, even if fatality rates, while tragic, are relatively low. So in addition to hanging signs reminding guests to wash their hands, in addition to taking sensible precautions and exercising common sense and good cheer, we can outfit ourselves with wisdom from church history. Perspective is never so valuable as in a time of panic, warranted or unwarranted or somewhere in between. So let’s inoculate ourselves against denial, on one hand, and fear, on the other, with a visit to the Book of Common Prayer and a cantankerous German monk, Martin Luther. – Elizabeth Glass Turner, Managing Editor

In The Proposed Book of Common Prayer of 1689, under the blunt heading, “In the time of any common Plague or Sickness,” you can read this prayer: “O ALMIGHTY God, who in thy wrath did send a plague upon thine own people in the wilderness, for their obstinate rebellion against Moses and Aaron; and also, in the time of king David, didst slay with the plague of Pestilence threescore and ten thousand, and yet remembering thy mercy didst save the rest; Have pity upon us miserable sinners, who now are visited with great sickness and mortality; that like as thou didst then accept of an atonement, and didst command the destroying Angel to cease from punishing, so it may now please thee to withdraw from us, who humbly acknowledge our sins and truly repent us of them, this plague and grievous sickness; that being delivered we may glorify thy Name, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”

In 2014 the World Health Organization released a manual providing guidelines that aim to maintain cultural respect and religious reverence for the safe burial of Ebola victims, since a full 20 percent of transmissions occured in the burial process. Officials consulted with Muslim and Christian leaders to explore ways that burials could maintain the rites of religious faith while avoiding the washing of a body or the sharing of a loved one’s possessions that might be contaminated with the virus.

Despite my excellent undergraduate education preparing me for Christian ministry, despite  my thoroughly-enjoyed seminary training, I don’t remember any discussions on how to provide pastoral care during outbreaks or what to preach during the plague. North America, take note: whatever your thoughts on travel regulations and disease transmission, Ebola and health care, pastors and laypeople everywhere have remembered something anew.

You are not immune.

And currently our sisters and brothers in several African nations (please brush up on your geography if you think Ebola has gripped the entire continent) are wrestling with very pragmatic issues of Christian love, urgent medical need and health and safety.

Re-read the heading of the above prayer: “In the time of any common Plague or Sickness.” What short memories we have. Plague and sickness, very present reminders of mortality abounded not long ago in our own nation. We’re a century away from the Spanish Influenza, antibiotics have been utilized for a few short decades and immunizations weren’t available when my Grandmother was a child. In a very little time, we have become shocked by cancer, appalled by heart attacks, distressed by dementia. And rightly so: they are horrible evils.

But we’ve become surprised by our own mortality.

“Have pity upon us miserable sinners, who now are visited with great sickness and mortality…”

How deeply does our surprise run? Search “priest” and “plague” on the internet and you’ll find plenty of references – to video games, some of which feature “plague priests” and “plague monks.” But as our featured image shows, the relationship between priests and plagues was something that used to be commonplace.

Hopefully, the [2014 Ebola] contagion is winding down; hopefully, the outbreak will continue to abate, running itself out in containment. Hopefully, it will no longer spread to other continents – this time, anyway.

Of all people, though, Christians must be conversant in the language of mortality, fluent in the evils of death and the beauty of resurrection, articulate in tragedy and triumph. What else is the rhythm of the church year for, but to practice us in the art of living the pattern of Kingdom life, of Christ-life, of birth, death, and resurrection? We must talk of these things if we have any hope of acting on them, putting hands to ideas. We must all find our inner Mother Teresa and touch the dying – even if you choose to wear three layers of gloves.

And in a moment of strangeness and perplexity, we do actually have some resources available for those who want wisdom in an outbreak, if you’re interested in the writings of one church reformer, Martin Luther. Yes, you may picture him as the rotund, angry reformer nailing his theses to a wooden door. But in the early 1500’s it wasn’t just outrage at the Roman Catholic Church that was sweeping Europe: it was the plague. So perhaps these principles will be helpful.

