Feedback on Direction 4: Recognise there is a time for everything
As one respondent put it, “[T]his Direction provoked longer emotional and thoughtful responses.” The balance of feedback on this Direction was focused more on endings than beginnings, pointing to the current balance of focus in our Church. Those that did focus on new and emerging communities affirmed the need for simplified pathways. Many were searching for specifics about what new pathways were required. Feedback from communities that had trod this path into the Uniting Church indicated that our processes need simplification, clarity and transparency. New and emerging communities were expected to ‘prove’ their bona fides. This was captured well in one response which said they felt that there was a “sense that we held a huge ‘burden of proof’ rather than a sense of excitement and optimism that a vibrant community wanted to join the UCA…”
There may always be a clash of cultures for any group seeking to find a pathway into the Uniting Church. CALD communities face particular challenges. We seem at times to get caught up in the complexity of our structures and processes. As one group observed, “Complex structures mean we spend a lot of time talking about who and what the UCA is instead of talking about Jesus.” We are concerned to assure ourselves about new communities’ commitment to us and our identity. As one group put it, “How do you ensure there is alignment of new communities with the governance, polity and ethos of the Uniting Church and its regulations?”
There were many responses about communities coming to the end of their life. The metaphor of ‘dying’ was prominent in this discussion. There was sadness. The relationship between the end of a Congregation’s life and grief at the loss of lifelong faithful members was prominent. The question of who has responsibility for decisions related to the closure or amalgamation of Congregations was contested. This demonstrates different understandings about the respective roles of the councils of the Church. Some were confused about the need for this part of the Direction at all, pointing to Regulation 3.4.3 (Dissolution of a Congregation) and 3.4.4 (Amalgamation or Division of Congregations) as clearly placing the responsibility for these decisions with the Presbytery. Others were equally adamant that these decisions must be made locally. This is captured well by one respondent, “[A] Congregation has the right to make its own decision about whether it will continue or not.”
Questions of the end of a Congregation’s life were inextricably linked to questions of property. This drew in the responsibility of Synods in relation to property, further complicating the respective roles and responsibilities of the various councils. Some see the end of a community and the sale of property as an opportunity to support a new community and leave a legacy. Others were suspicious that the wider Church was seeking to close Congregations for the financial resources it would generate through the sale of property assets. As one group observed, “The letting go is very hard.” While the imperative of change and the inevitability of closure in some places is clear, some reflected, “I’d prefer that you did it after I’m gone.”
Many took the two parts of the Direction together as a sign of the rhythms of life and the inevitability of change. As one group put it, “We’d like to see more connections made between the ending of one Congregation and the beginnings of new ways of being church.” Some pointed to the end of some Christendom patterns of life, “There was a time when we expected to have a UCA Congregation in every ‘town’, but we need to accept we are no longer in that time.” The need for pastoral responses that are respectful of communities, whether beginning or ending, was a recurring theme. People also emphasised the role, voice and agency of communities of faith, keen to avoid ‘one size fits all’ approaches. The formal responsibilities, structures and practices related to this work need to be joined with effective pastoral and change strategies from well-equipped, capable leaders within Congregations and the wider Church.
“This is reflective of our current reality. Closing a place of worship need not be seen as a sign of failure but as a change of season. It is critical, however, that we at the same time simplify life for new communities to enter the Uniting Church.”
Synod Response Form
“We celebrate new, small, large and diverse groups coming into the life of the Uniting Church. This provides us with a range of opportunities and challenges. In this, there is the potential for renewal of our life together as a whole wider church. Yet, there is a tension between wanting people and groups to be themselves, not “become us” or be controlled, but also the potential to be “hijacked” by others who are not within the ethos of the Uniting Church. Doing this is absolutely necessary to change our inward focus but requires skilful community engagement.”
Church Council Response Form