May 29: Summary so far

For those of you new to this blog this entry contains a brief summary and links to the most relevant entries.

The Situation

A new policy, announced March 11, excludes former pastors from becoming a part of the congregation.  Some in the congregation object to this policy and question the process by which the policy was changed. (Click to view new policy.)

The previous policy allowed former pastors to be welcomed back as members of the congregation after one year, upon the invitation of the new settled pastor.  (Click to view former policy.)  In our experience at FCC and for some at other UCC churches, this tradition has worked well. David Kelly and Barbara Rathbun are two such former pastors who are currently much-loved members of our congregation.

The Process:  The revised policy was developed by a newly formed Human Relations Ministry (HRM) that recommended the change directly to the Church Council.  The Council approved the new former pastor policy without bringing it to the full congregation.  The change disallowing our two former pastors from participation in our church was approved by Council and communicated to the congregation in a letter from Moderator Phil Taylor (click to view letter) on March 11.

Background Information

Click on the following to view in full:

·         Former Policy

·         New Policy

·         Guidance from national UCC bylaws referencing retiring ministers (paragraph 113)

·         March 11     Announcement of New Policy (letter from Moderator Phil Taylor to congregation)

·         April 16        Letter from Pastor Karla to congregation

·         April 28        Letter from 39 concerned members (to moderator, Church Council, HRM, Pastor Karla)

·         May 4            Response from moderator to letter from concerned members

·         May 23         Notes from meeting with Rev. Colleen Samson, NC Assn. of the Southern Conference, UCC

May 23: Group representatives send a summary of the May 18 meeting

Dear friends,

Attached is a summary of the Zoom meeting that Bonnie Rash, Ben Coonrod, Diane Rhoades, and I had last Monday with Rev. Colleen Samson and three members of the UCC conference Committee on Ministry (COM).  We thank Judith Nourse for her careful notes of the meeting and Bonnie for leading us through the meeting and compiling the notes while she and Jim were moving.

Please note that this was a meeting for us to introduce our concerns to members of the committee and listen to their responses.  As the summary indicates, Bonnie will be talking soon with Rev. Samson about more specific ways the COM can provide guidance to FCUCC as we work through the issues.

Yours in peace,

Bob Miles

The following was attached as a Word document.

Summary and Notes

Meeting with Members of the UCC Southern Conference Committee on Ministry

Summary

Our four representatives (Bob Miles, Diane Rhoades, Ben Coonrod and Bonnie Rash), plus Judith Nourse as scribe, met in a Zoom with four members of the UCC Southern Conference Committee on Ministry (COM), United Church of Christ, on May 18 for two hours.  The four representatives of the COM are each retired or active ministers.  The group is led by Rev. Colleen Samson, Associate Conference Minister for the Western North Carolina Association.

Members of the Committee on Ministry (COM) heard and overwhelmingly empathized with our concern about the process in which the former pastor policy was changed at our church.  They validated that such an important decision be made by our full congregation. 

On our issue of excluding anyone from our open and affirming congregation, the COM members acknowledged how painful it is for pastor and congregation to break ties, how painful it has been for them personally to part with the congregations they have pastored, and how their experiences of having former pastors in their congregations have varied.  The COM members cited UCC tools available to help congregations and pastors in making this transition.

The COM members acknowledged that they have not fulfilled their responsibility to our congregation to assist through our transition.  The isolation required for safety from coronavirus has stalled in-person meetings.  They expressed a desire to get involved now to help us through our differences.  They emphasized that the decision belongs to the local congregation.

Rev. Samson asked for time to consider how they might move forward to help with these concerns in our church, and whether they can support our wish to bring this to the full congregation.  We reiterated our desire to be transparent. 

Details

I.                    Summary of Issues (Bonnie)

In our conversation, and in our silence, clarity has formed for us around two issues that concern the group we represent:

Our church’s inclusive identity.  Our congregation is a unique body of people immersed in love for all.  How can we be an open and affirming church, embracing all, but not our former pastors?

