The following report from the FMUU Religious Leadership Task Force was presented by Skip Wood, Task Force Chair, to the Board of Directors at the March 6, 2005 Board meeting.
"Dear board members,
As per our assignment to make long- and short-term recommendations regarding additional professional leadership, the task force is happy to report that we have reached consensus. While this consensus was easily agreed upon, it is not without important tangential considerations as discussed below.
In keeping with the goals established by the congregation in the current 5 year plan, we found that the congregation is desiring of a ministerial presence not only to foster growth, but also to help us in several areas. Ranked by survey score, the following stood out:
Guidance – a resource for organizational development, conflict resolution, and advising committees.
Pastoral Care – hospital and home visits, conducting rites of passage, personal guidance and/or counseling referral.
Community Outreach – representing us to the community; playing a part in the community.
Religious Education – there is interest in having the minister involved with child and adult religious education, but not take charge.
The next highest score is having the minister speak on Sunday, but not too often! While opinion on the frequency varied greatly, monthly seemed to be the average response. Overseeing programming was another function that scored close to 3 on our 6 point scale.
Using the survey (results enclosed), the input from 4 discussion groups, our own analysis, and advice from Nancy Heege, Phil Lund and others, we reached several conclusions regarding the leadership options previously identified:
Commissioned Lay Leader – This option comes with a long timeline for recruiting and training making it a poor short-term prospect. As for long-term, we see limited capacity for a larger role, and limited capacity for some of the functions most desired by the congregation, many of which would appear to require advanced ministry skills. There is also a measure of uncertainty and risk born of the need to commit to a candidate before the educational process begins.
Ministerial Intern – This option also doesn't provide for the advanced skills our preferred functions would seem to call for. We feel it's an option better suited to a congregation that already has a minister, but could use extra help. It's also temporary, so not likely to be of long-term help.
Consulting Minister – We didn't entirely rule this out, as the board might see an appropriate role for a consulting minister. However, we view a consulting minister as temporary, and of limited availability for many of the desired functions. Therefore, we see it as an option only should the board feel we need a consulting minister to help us through a particular transition, bringing a set of specific skills. Such need is not apparent to this committee.
OUR RECOMMENDATION: Quarter-time Minister for the fall of 2006
It is important to note that the membership is not interested in replacing our lay leadership, or our predominantly lay programming. We see no conflict in that regard when looking at the functions deemed most important.
The Underwood Factor
We have preliminary indications that Underwood is also in a position to consider part-time ministry. This might help us attract a strong candidate. We have alerted Underwood that part-time ministry is under consideration here. Our activity might get them going. (They recently came into a considerable amount of money.) We would want to have most of our sharing questions worked out by this time next year when the district begins the process of matching congregations and ministers. Grand Forks and other area congregations might also provide income opportunities for the minister.
CONCLUSION
The committee recommends the board ask for a vote of the congregation on a non-binding resolution to pursue part-time ministry for the fall of 2006. With a favorable vote, we recommend the board convene a Ministerial Appointment Committee. This group will be assigned the task of working with the district, discussing with Underwood the issues of sharing a minister, learning about the covenanting process, and helping engage the congregation in our "Move Toward Ministry."
SUPPLEMENTAL RECOMMENDATION: We strongly recommend the immediate formation of a youth committee.
Our youth is an area deserving of special discussion. A youth director was not one of the ministerial options we raised in our document on professional leadership, but it became clear the membership feels our church needs to become more relevant for our older youth. "Supervising teen programming/director" was the next (6th) highest scoring function on our survey after those mentioned above. And perhaps more importantly, it was a prominent point of discussion in our meetings.
However, before we conclude that hiring a youth director is an alternative to hiring a minister, our committee feels we should organize a group of interested adults to work on this issue and see what we can accomplish on a voluntary basis. Only then can we assess whether paid staff is necessary, or whether we would want youth work to be part of our covenant with a minister. (Regarding a minister as youth director, it was noted in one meeting that youth best respond to someone other than a congregation's lead minister.)
We also highly recommend that the church explore sponsoring (with the help of the district) a youth group training for adults, inviting other area congregations to participate. And we would also expect our youth themselves to help guide much of our process.
Bottom line, we don't feel the congregation has to choose between youth programming and a minister. We think the congregation very likely has the capability to do both."