Reflections No. 2: Vision and Leadership: the twin strands of developing congregational life Discoveries from congregational stories: Cupar: Old 1
The Mission Statement of Cupar Old A Church for Today and Tomorrow We are part of the world wide Church of Jesus Christ; - here to worship God together, encourage personal faith and prayer, spread the Good News about Jesus Christ, and care for others; - here to nurture gifts to enable the participation of all; - here to react to the changing world, to keep the Church relevant for the next generation. 2
Introduction: On Cupar "He that will to Cupar maun to Cupar" With a population of 8510, Cupar is a burgh town in North East Fife, which lies on the River Eden at the east end of the Howe of Fife, 12 miles (19 km) west of St Andrews. For much of the past millennium, Cupar was the county town of Fife. It inherited this role from the coastal village of Crail in 1214 and in 1328 received its royal charter by grant of King Robert 1, along with the right to trade through a port near Guardbridge on the coast. The town subsequently developed as an administrative and agricultural market centre, functions that continued until 1975 when Glenrothes became the new county town and 1994 when the local market was closed. A particular testament to Cupar's historic wealth and importance is its fine and varied collection of churches, one of which is Cupar Old and St Michael of Tarvit Parish Church, in Kirkgate. The tower dates back to 1415, though the church itself was rebuilt in 1785. 3
Introduction: purpose, methodology and questions If going to the end right at the beginning seems strange, then let me at the very outset of this story state the key question that arose after reflecting on my conversations with people from Cupar Old church. It was this, For now and for the future, who is, or who are the vision setters of Cupar Old church? This story arises out of a review process initiated by the minister, Ken Jeffery, where seven members of the congregation (see appendix 1), along with the minister, were interviewed by the Revd Robin McAlpine, Development Officer with the Mission and Discipleship Council of the Church of Scotland. The purpose of this was to look back over the last five years in the life of Cupar Old Parish church and reflect on what has happened, with the intention of producing a working document for the congregational Core group, Kirk Session and congregation, as a basis for developing congregational life in the next few years. This review was being carried in 2007, as Ken Jeffery was ordained and inducted as minister of Cupar Old church on Thursday 25th April 2002 and so has been the minister of this charge for 5 years. This story is offered, recognising that the conversations took place at a specific moment in time and that the life of Cupar Old has moved on in exciting ways since 2007. It is authentic to their experiences and hopes, but contains principles that we can all learn from. 4
To catch up with their fast moving story I would encourage you to contact them direct, visit their refurbished church centre and church and, if you feel that this review process is something that would be helpful for your congregation, then please do not hesitate to be in touch. Each person was asked the same questions: What is your present role (if any) in Cupar Old church and what was your past involvement in congregational life? (Cupar Old and previous congregations) How long have you been part of the life of Cupar Old? In the last five years, what, for you, have been the key moments in the life of Cupar Old? What are your hopes and aspirations for the future? What do you see as Ken Jeffrey s role in the development of the life of Cupar Old? 5
Key developments over the past 5 years Introduction This section is key to understanding what has been happening in the life of Cupar Old, and plays a major part in determining the outcomes of their story and, in particular, the key questions that the congregation needs to ask of itself at this time. The key developments are listed below in order of the number of times stated. There was no list for people to work off, but was left to what the interviewees told me. Having stated that, where obvious things seemed to have been missed out, and in some cases where people did ask what others had said, there was some minimal prompting. Having then heard some of the things that others said, they recognised these were developments they also wished to comment on. Their minds had simply gone blank! Fabric developments (7) K2 Worship (7) K3 Peru (5) K1 Children and Family work (4) K5 Pastoral care (3) K6 Youth work (3) K4 Weekday activities (3) Core group Structure (2) K7 Adult Christian Education (1) Kirk Session Changes (1) Extra Admin support (1) K8 The Code (K) indicates those developments mentioned by the minister Ken Jeffrey, and in which order. 6
These developments for the purpose of our reflections will be collated as follows: Organisational: fabric, Core group, Kirk Session & team development Missional: youth work, children & families, worship, Peru visit Pastoral: pastoral care, weekday activities, children & families Educational: adult Christian education The best 5 years in the church. I came alive as a Christian over the past few years (interviewee) Organisational Developments Fabric It came as no surprise that the major ongoing fabric redevelopments to the church hall, and to a lesser extent, to the church, come out as one of the two highest responses. After all, it was high profile at the time the conversations were taking place, both in terms of peoples thinking about its future use, and the financial commitment that was being asked. The details of the project are not required for our purpose here, except to say two things. First of all, any project that extends to a cost of over 1,000,000 requires huge commitment from those having to fund it, and the congregation needs to be congratulated on this. Secondly, any such project must always work towards, and further, the vision of the organisation. It is assumed that detailed research was undertaken by the leadership to relate the 7