This policy was adopted without congregational voice.  This change in policy was made by a subset of our congregation.  We wish for a decision of this kind to be made by the full congregation.

II.                  Communicating for the Group

Our group of four representatives feel a great responsibility to represent the concerned members of our church.  Comments from each:

a.       Deep Concerns of Members (Bob Miles)

This group evolved through sharing our concerns about this policy with each other.  The notice of the new policy coincided with loss of direct communication because of the COVID social isolation.  I quoted from an email sent by a member of the HRM who said there is no realistic possibility of reconsideration and “stirring things up with other church members causes dissention and divisiveness.”  I started an email list – our main way of communicating with each other. Karla Miller’s letter to the congregation sent on  April 16^th said she fully supports this policy, which left us with no one to talk to at the church. Our group had a zoom meeting on April 18^th when we decided to write a letter together. I quoted church members’ comments: “I am heartsick.” “I have faced discrimination all my life. To me this is discrimination.” “There is no justice in this decision... the feeling of betrayal is devastating.”  “I cannot come to a church that excludes anyone.”

b.      Loving Through our Differences (Diane Rhoades)

I love our church.  I love Karla.  I love the people in the group who came up with this policy. And I disagree with this new policy.  I really appreciate that we are loving our way through our differences, staying heart connected.  I imagine the prayer traffic from our fellowship isn’t leaving anyone out.  I think it might as well read instead of love your enemies, love those who disagree with you. This policy has interrupted the almost seamless fit that our church has been for me.  That said, it is good work to find our way to common ground; lovingly.

c.       Fear of Rejection (Bonnie Rash)

My personal first reaction to the change in policy -- and I heard this from many people on our two Zoom calls -- was a fear of rejection by this church that I have joined BECAUSE it is open and affirming, welcoming all.  I now doubt whether I am safe to reveal my philosophies and vulnerabilities within this church.  For many of us, this exclusive policy brings up painful memories of excommunication from the Catholic Church, anti-Semitism, racism, rejection based on education level, level of professional achievement, alcoholism or drug addiction, suicide attempts, estrangement from family members, age or infirmity, social status, financial status.  Are we safe to reveal ourselves in this congregation that has banned former pastors?  We thought this church was different.

d.  Irrational Love (Ben Coonrod)

My first reaction was, “What would Jesus do?”  Jesus modeled and lived irrational love. He healed people on the Sabbath, even though it was against tradition and the law.  He forgave people – even those who crucified Him. 

My wife and I have been members of the congregation for 2-1/2 years.  We were married here.  One reason we joined this church is because it was open and affirming and with the understanding that any controversial issue would be talked about openly.  Having the former pastor policy made under a shroud of secrecy and a decision made by a small group of people does not feel like the church we joined. 

I believe that this situation is an opportunity – a gift from God – for us as a congregation to grow, to look at the health of the church.  If someone is sick, they can choose pain pills and mask the symptoms, amputate, or see it as an opportunity to look at what is happening in their life and make changes that will bring them back to health.

III.                 We asked the COM members to address the following questions:

Questions:

Q:  What is your role, Rev. Samson, in moving forward? 

Rev. Samson:  My role is to identify situations that either have a history of recurrence, or can’t come to resolution on your own.  This COM is seasoned.  Your situation is not unusual.  You are an autonomous congregation.  Inability to talk faced to face is a hindrance.  My role is to facilitate, to inform you of what is in place to help.  Primary tools are “Manual on Ministry” and “A Sure Foundation,” a resource for relationship between pastors and congregations.

Q:  Can you assure us that you and the committee will be impartial? 

Rev. Samson:  Other congregations and pastors feel the same pain.  Members of this committee have different opinions – we hash things out among ourselves. 

Q:  Is there bias toward the new policy and support of church leaders?

Rev. Samson:  We have chatted with them [church leaders] and the entire COM. It’s not our job to have a bias.