Luther wrote “to the Reverend Doctor Johann Hess, pastor at Breslau, and to his fellow-servants of the gospel of Jesus Christ,” on the very interestingly titled subject, “whether one may flee from a deadly plague.”

In other words, is it alright, as a Christian, to leave an area where people may need your help?

And he answers very pastorally, if bluntly – it depends. “Since it is generally true of Christians that few are strong and many are weak, one simply cannot place the same burden upon everyone,” explaining in rather kinder terms, “it takes more than a milk faith to await a death before which most of the saints themselves have been and still are in dread.”

But Luther puts a different burden on those in leadership in both the church and the state. About clergy, he advises:

“Those who are engaged in a spiritual ministry such as preachers and pastors must likewise remain steadfast before the peril of death. For when people are dying, they most need a spiritual ministry which strengthens and comforts their consciences by word and sacrament and in faith overcomes death. However, where enough preachers are available in one locality and they agree to encourage the other clergy to leave in order not to expose themselves needlessly to danger, I do not consider such conduct sinful because spiritual services are provided for and because they would have been ready and willing to stay if it had been necessary.”

Laypeople are not neglected in the discussion, however. “In the case of children who are orphaned, guardians or close friends are under obligation either to stay with them or to arrange diligently for other nursing care for their sick friends. Yes, no one should dare leave his neighbor unless there are others who will take care of the sick in their stead and nurse them.” This is tempered when he continues that if there is enough nursing available, believers have an “equal choice either to flee or to remain.”

Of course, he is not speaking here of mandated quarantine or other 21st-century realities (though quarantine is nothing new: the city of Venice used an island as a quarantine location when it faced the plague several centuries ago). The pastoral response in current contexts must also include care for others by not exposing them frivolously or lightly to that with which one may be infected.

But in a triage situation, many of the principles are still relevant: because before the CDC arrives, or before the world takes note but after your local doctors and nurses have fallen ill with the disease themselves, then what?

First, whether you stay or go, Luther would have you pray and commend yourself to God: “if he feels bound to remain where death rages in order to serve his neighbor, let him commend himself to God and say, ‘Lord, I am in they hands; thou hast kept me here; they will be done.’ If a man is free, however, and can escape, let him commend himself and say, ‘Lord God, I am weak and fearful. Therefore I am running away from evil and am doing what I can to protect myself against it.'”

This pastoral word essentially encourages believers – whether on the front lines or seeking safety – to acknowledge first and foremost that we are submitted to things beyond our control, and that we have committed our spirits to the Lord, aware of our own frailty and mortality. Pastoral care during outbreak begins with acknowledging what is in our control and what is out of our control.

Second, he gives a word of encouragement to those facing graphic horrors of contagious illness. “When anyone is overcome by horror and repugnance in the presence of a sick person he should take courage and strength in the firm assurance that it is the devil who stirs up such fear and loathing in his heart…[he] also takes delight in making us deathly afraid, worried, and apprehensive so that we should regard dying as horrible and have no rest or peace, [making] us forget and lose Christ…”

How comfortable are you around sick people? Certainly, take sensible precautions: wash your hands, cough into your elbow, take vitamins. But can you bear to be around those who are gravely ill? Are you prepared to walk through the valley of the shadow of death with them so that they are not alone? Does your faith give you the strength to sit next to the person receiving chemo? During a time of spreading disease, everyone is forced to confront dynamics that occur every day for people with multiple sclerosis or cancer or recovering from injuries sustained in warfare or car accidents. The point is sharply made when Luther writes, “this I well know, that if it were Christ or his mother who were laid low by illness, everybody would be so solicitous and would gladly become a servant or helper.”