proposed fabric changes to the needs of either the congregation and/or the community. It is clear that not everyone was in favour of the project initially. Questions were asked, such as, how will we ever raise this amount of money? This, of course, could have been a side issue, where they were simply not in favour of the project in the first place! This is not unusual. For most people, not only has the vision to be shared, but the benefits seen, before they will come on board. What is interesting is that in many situations, these sceptics can soon become some of the project s greatest champions! The opposite view was also evident. This is a project that is both challenging and exciting. Indeed one person commented on the energy that was involved in it. This example shows how in any given group of people, their reaction to change varies enormously and must always be taken on board. At the time of the conversations it seemed that most people approved of the project, the tangible evidence being the money has been raised. One person commented that the congregation has surprised even itself in reaching its goal. 8
The question of why this project is seen as important is centred on two issues. The first is to make the congregation more outward looking, by using the upgraded facilities to develop more contact with people outside the church. The second is that the building will become an internal resource for the congregation s own work in developing its youth, children and family programmes. It is understood that both of these aims will make the church more real to the town, through better facilities and by a café that will encourage people who would not normally walk through the door of a church, to do so. It will be important for the leadership to monitor just how this works out in practice. How will this building, in the realty beyond the initial excitement, help to develop the interaction between the community of Cupar and the faith community of Cupar Old? The danger is always that people will see any major fabric alterations as an end in themselves, and the work completed once the building work has finished. The church leadership will need to work hard to maintain and develop the ongoing benefit of the project, so that momentum continues well beyond its initial completion date. This will give the project a missional context of community outreach and not just be seen as a building project. In other words, the physical must always be seen to be working towards the overall vision. On the other side of the fence, will it be seen as the church trying to be up to date, or appreciated for what it is 9
and what it has done? This will depend on people s view of the church now. Is it already valued and trusted, for a new building will not develop this, only its people will. If it is true that a building reflects the congregation in it, how will this remodelling change (if it does) the image of the church and or congregation? Will it in fact make it more the centre of the community (if such a thing can be measured) or, in today s society, is this the church being presumptuous? There were also some interesting words used to describe the outcome of this building project. It will be a touching place, a space for hospitality, and it will assist in the great commission as given by Jesus to his disciples, to go into all the world. In other words, the project is seen as both spiritual and social. One last key aspect, described as hugely significant needs to be commented on. This picks up the biblical idea of tithing where 10% of the money raised is going to the Peru project, in this case approximately 60,000. This is an important overlap and interconnection of priorities The final comment goes back to the key question that is being asked, of the source of vision within Cupar Old church. How driven was it, in the first stages by Ken 10
Jeffery alone, for he himself described the building project as my baby, and has taken great personal encouragement in the congregation s response? This section is completed by two issues that offer us a reflection on those priorities mentioned by the minister but not mentioned by anyone else. Core group First of all there is the movement from groups to a Core group (see appendix 3) structure that has helped to sharpen up and give focus to peoples goals. Development of team Secondly there is the importance of developing teams, and how this can be a means of taking some of the stress away from the work of the parish minister, and helping with shared responsibilities. The example given was the appointment of a church secretary. This raises two important issues, 1) The difference there can be between the vision of the minister and any leadership team. What is vital is how any differences are worked through. Is the energy generated used positively to further vision, or negatively as a barrier to it? 2) The difference in perspective that depends on people s position and priorities, ie what vision are they seeing? Changes in the Kirk Session The final organisational issue was, since Ken coming to Cupar Old, the ordination of many new Elders. This is significant and is part of vision building, for as new people 11