Rev. Samson called on other members of her committee to respond to our concerns.  Their comments are paraphrased here:

·         It is painful to leave a church.  Pastors take a covenant to leave appropriately.  I am very concerned that the process at your church was done behind closed doors.  This is not the way UCC churches should operate.  I’m with you there. I’d love to meet with your group.  I’m glad you are speaking up and speaking out and calling on your congregation to meet.   

Thank you for trusting the heart.  How do you trust when someone has agreed to be open and affirming and yet, not sure they are?  I hope you feel our passion and compassion.  It’s hard when a church you love throws you a left curve.

·         You couldn’t get back together as a group face-to-face to address your concerns [because of the isolation required].  The policy should have been communicated [to the full congregation] before being finalized.  I had two former pastors in my church, and they were fantastic.  I hear that you don’t feel heard.

·         I hear problems with process – it is hard to deal with [issues] when you can’t get together.  I sense in you the willingness to find the right path.  Tell us how we can be helpful. 

·         Conflict can be a time of growing.  [Times of conflict] may be when we grow the most.  We learn to trust and have faith.

·         Re. Bonnie’s list of fears: These are rich conversation for discussions.  I feel great concern for people who are feeling the threat of rejection described by Bonnie.

Rev. Samson

I feel God is at work in conflict.  Let’s see what God has to say.

Rev. Samson referenced a UCC document citing expectations for retiring clergy, published by the UCC:

“When a clergy retires, the UCC ministerial code will be adhered to, and the boundaries outlined are to be honored.  Retired minister refrains from providing pastoral care or seeking out continued relationship with those formerly in their care and transfers their church membership and standing if appropriate upon retirement.  These boundaries encourage the clergy person to build relationships in a new community and to acclimate to retirement.

“Even in instances and locations where retired pastors remain in the community they have served including at times retaining church membership in the former congregations due to a lack of local UCC churches, a retired minister should not participate in the life of a congregation from which they have retired for a period of 1-3 years – determined in conversation with the COM and incoming pastor.”

Boundaries include funerals, weddings, and baptisms for congregants and the wider community alike.  We [the COM] weren’t there to provide guidance, we weren’t called in.  We got cut short in our work with you by the pandemic.  The pandemic came; people tried to handle things on their own.  We take some of the responsibility for what is happening right now.

From the “Manual on Ministry:”  “Retired [Pastors] or Pastors Who are Leaving Covenant: Retired pastor not to perform pastoral services within a congregation or for a member of a congregation without invitation of current pastor … neither interfere with nor intrude upon the ministry of my successor upon my departure from a ministry setting and to deal honorably with the record of my predecessor or successor.”

Diane Rhoades

There is an ethical issue here.  Richard Weidler left anticipating the old policy. Without our former pastors being informed, the policy changed.  People are usually grandfathered in under these circumstances.  Our congregation wondered why church leadership changed the policy.  I couldn’t help but wonder if Rev. Weidler was being singled out.

Rev. Samson

What I am advocating for is a period of 1-3 years in conversation with the COM and the incoming pastor. 

Bob Miles

Richard retired two years ago, and we had a very successful interim.  Much of the congregation is new and doesn’t know what we are talking about.  I felt there was nearly a total breakdown in communication.   A number of us asked Karla Miller, after she had been with us for a year, whether Richard might return.  The March 11 email with the new policy was sent with no advance notice.  I don’t know if Karla and Richard Weidler have ever talked directly with each other.  It is essential for the departed pastor and new pastor to talk with each other.  Rev. Barbara Rathbun came back twice and backed away because she felt that she was still being seen as the pastor.  The third time, it seemed okay.  The Human Relations Ministry (HRM) originally was intended to be a support group for the new pastor.

Ben Coonrod

The HRM was blessed by our congregation.  My memory of the HRM charge was to help the pastor with employees with relationship issues.  Richard and Mike are no longer employees.  It seems they [HRM] have overstepped their charge.