And about burials – which the World Health Organization would appreciate – Luther simply says, “I leave it to the doctors of medicine and others with greater experience than mine in such matters to decide whether it is dangerous to maintain cemeteries within the city limits,” though he urges caution and suggests burial out of town.

So: hear sermons from the Word on how to live and how to die (Luther recommends – though currently in winter 2020, some congregations in other countries are restricted from gathering, due to public gathering limitations to curb disease spread); prepare for death in time to confess and take the sacrament, in time for reconciling with others (he further recommends); and if you want a chaplain or pastor at the time of your death, call them while you’re still in your right mind (he wasn’t a man short on words).

Are you comfortable with mortality? Are you ready to be around the dying?

It’s worth thinking about. It doesn’t matter if one pandemic scare fades away, allowing us to be (relatively) at peace again; whether or not there is emergent disease risk, we all have to grapple with mortality, limitations, and ill people in our communities who need our presence. We all have to reconcile ourselves to the fragility of life. Sometimes it’s just on the news more than usual.

Have you ever welcomed an unexpected guest into a house that is not ready for visitors? It is difficult for some of us to prepare for invited guests, as kids, pets, or spouses seem to undo whatever has been done. Things are even worse though when those guests are unexpected. You apologize for the chaotic appearance, leading the way as you toss things behind closed doors. You explain that things don’t normally look like the ruined temple of Jerusalem, its gates burned with fire!

Chaotic change is an uninvited guest. Like an unplanned extra person at an already too-small table, everything seems forced. Decisions have to be made before their time. People have to make room, take on new roles, or change habits even while leading.

Reasons vary when it comes to people disliking change. We may not like being out of control, or we may fear surprises or an uncertain future, or dread a heavier workload. We may have a preference for the “same” over something different, or have defensiveness over our territory, or feel that others question our competence, or we remember past resentments (1). And when that change is unexpected, these feelings are magnified.

When Nehemiah approached the actual ruined temple of Jerusalem, he evaluated the situation, assessed the damage, and called the people to rebuild. But in reading the Old Testament book of Nehemiah, have you ever noticed the people to whom he was speaking were already in the city?

They could see the same broken-down gates and walls; they were standing on rubble as he called them to change. They hadn’t done anything about it, though, before Nehemiah showed up and called them to rebuild. There is a sentence between his evaluation and the people’s response that is easily overlooked due to its brevity. But it explains how the people were inspired and motivated to change.

“I also told them about the gracious hand of my God on me and what the king had said to me. They replied, ‘Let us start rebuilding.’ So they began this good work.” (Nehemiah 2:18)

The people had smelled the smoke. They had seen the walls fall. Change had come and there was nothing they could do about it. Attendance falls. No one shows up to serve. Staff leaves. The budget isn’t met. We smell the smoke of chaotic change. Something is broken.

Nehemiah showed up to the ruined temple without anything more than a positive vision, inspiration, and the commitment to persevere. He had a sense of urgency to bring chaos under control and rebuild. And through his leading, he received the response from the people, “Let us start rebuilding.”

They answered challenges as they came. Naysayers attacked with mocking words, and Nehemiah responded with the vision. Rumors flew of the project’s demise, and Nehemiah responded with changes in roles, delegating half to work while half stood guard. Midway through the rebuilding he had to deal with budget issues and threats to vote him out. Nehemiah 1-6 contains an example of every possible element of a contentious change. Nehemiah 7-12 is an example of the results of persevering through the chaos.

We all want so many volunteers at church that we have to draw straws, everyone “storehouse tithing,” confessing their sins to one another, and living in agreement. Idealized circumstances rarely come to life. We have to see the rubble and be willing to make hard decisions and put in even harder work, leading to make the vision come to life.

This type of chaotic change doesn’t usually follow a step-by-step program, which can frustrate planners used to taking followers through a structured, rational process. Project managers want to analyze and create the best solution with specific leadership roles, which are wonderful skills – for planned change. But when we’re standing on the rubble smelling smoke, how do we manage organizational change?