come into the leadership team, there comes with them new ideas and a willingness to change that might not have been there before. There was no discussion on Elder s ordination for life, but is certainly part of the bigger picture when considering the long term make up of the local congregational leadership team. Missional Developments Worship There was general agreement that over the past 5 years worship has changed significantly. From being more traditional to being more evangelical. (Descriptions of these terms were not pursued) However, there was as one comment that Ken Jeffrey, particularly when he first came, tried to push through change too quickly! For example, the praise band was not liked by everyone at the beginning (a view held by one interviewee, but who has since changed their mind). This is a common experience, where people can be initially hesitant regarding change, but as it becomes part of their normal experience, they begin to accept it, and in many cases even like it, especially when they see the benefits of it or at least, they get used to it! There were other examples, the praise time, and how some people were not able to stand for the length of it all, or a relationship, not always smooth, between the praise band and the choir. It is not the specifics that are important here, but the fact that what people are objecting to is not always the change, but the speed of that change. There has been a lot of talk about managing change, but a better concept is to help people deal with transitions, their internal response to the 12
external changes that are happening around them. There will always be those who resist any change (in particular in worship), as well as those who feel that the rate of change is actually too slow! It is the minister who finds himself or herself in the midst of this dilemma! Ken himself did admit that there had been a lot of changes in the first two years of his ministry and indeed used the phase grace and kindness, which could refer to either God holding everything together during this time, or the response of the people of Cupar Old themselves. This initial period of change has now settled down. The outcomes of these changes have been that Worship is: less formal more child friendly, so that they feel more part of the worship more family friendly, with people more involved All of the above, helping to attract people to worship at Cupar Old. Other comments were: It appeals to all ages There is a changed demographic, with more younger people and families There are more regular attenders, not all who necessarily wish to join the church There is a good mix of music in worship Worship is friendly and welcoming It feels younger, with more life 13
The only negative comment was that, in some people s opinion, there was a loss of dignity as the service began, and that some services were too orientated towards the children. It is also worth noting the strong comments made about the preaching. It is biblical (this was not defined), relevant, thought provoking and challenging, and it changes people. This is about an encounter with God. So, are we different people as a result of worshipping God? For the future, the next change in worship will be the development of multimedia, which will be built into the refurbished church building. Here again there is a crossfertilisation of priorities for the future, between upgrading the building and the worshipping people of God. Peru This is the first thing that Ken talked about and ties in with the comment that this has been a project of Ken s, who by his enthusiasm has challenged people to participate. We are again touching on the issue of vision setting. Research indicates that within any given group, only 2-3% are vision people. If Ken Jeffery is certainly one, who are the others and how are they to be identified? 14
It started as a Harvest project in October 2004. Ken himself visited Peru in January 2005, with a team from the congregation out in October 2006. The next team will go out in 2008, with many people already signed up to go (approximately 30), most of them congregational members. Supporting the work of the Vine Trust in Peru has been a big influence in the life of Cupar Old, in particular for those ordinary people who experienced the visit and came home, told their stories, and showed their pictures. This has certainly inspired and engaged people, leading to further congregational support to the tune of 25,000 a year. Outcomes: Influence on those who visited Peru Knock-on effect on families and friends and wider congregation Helped the congregation to look beyond itself Helps to focus on one project and so gives more understanding One other comment will be mentioned. Although this project was really good, one person said they loved Cupar more! The church also needs to have compassion on its own doorstep. Poverty is everywhere; it is only the context that is different. 15
Children and Family work For clarification, this is understood as different from youth work. Ken Jeffery noticed in 2003 the growth of the Tots group on a Tuesday morning, and the networking and Alpha groups that sprang from it. He then suggested the idea of a family worker, which was agreed by the Kirk Session in 2004. This is an important issue. Out of an existing situation, and not just blue sky thinking, a vision for the future is realised. It is building on what is already there. Jill, who is the family worker, was appointed in 2004, initially on a voluntary basis, but salaried for 10 hours a week as of January 2005. She recognises the courage that Ken had to develop children and family work with in the life of the church, and to run with it, even when people said what! Developing vision is not always easy, and often overlaps with the prophetic, saying things that people do not wish to hear at the time! The basis of this work is relational and pastoral, recognised as the first building block of congregational development. (See Reflections 1) At present the Tots group meets for two sessions a week, with numbers around 120, where 90% do not go to the church, so developing outside contacts. It is supported by volunteers and a management group, chair and a core group of eight. The new build will be the base for this work, so enabling a community centre type of work to develop. This link is yet another example of where the priorities of Cupar Old are coming together. It is about building a 16