Richard spoke from the pulpit – expressing that he was very conscious of the commitment to come back as a member, not as a pastor.  He was really ready to retire and come back when invited.  My sense is that he met his commitment.  He did not and continues to not be involved with members or with this group [we represent].  He’s been banned for life!

I am a chaplain in another group – I listen to people, challenge people.  I want to have frank conversations with Richard about anything – authentic and heart-to-heart conversations.  I want reassurance that we can have heart-to-heart conversations. 

Diane Rhoades

Richard is a friend.  When I invited him to our wedding in February, Rev. Weidler said he couldn’t attend unless Karla invited him.  He honored the covenant without complaint. Richard Weidler, as far as I am concerned, has kept the covenant intact.  At first, my objection was more personal, more about Richard.  Now, I recognize that the more important issue is how this policy challenges the forgiving, loving, and inclusive identity of my church.  Thank you for this conversation.

Rev. Samson

I wish I could talk about some things, but there are confidential things that I cannot talk about or that no member of the committee can talk about.  You can be in conversation with Richard as long as it isn’t about your church business.  That’s where the line is drawn.

There is a fine line between pastor as pastor, and pastor as friend.  As a pastor, you are not our best friends.  Those are some of the blurred lines.

Bob Miles

As a retired professional counselor, I can say that ministers are not the only profession that defines boundary issues.  Counselors and therapists have a responsibility to avoid dual relationships with their clients. 

COM member: A relationship with a retired pastor can’t be totally reciprocal. 

Bonnie Rash to COM members

I hear a couple of things forming:

·         Our group wants to put this conversation to the full congregation.  But how do we do that in isolation?

·         The COM is suggesting that we take advantage of the 1-3 years and not make this decision to challenge the policy yet, allowing you time to come in and work with us more.  Does that mean the new policy is frozen or reversed until further notice?  Is this accurate?

Rev. Samson

We are in covenant.  Churches have autonomy.  I can make my voice heard, but I can’t make demands.

Bonnie Rash

It may be time for us to go away and talk about what is the best way to move forward.  It would be difficult to slow this process down.  We need to communicate with our larger group.  Will we communicate that we are going to reverse this policy and follow a different process?

Rev. Samson

I need time to go back and talk about some things I’ve heard and see if that’s possible.  I don’t know if it is possible.  I’m willing to do that – it’s part of my job.

Ben Coonrod

Transparency has been an issue for us.  We propose that others from this group can listen to further conversation.  I’m sorry they couldn’t be listening today because they would have hope.  They have been praying for us.

Rev. Samson

I want you to know that others from the COM wanted to listen in also, and I put the brakes on for both sides.

Bob Miles

We’ve heard it’s us vs. them, and that’s not good.   I look to hear some openness from church leaders that they take some responsibility, as you folks have, that things could have happened differently and some openness to take another look at this policy.  Until we hear that, I’m not sure how we would proceed.

Next Immediate Steps

Bonnie will communicate soon with Rev. Samson about possible next steps that Rev. Samson and the COM can suggest. 
_____________________________________________________________________________________

To readers of these notes:  The “Next Steps” to be taken by our group of 40+ may be different from the Next Steps taken by or with the COM.  Your four representatives would like to hear back from the COM re. their decision whether to support contacting the entire congregation, or not, with a clear, concise description of our concerns, linked to the appropriate detailed documents.  It remains the intention of the group of 40+ to bring this conversation to the entire congregation. 

HRM Description from church bylaws

This was excepted from the church bylaws.  The bylaws are available on the church website.  This decryption covers the "tasks and responsibilities" of the Ministry.

ARTICLE XI – HUMAN RELATIONS MINISTRY
The purpose of the Human Relations Ministry is to administer the Personnel Policies for the paid staff and provide affirmative support for the staff and lay leadership of the church. For the detailed
functioning of this Ministry, refer to the Human Relations Ministry Charter and the Personnel Policies Manual.