First, you need to step back and evaluate the situation. This isn’t data collection for a thesis, but a quick assessment – Nehemiah took three days to evaluate an entire city.

Next, evaluate the leaders’ experience, influence, capacity, and willingness to change (both your own and any potential leaders). People have different approaches to change. One resource, de Caluwé and Vermaak’s color-print model (2 and 3) is an excellent way to understand the approaches of your leading team members.

The strength of the leadership team is dependent on having the right type of change leader in the right place for that change situation. In the color-print model, there are five colors, and each can be used to describe the dominant approach needed for the current change initiative. For example, a blue-print thinker is organized and great at managing controlled, planned change (blue = architectural design). Yellow-print thinkers form coalitions and are great at lobbying for change among a power base (yellow = power/sun/fire). When you need to bring common interests together to create a win-win situation, the yellow-print should lead the charge, not the blue-print. Nehemiah may have been a red-print motivational leader, focusing on the emotions of followers; their behavior changed as a result of inspiring vision (red = heart). He was the right leader to lead a downtrodden Jewish remnant who needed to be stimulated to action.

After evaluating the situation and the leadership team, the change requires both management and leadership. This is the equivalent of having a tool in one hand and a weapon in the other.

We must continue to manage what is working in the organization and decide how to prioritize resources for the ongoing activity of the church, while leading in creative collaboration to fix what is not working. Leading means looking past the broken walls being repaired to see the contentious issues on the horizon and working together with followers to craft solutions.

In both planned and unplanned change, leaders are called to exercise wise decision-making, with trust in God, the people, and the process. Leaders must persevere, inspire, and remain positive. Learning the language of change management and different tactics to lead change can result in effective organizational change – even when the change is uninvited.

1 Kanter, R. M. (2012). Ten reasons people resist change. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2012/09/ten-reasons-people-resist-chang

2 de Caluwé and Vermaak Videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgEvL0aQxoE

3 de Caluwé and Vermaak Article: http://www.decaluwe.nl/articles/ODJournal.pdf)

If you have been a leader for very long, you have heard the question, “Why do we need to change?” In 1967, British Prime Minister Harold Wilson declared, “He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery.” (1) So we must change if we want to live. Long before the 1960’s, philosopher Plato used Heraclitus’ axiom, “Everything changes and nothing stands still.” For millenia, humans have adapted to survive – or they haven’t, and didn’t.  So asking why we need to change is really like asking why we need modern medicine or why electricity is useful: there are many examples all around us of why significant change can shift life for the better. 

Instead of asking why we need to change, then, leaders assess the landscape and ask what, who, how, and when we will change. These are the questions that are answered when you engage in an organizational change process, and there are multiple change models to consult.

Depending on the type of organization and the type of change, there are plenty of change process models to consider as you navigate how to lead fruitful change. The ways to lead change vary; I will highlight some of the better-known models and theories so that you can answer the questions of what, who, how, and when we will change as you initiate and manage fruitful change in your context.

But first, a word of caution. In 2007, researchers at Gallup asked a series of questions on whether Christians rely more on human reason or on an outside power such as God for moral guidance and for planning for their future. For many, human reason trumped God in their responses. (2) The organizational change management processes, models, and theories highlighted here are helpful tools in determining the what, who, how, and when. But in all of this, I encourage you to make sure to remember Who leads you as you lead change.

The following three change models illustrate planned organizational change (as opposed to unplanned change). They are intended to illustrate changing organizational systems processes. Let’s take a look at the theory of the change models and then the application of how they might look in a real life church setting.

Unfreeze: Change: Refreeze – Lewin’s Model of Change

A social psychologist named Kurt Lewin researched group dynamics and the impact of leadership on groups. His model is not a prescription for change with a step-by-step how-to process; rather, it’s an explanation of how change occurs.