bigger picture, where pieces of the jigsaw come together, rather than independent areas of work. The future looks positive, with a successful application to the Parish Development Fund and an application to Lloyds TSB. From September 2007, this became a full time post Outcomes Jill is now very visible in the community She is recognised by outside agencies in the work that is being done This project works across different churches, across the community and the town It is evangelistic work, ie reaches people that others aspects of the life of the church does not. People recognise its value and seek to join or stay at Cupar Old because of it Youth work When Ken first came to Cupar Old, there was only the Sunday School that was active. He then set about building up this work by starting CY4G as a Cupar-wide youth group. This work was originally supported by committed volunteers until a part time appointment of a youth worker was made at the end of 2004. This appointment has recently ended, will not be replaced and will be taken over by Ken Jeffery himself. This is an interesting move, in the light of previous comments made by Ken about the stress involved in parish ministry, but is important, if we see vision related to people s gifting. What is it that gives 17
people energy, and what is it that we ask people to do that drains them? This focus s on two groups. On a Sunday evening in the hall there are about 70 young people registered for the club, aged, P7 to S2, with an attendance of about 30. This took over from the lack of success of Rock Solid over the previous period of 18 months. There is also a meeting in the manse led by Ken for S3-S6, with numbers of about 15. Comment by Ken: if something is not working, step in and build a team around you. Outside of this there is an annual Summer Club run with Cupar: St John s, which has about 80-100 kids attending. This helps to develop a good working relationship with the other Church of Scotland in the town, and has led to a joint eco congregation award. It is obvious that the youth work initiatives are another factor in attracting families to Cupar Old. Pastoral Developments Pastoral care There is a strong group involved in visiting, not just the elderly, but in befriending. Ken himself does a fair amount of visiting and sees this as part of the core function of the job, something he is called to do. In the first 18 months of being at Cupar Old, he visited everyone in the congregation. 18
The congregation also has two pastoral assistants, a bereavement counsellor and a special care visiting group. As part of Ken s lead (vision), this aspect of the life of the congregation is being developed. New midweek activities These were emphasised as important, and depending on people s priorities and needs, different groups were commented on. There are now various groups for different ages in Cupar Old during the week. For example: Tots Refresh Ecumenical men s breakfast Grumpy Old Men and Angels : social and relationship building groups Widows group Even here, Ken is seen as instrumental in getting these groups started. Two questions that could be asked are, what groups are not catered for, and in what way are these groups the church s response to the idea of 24/7 church or whole life discipleship? Educational Developments Adult Christian education I am not sure what is being said here, or not said, since the educational aspect of congregational life was hardly mentioned at all. However some examples were given: Alpha, though not in the last two years, Lent studies and various house groups. 19
Visions and expectations for the future The next question that needs to be asked is whether there is a relationship between what has been seen as significant in the developments of past five years, and people s hopes and aspirations for the future. Organisational Developments Fabric: This can be summarised as follows: That the fabric work will be completed and paid for. That the new build will be used to its full potential and be a catalyst for growth. That people will get excited with the new work and new facilities. That the project will work at different levels, both for congregation and in the community. These aspirations are what you would expect; the comment below, however, comes from a different angle, and is one we can all learn from. To be in the Old Catholic Church / school for a year. During this time the congregation to pull together and make its mistakes, so as to stay humble and serve the community and to have this same attitude in the new building. Comment has already been made with regards to the dangers of seeing the fabric work as an end in itself, and how the church leadership will need to work to build on 20
this aspect of the vision, so that people will not sit back and think the work is done. Organisational structure That the Session work groups [Core group model] will take off and become more proactive. That Ken will still be with us in the future! Change That people will stay with the church through all the changes, eg in worship Missional Developments Community involvement To have more community involvement. To show more commitment to the people of Cupar and to share faith with other churches. To be a mainstay church in the town. Music and worship To have more participation in worship by using people s gifts, ie an all member ministry. To have a balance in worship with more of a sense of connection with God. To have more space in worship. The use of other media. To deepen and to make worship more relational. The need to process the challenge and response to preaching, eg an end of service time of prayer ministry. 21
