Excerpts from Shannon’s Rector’s Report, 2003

Over the past two years, I have de-activated 80 persons totaling 35 households.  By now,   the extensive work we had to do to purge our rolls of long-inactive persons has been done, the greater part of this being accomplished last year.  Thus we can conclude that most of the people in these 2002 numbers became active at All Saints’ sometime between the years 1994--2000. Before these numbers become alarming, however, it is important to note that in these past two years 25 persons / 15 households are people who were quite active at All Saints’, but moved away.  (They are listed “inactive” here because they have not  had their membership formally transferred to another Episcopal congregation.)

This means that over two years, we have seen 55 persons / 20 households become inactive for reasons other than moving out of town. It is fair to say that many of these persons  have been only marginally active, but it is no less true that most of them were seeking a church home in good faith.  In last year’s Rector’s Report, I cited NEW MEMBER RETENTION as one of my primary concerns for our vitality and mission and these numbers underscore my point.  Of course there are lots of reasons why a person drops out  (for example, marrying a person in another church and attending there), but  a significant number of these folks told me personally that they just could not “find their place” and didn’t feel that they fit in.  Others told me that they simply couldn’t make friends here and kept feeling like a newcomer or stranger at their own church. I must say that I also know that several of those who became disappointed didn’t do very much to help themselves make it work--relationship is a two-way responsibility!  Nonetheless, these comments should concern us all.  While there were numerous other reasons for dropping out, we can and must focus on being more intentional about incorporating newer members.  To this end, I am now working with the Evangelism and Connector Committees to launch specific efforts to support newer members.  Also, we will soon “re-invent” the Parish Families system so as to enable more cohesive small group ministry--small groups are the key for a congregation that has reached our size.

ON MY MIND . . .

Looking back on 2002, two things immediately come to mind.  The first is Gene’s illness.  As a parish issue (this kind of thing always is, due to the relationship between a priest and the congregation), this affected us in many ways.  Both personally and institutionally, there was a good bit of anxiety. For most of the four months, Gene was in ICU and “step-down,” and thus could not receive visitors.   We saw Karen here on most Sundays, and we saw the toll it was all taking on her.  We felt so helpless.

Without minimizing any of this, we should also note something very special indeed.  The entire situation galvanized our parish community. We pulled together and somehow saw things at All Saints’ differently.  Many of you expressed your concern and support for me, both in my ministry to Gene and Karen and in the ways his illness and absence affected me generally. 
Continued on insert

I am most grateful for that because I was indeed deeply shaken.  In short, you rose to the occasion and we became a better church family as a result.  You should know that this was, in fact, the very first thing I heard Gene speak about when he began truly to recover.  It was very evident to Gene and Karen what we can be to one another in this place.  This is the kind of thing that does not live on the surface, and so we hardly ever really think about it,  but I hope you’ll remember that it is there in all of us.

In April, 2002, I attended a national workshop sponsored by the Office of Congregational Development of the Episcopal Church.  It was there that I first learned about a new phenomenon that has been identified with regard to congregational dynamics and church growth: the “transitional congregation.”  This is a new classification which has been recognized and studied for only about three years, but its evidence and consequences can been seen over many years since the 1980’s.  It refers to what happens in a parish after it has made that very difficult move from the “pastoral size” to the “program size” parish. We completed this about two years ago.  For the past fifteen years, this change has been considered to be the most difficult and stressful undertaking a congregation can face;  now we know more about why! 

The “transitional congregation” is a program church with  an average Sunday attendance of 200-240.  All Saints’ has been moving around the 200-mark for the past several years.  For some reason(s) now being studied, once a congregation moves into that range, it seems to hit a brick wall.  Finances, morale, lay leadership, facilities--in a word, everything--become very stressed and do not seem to be able to hold up the weight. This invariably produces a great deal of anxiety within a congregation and tension with its leadership. It is strongly recommended that a congregation in this transitional size focus on one single goal--to get to the 240 average Sunday attendance point.  Studies show that it is then that a parish will not only resume very good momentum but even realize a situation in which it doesn’t have to struggle so hard to do what it wants and needs to do.  Focusing on this single goal has major implications across the board, from planning the annual budget to daily parish life and ministry.

This past October, three of our Vestry members and I attended another workshop, sponsored by the Dioceses of Mississippi and Alabama, led by the Rev. Canon Kevin Martin, the Church’s leading expert on transitional congregations.  We were stunned to hear Canon Martin proceed to describe almost every difficulty All Saints’ is now facing!  It would appear that we are the very thumbprint of a transitional parish.  Many of our present difficulties are inherent in systems dynamics and not so much about us “personally.”  We will be teaching about all of this throughout 2003; I am even hoping to be able to bring Canon Martin to All Saints’ for consultation and teaching specific to us.  [By the way, Canon Martin said without any qualification that being the Rector of a transitional parish is the single most difficult job in the Church!  So now I have an excuse for the way I am.]

Probably the most memorable difficulty we had in 2002 was the cash-flow crisis in the last quarter of the year that forced us into a freeze on spending.  Such difficulties with finances can indeed be understood in light of the issues of a transitional parish.  Even so, I also think that we have to lay responsibility at our own doorsteps and be sure that our priorities will take care of  our church!  Be very sure: the cash crisis we had in 2002 cannot be repeated without major damage to All Saints’, both as a community in itself and as a ministry in this area.  To maintain necessary cash-flow, your pledges need to be kept up to date, paid monthly or weekly (at the very least, quarterly).  Yes, there is much theology and spirituality in your stewardship, but right now I’m simply talking about the unforgiving realities of the everyday world.

I remain very concerned over an apparent lack of commitment to regular participation in our parish life, programs, and ministries.  Simply put, the number of parishioners taking part regularly just doesn’t reflect the size of our membership.  It starts with worship--the first priority and mission of the Church.  Especially with regard to Holy Week and the Great Vigil of Easter--the very heartbeat and lifeblood of the Christian faith--our attendance is inexcusably low.  Attendance at special services, such as Lessons & Carols, Twelfth Night/Epiphany, Ash Wednesday, etc., is rather embarrassing.  We’ve sometimes had as many visitors at such occasions as parishioners.  Lay ministries and the activities of parish life often go wanting.  None of us should think it acceptable that so few of our children come to Sunday School.  I make no bones about it--this is about parental responsibility, yes, obligation to your child.  Hand in hand with this is participation in EYC; we’ve had very fine leadership and substance over the past several years, and we continue to have that now.  Even so, without a respectable number of our youth participating, the program cannot grow or improve.  Those who stand aside, waiting for a Youth Minister to “make things better,” are simply perpetuating a vicious circle:  we can’t employ a Youth Minister until that position can be justified by a greater commitment in what we’re already doing.

Raising the hard truths is just as much a part of good leadership as guiding successes.