First, the organization becomes aware of the need to change. When the status quo is no longer working, the organization must unfreeze – releasing its grip on continuing to do the same things in the same way. The second step is implementing change. The organizational participants react to the lack of equilibrium by generating new responses and actions that are more effective. Finally, the organization refreezes  as it assimilates the changes and regains equilibrium, operating effectively again.

For instance, during any snow event in the American South, “is it sticking?” is the first question asked. In the South, the ground isn’t frozen. When snow falls, it melts. Unless there is an extreme environmental change (temperature drops and snowfall increases), the snow disappears on contact. Lewin’s refreezing takes place after change has been implemented. It is the time when leaders check in to see if the new responses and actions deemed more effective are “sticking.”

What it looks like in your church: print & digital communications

Every process in a congregation can be evaluated in light of the Unfreeze-Change-Refreeze model. It provides the language of change to every level of leadership, whether staff, lay, or volunteer. In this way, everyone can discuss change in terms of solving a problem and increasing effectiveness.

For example, let’s say there are complaints about church communication. Many churches have leaned into social media and multimedia communication, leaving print-lovers behind, while other churches refuse to leave the Gutenberg era to embrace the opportunities of electronic communication. Both can result in frustrated churchgoers or visitors. This is a problem.

Using the Unfreeze-Change-Refreeze model, we see a basic movement unfold: first, discover the need for change due to consistent communication problems affecting daily function; then, identify new processes and activate new approaches that will lead to effective communication with multiple constituents; and finally, implement the new processes and approaches and evaluate their impact.

Lewin’s ideas have been used as the basis of many modern change models in which you will see elements of unfreeze-change-refreeze. For example, Harvard Business School Online has a course that uses Lewin’s model as the framework for change. (Visit here for a modern, expanded example of Lewin’s model.)

The Change Path: Awakening: Mobilization: Acceleration: Institutionalization

The change path model of organizational change is another adaptation of Lewin’s model (3), in which there are four stages:

Awakening

Mobilization

Acceleration

Institutionalization

This is an excellent model for making changes to processes within an organization (which is distinct from changes in culture, mission, or values). The awakening stage is similar to Lewin’s unfreezing stage. More than just an awareness of the need for change, in awakening, the organization must consider the nature of the change (planned or unplanned, internal need or external pressure) and its alignment with the organization’s vision. Once the awakening is defined in a way that everyone can understand, mobilization begins. Mobilization is the process of identifying the distance between the current and desired states: what needs to be done, who needs to do it, what the cost is, and other questions. In the acceleration stage, plans are drawn up in response to the mobilization questions. Institutionalization is the implementation of the plans and refreezing of the organization around the new process.

What it looks like in your church: gaps between denominational statement and practice

In the past 15 years, one denomination with which I’ve interacted was awakened to the fact that many churches had local membership processes and requirements that varied from the denominational membership requirements. The policy “on the books” did not match the policy in practice. This was a problem.

Several decisions could be made: ignore the discrepancy, allowing local churches to continue to be out of alignment; put pressure on local churches to conform to the denomination’s membership requirements; or adjust the denominational requirements to better match the local churches’ current practice.

Awakening includes defining the nature of the change and describing it in the vernacular (in this case, proposals submitted to the General Board).

Mobilization took place in the General Board sub-committee, which was tasked with reviewing the various proposals and determining the gap between the present state of some churches and the future state of membership in the denomination.

Bureaucracies have specific processes in place to manage planned change, so the mobilization phase is clearly defined, but to allow for some collaboration, plans for bridging the gap through action planning and implementation were drawn up. When the final proposals were presented, they had been combined and rewritten in a way that reflected that collaboration.

The final step was institutionalization. Just changing the written “rules” of the denomination was not enough to institutionalize the change. The change had to be implemented at all levels. Resources were created for churches to initiate the change. Annual processes changed at the local organization level, which carried the weight of making significant changes not only to processes but also in local culture. The change needed to be measured to determine effectiveness of the change initiative, which required changes in data collection and reporting.