Congregational profile To bring younger people into the church so as to have a healthy balance with older people. To continue to grow, but not necessarily be bigger in numbers. To have greater commitment within the life of the congregation. Two comments for reflection: there are no specific Pastoral or Educational hopes. Are they not important, or do people see these areas of church life as already being more fulfilled? Secondly, it is always easier to identify the hopes for the future; it is much more difficult to put them into practice. The leadership could use this list as a basis for developing their vision for the future and to ask, what has been missed out and why? Role of Ken Jeffrey I knew this was the place because he was passionate in the pulpit and humble at the door At this point we go back to the original question, For now and for the future, who is, or who are, the vision setters of Cupar Old church? Vision It should be obvious from all 22
that has been said that people see Ken Jeffrey s key role as that of vision setter. One person even used the words his vision, but then clarified it by saying he inspired others through his influence. It was described as a vision that comes through scripture. One person described it as vision through the bible. So it is a vision centered on faith, where people are always called back to the Word of God. This is his gift. To have a definite vision of where he believes the church should be going. Vision is then shared through the structure of the church, and so brought to the wider congregation. One illuminating comment was made. Ken can run away with things, even be impatient, and hopes that people will catch him up, and sometimes he has learned the hard way! Yet, he keeps on dreaming the dreams and works hard to make ideas into reality. Leadership This is integral to vision. Ken is seen as leading from the front in his teaching and preaching, which is described as easy to listen to, and in which he shares his vision and his inner feelings. One person commented that he expresses his vulnerability and struggles, so indicating that we are all in this together. As can be seen from this report, Ken Jeffrey s leadership, when tied in to being a vision setter, can be described as directional. Without losing this leadership, how can others be enabled to be leaders themselves? Comments were made that he is beginning to develop this role of enabling and that there are 23
now more people in the church who have ideas for the future. The danger of leading too much from the front is that of dependency. If Ken left, would the present momentum and energy be sustainable? In a recent study carried out by the Salvation Army in England, it is worth noting that congregational growth is more likely to happen where there is both good leadership and a vision for the future. Conclusions The danger of asking such a small number of people their views is to find the common thread amongst people s own passions and desires, to separate out what is important for the individual and what is God s vision for the future. In short, it is about discernment. So it is hoped that these short conversations will be representative of the wider congregation, and give insight to where God is challenging the people of Cupar Old. It is not surprising that the key issues most spoken of were: those most immediately present on peoples minds, eg the new build project, those experiences that have particularity impacted on peoples lives, eg the Peru visit, those issues that were peoples own priorities, eg children and family work / midweek activities, the experience of communal worship of the community of faith. The second interesting point is the relationship between these key developments and people s vision for the future. 24
Again this should not surprise us. If vision is a reality, then there should be an obvious link between what people are doing and planning for now, and their hopes and expectations for the future. However, as already noted, this link does not seem so obvious for pastoral and educational issues. The final point again relates to the people themselves. Whether it be their specific role in the life of the church, paid or voluntary, there is a link between the key developments identified and their specific gifting or skills, eg music in the church, or involvement in the building project. So what of the potential and the willingness to change direction? The strength of a strong vision is to know exactly where you are going and to make sure that everything within the life of the congregation is directed to making that vision a reality. However, does God operate in such exact ways? Probably not. There needs to be breathing room for the Spirit of God to intervene constantly, to change the direction of the journey that little bit to take us by surprise and, in faith, to say yes to something new. Vision is never familiarity breading contempt, but God disturbing us, and ourselves being willing to change and be disturbed! If there is a link, a common vision, themes or a thread running through the life of Cupar Old, then it is a vision of a faith community, which through its refurbished building will deepen its links with the wider community of Cupar. It is a community of faith that seeks to expand its horizons further, through helping people in Peru and learning through that experience. It is also a community that is 25