The Human Relations Ministry shall be composed of five established members of the congregation.
1. Three members will be elected in odd-numbered years, and two members will be elected in
even-numbered years, in procedures defined in the Human Relations Ministry Charter, Article III,
Section B.

2. The Chair of the Human Relations Ministry will be a voting member on the church Council.

Human Relations Ministry Charter

I was asked to post the HRM charter.   This was copied from the church website.  You can access the HRM PDF document there.

HUMAN RELATIONS MINISTRY CHARTER DOCUMENT

ARTICLE I
PURPOSE OF THIS CHARTER
This Charter describes the various elements of a Human Relations Ministry at First
Congregational United Church of Christ, Hendersonville, North Carolina. This document is
intended to provide guidelines to frame a compassionate, healthy, supportive environment for the
Church’s paid staff and lay leadership.

ARTICLE II
PURPOSE OF THE HUMAN RELATIONS MINISTRY (hereafter, HRM)
We are a congregation empowered and led by the Spirit of God to be in loving relationship with
each other. Our commitment to God and to one another has given birth to the HRM and to a
covenant of loving, mutual support and self-care.
The HRM will administer the Personnel Policies for the paid staff of the church and provide
support for the staff and lay leadership of the church. The HRM will:
a) Promote positive relationships among the Pastor, the church leadership, and church
members.
b) Provide encouraging support for the paid staff and the lay leadership.
c) Implement all elements of the Personnel Policies of the Church.
d) Provide a safe forum for the Pastor, staff and lay leadership to discuss and resolve
concerns.
e) Maintain confidentiality in all personal matters.

ARTICLE III
ORGANIZATION
SECTION A. MEMBERSHIP
The HRM is established by Article XI of the Bylaws. There will be five members on the
HRM team, who have been members of the church in good standing for a minimum of three
years. They will be congregation members who collectively are imbued with wisdom,
compassion, objectivity and expertise and/or experience in the personnel management or
human resources arena. They should have the ability to evaluate and assess staff
performance in a nurturing, supportive and professional manner.
SECTION B. STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION
1. The HRM will operate under the following guidelines:
HRM V15.0 – Version approved by Council on 10/10/2018
a) Five members will be nominated by the Nominating Committee and voted on by the
Congregation. Initially, five members will be elected. If started in an odd year, three
members will have two-year terms, and the remaining two members will have oneyear
terms. If started in an even year, the opposite will apply – with two members
having two-year terms and the remaining three having one-year terms. Thereafter,
two new members will be elected in even years and three will be elected in odd
years. A member may serve a second two-year term, but then must step down for at
least a one-year hiatus.
b) If a position is vacated for any reason, the replacement person (nominated by the
Moderator and approved by Council) will serve out the remainder of that term of
office.
c) One member will serve as the Chair, elected by the HRM members.
i. The term for the Chair will be one year.
ii. The Chair is limited to serving two consecutive one-year terms.
iii. The Chair will be a voting member of the Church Council and is
expected to attend Council meetings.
SECTION C. POSITION WITHIN THE CHURCH
The HRM will operate as an independent body within the church organizational structure. It
will work in continual, close collaboration with the Pastor and the Moderator.
If requested by Council, the HRM will provide information and guidance regarding issues related
to both the paid staff and lay leadership.

