Being a Cleveland Cavs fan by marriage, I was intrigued to learn that the Republican convention will be held in their basketball court. Somehow the wood floor that hosts hundreds of hours each year of elbows, shoving, and intentional fouling, will be covered over so that neat rows of chairs and a podium may exist in the midst of the arena. If the Republicans have a contested convention, some are promising that there will be more blood sport happening that week than what even the NBA allows. I pray not. Politics, like religion, should not be a competitive enterprise. Nor should the quest for entertainment drain our contests of their intended purpose.

In the church, we should be careful to limit competition to the annual picnic’s egg-toss. When there is a contest between competing visions, leadership, or policies, the focus should be upon building consensus and hearing the concerns of those to meek to lift up their voice.  The purpose of politics is not to give entertainers another stage to strut upon. Similarly, the purpose of our church meetings is not to give competitive individuals another arena in which to one-up their neighbors.

Church life is not a chess game, where we silently consider our strategies knowing that every move that benefits me costs my opponent something. The church is organic, a wholistic enterprise that only remains alive through cooperation. Even the most aggressive of her early leaders used the language of competition only to speak of how he disciplined his personal life. Regarding the life of the church, he said:

Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with [Christ’s church]… and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it. Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 

  (I Corinthians 12:12, 23-27)

I saw a photo of Rosa Parks in a display for International Woman’s Day and thought of the qualities that made her a great leader. We know now that she developed gradually into her role, attending workshops and reflecting carefully about the problem of segregation and how to effectively demonstrate in opposition to it, long before she refused to give up her bus seat on December 1st, 1955. Though she was always clear that “she was tired of giving in” — not physically tired — her demeanor and method of protest fostered sympathy and a consideration of our shared humanity, even among her opponents. Further, she was willing to utilize her strengths as an introvert.  Her whole life exampled dogged determination, as well as, a willingness to let others take the spotlight. Notably, she teamed up with Martin Luther King and complimented his more outgoing leadership gifts.

Lao Tzu writes:

A leader is best

When people barely know they exist

Of a good leader, who talks little,

When his or her work is done, the aim fulfilled,

The whole community will say, “We did this ourselves.”

Bill Easum recently wrote that the pastors who serve churches that have no hope of growth are wasting their time. This sentiment, often repeated by bishops and leaders who should know better, reminds me of Simon Newman, the college president who urged his staff to "drown them bunnies" when they were dealing with a student who may not make it all the way to their four year degree. The assumption of the college president was that his school existed to profitably collect four years of tuition and maintain an excellent rating with their accreditation agency. Those of us who look for a college education to broaden a person’s life, even if that person doesn’t complete their degree, will find little common ground with Newman. Similarly, I happen to believe that congregations have a higher purpose than longevity or institutional growth.

There is something repulsive about the whole exercise of clergy passing judgement on congregations and basing that judgement solely on whether or not a situation can sustain a full-time, ordained, pastor.  I have served situations of various sizes and been the elder in charge of group ministries that involve various clergy categories. I am convinced that vitality can be maintained in situations with limited resources, if the supervising elder is willing to be creative and employ trained laity. Each of the situations that I served were "of God" and remained a part of His overall plan of salvation, even when they weren’t growing. Further, local churches are instruments of a mysterious grace, even when they are ineffective or in the final decade of their lifespan. 

Easum’s point about the clergy who feel that they are wasting their time serving certain churches says more about how some have lost their servant’s heart than about the loss of sustainable ministry in poorer rural and inner city situations. Three of these small membership churches that I served, closed some years later (I don't think I had anything to do with it). If the Lord tarries, all of the churches that we serve will eventually close. I reflect back on Winterport UMC (Maine Conference), Prouty UMC (Central PA conference), and Fellowship UMC (Western PA conference) and see them now as instruments of God's Holy Spirit. I cherish their memories as one would a departed loved one. No, my service with them was not a waste. It was an honor. I am humbled.