willing to develop its own times of worship, not that this is purely internal, but as a means of communicating the vision, and building up the Body of Christ. If we were to ask, where does this vision come from? the obvious answer is God! It is however more complex than that. In Cupar Old, vision is driven and shared by the minister Ken Jeffrey. The positive side of that is a leader, willing to take the risk of sharing himself and what he truly believes to be the way ahead. It is a strong form of leadership, but also vulnerable. If there is a negative side, it is that of dependency. If the minister left, what would happen? Would there be the courage, momentum, desire and call from God for these initiatives to develop? If this report began with the mission statement of Cupar Old, there is an important question to ask: Does the congregational vision, as articulated in these conversations, tie in with this statement of faith? Are they saying the same thing? If not, which one is right, and which needs to be adjusted? Is the practice of the vision living out the theology of the mission statement? What we can say is this: Cupar Old is certainly a church that is changing, and willing to change, through the use of its building for worship and community outreach. Cupar Old is certainly a church that is living out the gospel of Jesus Christ in worship, in the local community and by its work in Peru, sees itself as part of the world wide church of Jesus Christ. 26
If there is a weakness and a challenge, what of those areas that did not come through so strongly? These could be identified as prayer, pastoral care, adult Christian education and the use of people s gifts. It may be, of course, simply the fact that these would have been identified if different people had been interviewed! The Cupar Old website is: www.cuparold.org.uk Appendix 1: people interviewed Present Role Past Roles Time at Cupar Old Session Clerk (3 years) / praise group / housegroup Elder in previous congregation Age group 7 years 60s Lead Refresh / Ecumenical 2 years 30s praise band congregation Worship Sunday School teacher 62 years 70s committee / knitting group / junior choir leader / Presbytrey Elder / Elder / pastoral care committee Minister 5 years 30s Elder (25 years) / property development group Session Clerk (16 years) 25 years 50s Children and families worker since 2005 5 years 30s Leading 2 years 30s evening services No specific role 32 years 50s 27
Appendix 2: changes in communicants roll from 1997 to 2006 Year end 31 Dec Communicants admitted by Communicants removed by Total on Roll Prof Cert Res Total Death Cert Total 2006 8 7 3 18 15 13 28 634 2005 10 14 14 38 25 8 33 644 2004 13 5 11 29 29 5 34 639 2003 7 10 11 28 25 10 35 644 2002 2 12 12 26 28 7 35 651 2001 1 8 3 12 19 6 25 660 2000 0 5 5 10 22 35 57 673 1999 0 10 1 11 24 12 36 720 1998 3 9 2 14 31 32 63 745 1997 2 8 4 14 25 13 38 794 Prof = Profession of Faith Cert = Admission by transference of membership certificate Res = Admission or removal by resolution of the Kirk Session Appendix 3: Congregational Income 2002 2007 2002: 73,785 2003: 93,540 2004: 99,958 2005: 106,930 2006: 110,540 2007: 119,400 28
Appendix 4: Contract church and the role of the core group Cupar Old is a church that is changing, and one factor behind this is a structure that enables transition. It is called Contract Church which has helped Cupar Old to sharpen up its vision, and give greater clarity and focus to people s goals. It is a movement away from long standing committees to an integrated structure of a Core group, which acts like an executive of the Kirk Session, along with four workgroups. It seeks to be an holistic model of congregational development, where the co-conveners of each workgroup, namely Pastoral Care, Youth and Mission, Worship and Reach and Teach, together the with minister, session clerk, treasurer and fabric convener, as ex officio members of the Core group, meet with an external facilitator, who leads the meeting. It is the role of the co-conveners to bring to the table the ongoing work and new ideas of each work group for sharing and discussion. This allows the other members of the Core group to listen to what is happening, contribute to debate around the table and feed back to their own work groups. The important role of the work groups cannot be over emphasised, in being centres of inspiration, initiating pieces of work and developing local leadership. One of the key parts of this structure is the outside facilitator. This person comes to the meetings with no local agenda, but is there to act as an accompanier and sometimes a resource person. This function assists people in their discussion of what is happening, and helps people focus on where their congregation might go in the future. 29
The Core group meets 3-4 times a year, once as an overnight retreat, with the work groups meeting as required, with written reports going to the Kirk Session after each Core group meeting. Having outlined the role of the Core group, the Kirk Session still has ultimate authority in decision making. In a process of discernment, it is up to the Core group to decide when decisions are simply passed to the Session for formal approval or, if a major piece of work has been discussed, for it to go to the Session for a more full discussion and final decision. For this structure to work there have to be clear boundaries drawn up, with people trusted and given authority and responsibility to carry on with their tasks. The Contract church model is one structure that allows a process of vision and transition. Mission & Discipleship Council The Church of Scotland 121 George Street EDINBURGH EH2 4YN Tel: 0131 225 5722 / Email: mandd@cofscotland.org.uk 30