ARTICLE IV  DUTIES
SECTION A. DUTIES
1. Guided by the spirit of love, the HRM will fulfill the following general functions:
a) Ensure policies, procedures and processes are in place to support the paid staff
members and lay volunteers.
b) Ensure the HRM operates in compliance with all applicable laws and UCC guidelines
and directives.
c) Promote the well-being, care, self-care, and effectiveness of both the staff and lay
leaders, and create a nurturing environment where appreciation is expressed.
d) Function as a mediator between church members, between church members and
staff, and between staff members.
e) Create a culture that encourages the development of individual self-care boundaries,
respects those boundaries, and conveys the spirit of this culture to the congregation.
SECTION B. REVIEW PROCESS FOR STAFF
HRM V15.0 – Version approved by Council on 10/10/2018
The review of a staff member’s success in the job is based on several factors – some measurable
and some not. The HRM should develop a balanced approach among these variables to provide
effective review and feedback between the HRM and staff members in a supportive and
compassionate environment. The review will consist of two separate tracks: One is for Job
Wellness and one is for Accountability. Appendices A and B provide guidelines that define a
framework for the review.
Appendix A helps develop a dialog concerning Job Wellness and Appendix B helps guide a
conversation about Accountability.
1. Job Wellness Review.
Job Wellness is defined as the staff member’s expressing their feelings about their job, work
environment, self-care, and their ability to set goals for themselves.
The questions in Appendix A are designed for the staff member to complete.
The answers to these questions are to foster discussion in a supportive environment, not for
evaluation. These discussions are for the purpose of affirming the staff member in their job and
position within the church family.
This will be a cyclical process, renewed at least every six months. This ensures follow-up and
future development.
2. Job Accountability Review.
Accountability is defined as a thoughtful discussion among HRM members to review the overall
work of the staff person. The questions in Appendix B are designed to guide this discussion.
The HRM will share the results of this review in feedback to the staff member in a supportive
and compassionate environment. The feedback should be both oral and written.
These reviews might be every six months or quarterly, as the HRM feels appropriate. The staff
member may request an Accountability Review at any time.
Annually, the HRM will make a salary recommendation to the Treasurer, who incorporates them
into a draft budget for approval by the Ministry of Financial Resources, Council, and the
congregation, in that order.

SECTION C. PAID STAFF
1. The regular paid staff currently includes the Pastor, Minister of Music, Administrator, Sunday
School staff, and Custodians. The HRM will perform the following duties for these paid staff
members:
a) Ensure that each staff member has a current job description, agreed upon by both
the HRM and staff member.
b) Conduct wellness and feedback reviews as described in Article IV, Section B above.
HRM V15.0 – Version approved by Council on 10/10/2018
c) Make recommendations as needed as a result of these reviews to the Council and
Ministry of Financial Resources.
d) Oversee the relationship of the staff to each ther and to people in the congregation
and promote a compassionate, self-caring, nurturing environment.
e) Encourage paid staff members to make use of opportunities for continuing
education that are available to them.
2. Other paid staff members might include Choral Scholars and choir section leaders. Their
oversight rests with the Minister of Music.
SECTION D. PASTOR
1. The HRM will provide a respectful and compassionate foundation that fosters success for the
Pastor. The HRM will create an environment that offers the Pastor unqualified support and
honest feedback on all aspects of the position he/she holds. The HRM will perform the
following duties:
a) Conduct wellness and feedback reviews as described in Section B, Items 1 and 2,
above.
b) Mutually assess any concerns the Pastor may have for his/her own spiritual, mental
and physical well-being. Provide encouragement to the Pastor to seek means
he/she might feel would be beneficial for self-care.
c) Prepare the Pastor’s annual salary recommendation, and coordinate this
recommendation with the Ministry of Financial Resources.
d) Review and comment from a congregational perspective on the Pastor-prepared
appraisals.
e) Hire a temporary minister during the Pastor’s sabbatical.
SECTION E. OTHER PAID STAFF
1. The HRM will perform the following duties:
a) Act as the agent for the employment and dismissal of non-clergy staff members, in
consultation with the Pastor and other Ministries, as appropriate. The HRM may
execute the hiring process or select an ad hoc committee to perform this duty.
b) Review and comment from a congregational perspective on the appraisals the
Pastor prepares of all non-clergy staff members.
c) These appraisals shall be both verbal and written and will be shared with the staff
members.
d) Coordinate the salary recommendations with the Ministry of Financial Resources.
SECTION F. LAY LEADERSHIP
HRM V15.0 – Version approved by Council on 10/10/2018
The HRM recognizes that lay leaders and volunteers are crucial to the functioning and overall
health of the church. Proper attention to the self-care, guidance and support for these lay leaders
and volunteers is crucial to their well-being.
The lay leadership includes Council Officers, Ministry facilitators, leaders of sub-group activities
within the ministries, and leaders of small-group ministries.
1. The HRM will perform the following duties:
a) Provide training and skills enhancement for current and potential lay leaders. Such
training could be offered by experienced members of the congregation and/or
through church– purchased training programs/trainers (at no cost to the lay
leaders). The goal of such training and skills enhancement is to help lay leaders be
successful and fulfilled in their leadership roles.
b) Maintain an inventory of church ministries and their leaders, sub-groups within
Ministries, special interest small groups, and outreach groups.
c) Engage in informal discussion and two-way conversations with the lay leadership,
which could be instigated by either party.
d) Meet informally with lay leaders to assess their needs and express appreciation.
e) Recognize the importance of celebration of our lay volunteers.
f) Consider ways to promote visibility and appreciation for the lay leaders and other
volunteers for all ministries.
1. Promote Visibility. This could include visiting their activities; articles in the
Chronicle highlighting an individual or ministry that might also include
interviews; create a “Spotlight On….” Bulletin Board, where some elements
can be showcased with photos.
2. Promote appreciation and celebration. This could be celebratory events,
such as a special coffee hour, luncheon, BBQ, and verbal affirmations from
congregants to all members serving the church in any way.
3. Recognizing the presence of the Holy Spirit in all we do, annually have a
reciprocal commitment liturgy. With spoken statements from all, confirm a
covenant of service from the staff, lay leaders and volunteers to the
congregation, and a covenant of support, self-care, and caring between the
congregation and all those serving. This could also include installation of the
HRM members.

