Given all the challenges before The Episcopal Church, is restructuring important?
Leaders of the Episcopal Church are
fond of using initials, hence “PECUSA” which became “ECUSA” which is now “TEC.” The powerful fiscal committee of the Church
is Program, Budget and Finance which is almost always referred to as “PB&F”
which I always thought sounded like a sandwich you would order for lunch. The latest set of initials is TREC or The
Taskforce to Reimagine the Episcopal Church.
This high level taskforce with many capable leaders was established at
the last General Convention to come up with recommendations to enhance the
structures and mechanism of the Church for the more effective accomplishment of
the Church’s Mission. While this seems
to imply a whole re-thinking and re-visioning of the Church, this is not
exactly what is now before us. In their
initial reports, clearly the taskforce members have given some thought to the
challenge of doing this, but their recommendations point more toward the issue
of restructuring the Church, I think that is because the essentially the driving
force for this work comes from three different dynamics.
First is the long standing lack of
clarity about the relationship of the Presiding Bishop’s Office, the Staff of
815, the President of the House of Deputies and the relationship of all these
to the Executive Council along with the Council’s relationship to the General
Convention. Second is the immense cost
and continued complexity of General Convention with its extensive committee
structure and the overwhelming number of resolutions generated each three
years. Lastly there is the unfolding
challenge of funding the budget and establishing priorities given the shrinking
number of members and congregations.
The Taskforce set out to do its
work deliberately and with much energy.
The Taskforce’s very existence along with its interim reports have been
meet with much discussion, debate, criticism, resistance, and some outright cynicism. The Taskforce members seem enthusiastic about
their work and have clearly done some in depth reflection and strategic
thinking. Their latest report shows that
they are taking seriously the work of restructuring the church to make it more
efficient, to clarify relationships among important groups, and to give
increased power to both the office of Presiding Bishop and the Executive
Council which is consistent with the greater centralization of the Church in
the past several decades. The suggested
move toward a more centralize role for the Executive Council (reduced in size)
and greater clarification of the role of the PB as chief executive of the
Church are not surprising and reflect the long historic development of the PB’s
office. In recent years, the on-going
tension and power struggle between the current PB and the President of the
House of Deputies have accentuated the need for clearer lines of authority and accountability.
I do not intent to comment much in
this blog on the merits of the individual recommendations. Essentially, I believe that such
restructuring and clarification have been badly needed and in summary I believe
the Taskforce has done a credible job. I
personally would agree with the reduction in Executive Council members, but
would prefer Provincial representation rather than election at large. I also applaud their recommendations about
the reduction in the time of General Convention, the elimination of most join
Committees, and as a consequence the reduction in the huge number of
resolutions. The Taskforce is rightfully
trying to make the main thing the main work of General Convention.
As I read the criticism and
cynicism regarding their work, I note two general themes. The cynicism is rooted in an essential truth,
namely, restructuring is not the same as re-visioning or revitalization. While it is right to point out that
restructuring will not lead to the kind of re-vitalization that our declining
community needs, I believe it is unfair to lay this at the Taskforce’s
feet. Renewal, Revival, Re-vitalization,
Re-visioning, and even Resurrection is clearly the work of the Holy Spirit and
greatly dependent on our need for a new generation of visionary leaders. When such movements do occur in the Church
they almost never come from the center of power and decision making, but rather
on the fringes of the Church and among creative (and often controversial) outliers. Yet, as the Taskforce rightfully points out
by the example of the resurrection of Lazarus, Jesus then commands them to
“unbind him” and the work of the Taskforce is an energetic effort to unbind the
long outworn structures of a once larger Church and morass of committees and
commissions that were extensions of creations of an 18th century
community.
Does TEC need revitalization? Only those totally caught up in institutional
denial would think it does not. Unfortunately, we have a goodly number of such
people including the current PB still in elected and appointed offices. I am not saying that all is wrong with our
community. I see much creativity,
experimentation, and a willingness to try new methods and model to carry out
our understanding of God’s Mission. Yet
as a whole, we are clearly a declining community still living in the after math
of a substantial conflict and subsequent divide. What I am saying is that one significant part
of this is creating a Church with a structure that serves our members,
congregations, and dioceses in efficient and effective ways. I pray that TREC’s work succeeds in this
necessary work.
The other issue the Taskforce faces
is a predictable resistance to the changes by those who currently are most
vested in the status quo. Who are these
people? First are the Senior Deputies
who control so much of the mechanisms of General Convention. Second is every Deputy who sits on these
joint committees and commissions. The resistance
is highly predictable; when has any legislative body voted to reduce its
perceived power and influence? I note
with interest that on the internet it is often Senior Deputies and long-standing
Church functionaries who are warning of the centralization of power and the
elimination of vital participation. I
think we should call this what it is, the knee jerk reaction of those in
power.
In summary then, I think the work
of TREC is important, worthwhile and should be received and acted upon by the
wider Church. Will it fix all that is
wrong? No it will not. Will it address the core issues that are
really at stake in “reimagining” the Church and its mission? Not directly
though it is a start. In addition to the
example of the raising of Lazarus, let me offer another Biblical example.
When David set out to take on
Goliath, Saul offered David his armor to wear.
David refused and the usually understand is that the armor was too large
and bulky for the young David. Perhaps a
more insightful understanding is that the young charismatic future leader of
Israel understood that one cannot fight the battles of today with the already
defeated tools of the past. This may be
the greatest insight that the Taskforce has placed before the whole
Church. I pray that this is a word that
we are prepared to hear.
Note: The Task Force to Reimagine
the Episcopal Church (TREC) will convene a church wide meeting on October 2
at 7:30 pm Eastern time (6:30 pm Central/5:30 pm Mountain/4:30 pm Pacific/3:30
pm Alaska/1:30 pm Hawaii).