The challenge for many leaders is the desire to jump straight from awakening to institutionalization: “I have identified a problem and the most logical solution—make it so” (as we dictate the obviously logical solution to the staff/board/volunteers). The process of moving from awakening into a time of collaborative analysis and planning prior to institutionalization is imperative to the success of the change. The contribution and buy-in of those who need to activate the change cannot be overemphasized. That process is even further explained in Kotter’s model.

Kotter’s Eight-Stage Change Process

Task-oriented planners (or those who need someone to provide a step-by-step process so that they will not venture off the change path) will appreciate John Kotter’s detailed map for planned change. The eight steps begin by creating a climate for change, by

1) Increasing urgency

2) Building a guiding team

3) Getting the vision right, and

4) Communicating for buy-in. This moves the entire organization in the direction of the change,

5) Enabling action and

6) Creating short-term wins. The implementation and maintenance of the change continue as the change leaders then

7) Don’t let up and finally

8) Make it stick.

This framework was first introduced in Leading Change, further supported by real-life success stories in The Heart of Change and, because winning the first step is imperative, an entire book dedicated to A Sense of Urgency.

What it looks like in your church: a must-have/user-friendly resource

In Kotter’s best-selling book Our Iceberg is Melting (similar to the popular Who Moved My Cheese?) he walks the reader through the change process in an easy-to-apply parable. This is a great resource for a local board to use as a small group study in order to illustrate the process of change. It is also helpful to leaders to find their fit on a change team as they identify with characteristics in the illustration. It is also helpful in demonstrating to church leaders what has been shown to cause organizational change to fail time and time again, equipping them with steps to guide the organization through a difficult change initiative.

When Change Processes Aren’t Planned

These three organizational change models are all options for moving through planned change initiatives. However, we all know that circumstances external to the organization can force change and internal situations can pop up without notice. In the next post, we’ll examine helpful models for those times when we cannot respond to change with a strategic, step-by-step blueprint but rather are forced to make changes in the midst of chaos.  

 

1 Wilson, H. (1967, January 24). Speech to the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France, January 23, 1967. The New York Times, p. 12.

2 Gallup, G. H., Jr. (2007). Total trust: Trust is one of the basic bonds of relationships. Leadership Journal. Retrieved from http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/2007/july-online-only/day45.html

3 Cawsey, T. F., Deszca, G., & Ingols, C. (2020). Organizational change: An action-oriented toolkit (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 

Fred Rogers was an ordained Presbyterian pastor, but I believe that actually he was a Methodist deep down inside.  Why do I say that?  From my understanding of how he lived, I don’t know anyone who more fully lived out the concept of “prevenient grace.”  Prevenient grace is the grace that goes before us, the grace that calls us into conversion. In our Wesleyan understanding of prevenient grace, it is also the grace that goes to all people. It is the grace that embodies God’s love to all persons. You can reject conversion, you can reject sanctification, but you can’t undo God’s love for you. All people receive God’s love, whether we accept it or not.

Mr. Rogers understood that.  He sought to live out a life in which he treated all people with kindness; he treated everyone according to their worth. That is the essence of prevenient grace, the essence of the image of God that is placed upon all people. All are made in the image of God, all are in need of salvation, all can be saved, all can be saved to the uttermost.  All persons are called to receive grace, and all persons should be treated with the kindness to which this theology calls us. 

After my family and I watched A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, I did a lot of reading about the original article that forms the foundational narrative of the movie. That led to another article that is a postscript about the original piece and the movie on which it’s based. It is a really powerful follow-up, but as I read it, this line got me the most: “He lost, because the great conceit of the internet is that it has unveiled and unmasked us, that it shows us as we really are and our neighbors as they really are, and that hate is more viral than love.”