ARTICLE V
ADMINISTRATION OF THIS CHARTER
This Charter may be amended by a majority vote of the members of the HRM, in consultation
with the Pastor or Moderator, as needed
HRM V15.0 – Version approved by Council on 10/10/2018
Charter created in August 2018.


Appendix A
JOB WELLNESS REVIEW FOR FCC STAFF
STAFF PERSON QUESTIONS
(These are answered by the staff person and discussed with the HRM)
1. What do you most enjoy about your work/ministry at FCC?
2. What aspects of your work/ministry at FCC drain you/frustrate you?
3. What changes could be made to help your work/ministry to be more effective and
enjoyable? Are there any ways in which the HRM could be helpful to you and your
ministry?
4. Are there any difficult issues that you are dealing with that we need to be aware of?
5. As you think about your previous six-month goals, what do you feel have been the
most positive accomplishments, and what has not worked out well?
6. What are your goals for the coming six months/year?
7. Are there any long-term dreams for your work/ministry at our church that you
would like to share with us?
8. Our church is committed to both doing our work/ministry well, and to personal and
spiritual self-care. In what ways are you paying attention to self-care?
HRM V15.0 – Version approved by Council on 10/10/2018


Appendix B
JOB ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEW FOR FCC STAFF
HRM QUESTIONS
(These are discussed among the HRM and shared with the staff person)
1. How is the over-all work/ministry of this staff person perceived by you and the
congregation (positives and areas of concern)?
2. Looking back over the past six months/year, what aspects or specific areas of the
staff person’s work/ministry need to be affirmed?
3. Looking back over the past year, are there any areas of concern with this staff
person’s work/ministry that we need to share with him/her?
4. What would be helpful for this staff person to understand about their compensation
for the coming year?

HRM V15.0 – Version approved by Council on 10/10/2018

National UCC Bylaws

National UCC Bylaws, paragraph 113: 

An Ordained Minister retiring from active service by reason of age or disability retains Ordained Ministerial Standing in the Association of the Ordained Minister’s choice. Membership in a Local Church must be maintained

New Policy

This is an excerpt from Phil Taylor's March 11 email.

New Personnel Policy Section 13. 

