A Door Set Open, by Peter Steinke

Chapter 4 – The Challenge of Change

1.  Steinke begins with a difficult and poignant question, “How will the church find leaders for emotional systems caught in a rising tide of change?”  He then discusses the relationship between change and emotionality, noting that, “Change will touch off a burst of emotional energy.”  “People in the church can make the same wrong assumptions as some economists…we think that if we make a few sensible changes, harmony will hold.  But animal spirits find their way into any system.”  Steinke illustrates these animal spirits with the example of the misguided senior pastor and the various reactions within the congregation.

Where did this pastor err grievously?  Where did the congregation err grievously?  (Yes, stuff like this really happens!)

2.  Change is hard for everyone, especially congregations. 

“Now, suddenly, with steep changes happening in our society, congregations have to ask themselves whether they are responding to a world that no longer exists and whether they have the sort of leadership required to shift to new understanding and practices. Surely, the priestly work is always needed, but now, especially now, clergy may need to become advocates for adaptive change.”

“Ask yourselves—does your congregation need a more prophetic ministry?  Do you need a more visionary type of ministry?”

3.  Rightly so, Steinke casts doubt upon the myriad invitations to participate in transformational leadership training seminars.  (I get several of these each week in the mail and promptly round-file them!)  “Transformation is a process. It may take five years, a generation, or perhaps even forty wilderness years to see its effects. Early in the process it isn’t possible to tell how transformed a church might become. So impatient and anxious, well-intended change agents turn a decade into an hour.”

Why is our religious culture so gullibly transfixed by such transformation magic…and what is the antidote?

4.  Steinke notes that the success rate for a turnaround church is about one in four.  “People can squelch urgency by dragging out possible negative results and impending doom. If leaders want to
implement change, they are placed under suspicion. With fear hovering in the community, the coalition of change agents that needs to develop doesn’t know how to get started, or they prefer add-ons rather than substantive changes. The challenge of change for a congregation on a steady downward slope is precisely to redefine and redirect its mission.”  As Kathleen Norris states, “Their challenge is to go on living thankfully, contributing liberally, and living graciously.”

How does this last statement serve to guide St. Mark and other congregations toward effective mission?  How does each of these three responses positively redirect our energy and efforts toward change?