To think about Mr. Rogers “losing” a fight that is unwinnable – the temptation to hate and to belittle – is painful. But it is also true.  We are tempted to belittle those with different political beliefs (or at least think the worst of them).  We are tempted to belittle those with different religious ideas and ideals (or at least think the worst of them).  I don’t want to do that; I don’t want to fight; I don’t want to live in a “scorched earth” reality.  But the culture is pulling us all that way. 

Our moment puts us on different sides of so many issues, pitting us against each other.  Everything seems to be colored by our personal perspectives and realities. Some things are powerful and so very important: world views and religion, for instance. Others are of great value: religion and social matters. Some are of no particular importance: iPhone vs Android or sports teams. Everything seems to make each of us angry, and while some things are worthy of our passions, we can’t be angry about everything.  If everything arouses passion, then what is truly worthy of passion?

These passions and divisions seem to be tearing our nation, culture, and even churches apart. And we each, deep down within our heart, have to be asking ourselves, “isn’t there a better way? We can’t continue in this cycle forever, can we?”

This is not a liberal vs conservative ideology or Christian vs non-Christian thing that is unique to America in 2019. It is an age-old human thing. In light of these passions, we have to ask ourselves a question, especially those of us who value Wesleyan Methodist theology. Do we believe in prevenient grace?

I mean, do we really believe that preparing grace goes out to all people, the righteous and the unrighteous?  Do we believe that all persons, not just those who are with me, are made in the image of God?  Do we really think they are of sacred worth? 

Here’s the thing.

Jesus did.

He treated everyone that he met as a person with worth.  From the rich young man (who he looked at with love) who walked away, to the Samaritan woman, to the ones who nailed him to the cross. 

He treated each of these people as a person with worth.  And if he did, as one who follows him, I have to as well.  I don’t always want to.  It would be so much easier sometimes to give into the viral nature of hate.  It feels like everyone else is.  And what if I really disagree with “them,” whoever “they” are? I don’t ever want to pretend that our differences aren’t real: they are. It would be so easy to walk down that path of the world and culture.

But I don’t want to walk down that other path. I want to be like Mr. Rogers and as best I can, through God’s grace, live our God’s grace.  I believe that is the only path that leads to peace.  Maybe it makes me naive, or foolish, or less than those who want to pick up the battle. I’m learning to be okay with that. We all have to do what we think is right.

I think of another who, like the journalist believes Mr. Rogers did, “lost.” 

Jesus. 

He lost in the sight of the world, in the sight of the religious leaders of the day, in the sight of Rome.

But he didn’t lose.  Because he lived and died, showing God’s heart of love, and rose again to triumph over sin, death, and the grave.  Hate is not the most viral after all.

To win isn’t always to win.  And to lose isn’t always to lose.

In the end, Mr. Rogers didn’t lose if he still inspires us to show kindness and treat people as though their lives have worth. And Jesus, through his life, death, resurrection, and soon return, shows us our worth and the great love of the Father for us all.

 

Featured image by Lacey Terrell – © Sony Pictures Entertainment

Note from the Editor: This weekend we’re pleased to highlight this sermon from our friend Rev. Shaun Marshall. Exploring the question of how to be prepared for key moments in your life, this sermon is drawn from I Samuel 17, about David being sent to his brothers, who were fighting in the Israelite army – and who were stalled at the prospect of facing the Philistine champion, Goliath. The fear of failure can keep us from feeling adequately prepared.

How do you know when you’re ready? How can you tell when you’re well prepared? Sometimes it even keeps us from following the call God has put on our lives. But God has not changed his promise: you may be in process.

 

https://vimeo.com/202712586

A pastor, consultant and coach, Rev. Marshall is passionate about helping leaders move vision forward. He is the Founder and Principal Consultant of Navigate Consulting and Publishing, and serves as National Director of Congregational Vitality for the Evangelical Covenant Church. In this role, Shaun strengthens churches by providing the leadership, resources and support needed for healthy missional change.