Protocol for Departing Clergy:  This protocol is effective as of March 11, 2020.  Departing clergy, both settled and interim pastors, should have no contact or involvement with FCUCC or any of its members in any way, from their departure date until one year after the start of the new settled pastor.  After that time, social contact between the departed pastor and church members who so desire is approved.

The church wants to ensure successful new pastoral leadership, and healthy and uncomplicated relationships between the new pastor and church members.  The church also wishes departing clergy to be able to move forward with their lives.  Because it can be difficult for former pastors and church members to navigate healthy boundaries in a new kind of relationship, and in order to create clarity from the beginning, the revised protocol, and the most loving thing to do, is that departing pastors are no allowed to attend or rejoin FCUCC at any time.  This does not include former pastors who were invited to return to FCUCC before the enactment of this protocol.

A person’s choice of pastoral ministry as a vocation carries with it the expectation of leaving congregations and entering into the lives of new ones.  Departing pastors who remain in the area are encouraged to become involved in another faith community, and must end their membership with FCUCC, after departing FUCC.

Former Policy

This is an excerpt form Phil Taylor's March 11 email.

Former Personnel Policy Section 13.

Protocol for Departing Clergy: Upon departure of settled or interim clergy through resignation or termination, said clergy will have no official contact with FCUCC or its members for a period of at least one year after the arrival of the new settled pastor. It is the responsibility of the departing clergy to advise the congregation of the boundary rule of no contact. Should a former clergy desire to rejoin the congregation, it must be upon invitation by the current settled pastor.

May 17: Meeting with UCC Congregational Care scheduled

On May 17th, Bob Miles sent the following to the group:


Dear church friends,


The four representatives of our group (Ben Coonrod, Bonnie Rash, Diane Rhoades, and I) are scheduled for a Zoom meeting tomorrow morning (Monday, the 18th) at 10 (not in two weeks, as I said incorrectly in the last message I sent) to discuss issues that arose from the new policy to exclude former pastors from church membership,  


We agreed, somewhat reluctantly, that only the four of us will participate with the four UCC committee members and Rev. Samson and that the meeting will not be recorded (though we will take notes).


The four of us have been have been talking and emailing every day this week and will meet (six feet apart) this afternoon to prepare for the meeting.


We will ask questions about the meeting and UCC process.  We know the importance or conveying the anguish experienced by those in our group (and probably others) since the notice on March 11th of the new church policy.  If there are additional meetings, we will ask for other group members to participate as observers and for a record of the meetings. 
We also are writing a statement informing the congregation about these developments that we will ask Phil Taylor to send.

We will notify all of you about the meeting, including any outcomes, as soon as possible after Monday.


We continue to pray for healing within our congregation.


Bob Miles

May 11: Email from Rev. Samson

The following email was set to Bob Miles from Rev. Samson.  Bob forwarded it to the group,

Greetings Bob,

I am Rev. Colleen Samson, Associate Conference Minister for the Western North Carolina Association (WNCA), Southern Conference, United Church of Christ.  This email is written on behalf of the Committee on Ministry (COM). The COM oversees the authorized clergy and churches in the WNCA. 

On Thursday, May 7, 2020 the Committee on MInistry of the WNCA met and discussed the situation at First Congregational Church of Hendersonville, and the church leadership's new policy about the role of a former pastor in the church.  Because the COM oversees both clergy and churches, we think our congregational care sub-committee can be of assistance in listening to the differences of opinion that have developed.

There are four people on our congregational care sub-committee.  I would also be included in the zoom call.  We invite you to have between 5-10 people meet with us. We would like to meet the week of May 17 on Monday or Tuesday to listen to your thoughts.  We can meet via zoom in the early evening.  Would you be able to assemble some members who are willing to meet with us?

I look forward to hearing from you regarding this zoom call.

Blessings and Good Health,

Colleen

May 9: Second group Zoom Meeting

There was a second conference call on May 9.

A number of action steps were agreed including the agreement to meet with Rev. Samson.

May 4: Response from Phil recommending involvement of Rev. Samson

Hi Bob,



The HRM met via Zoom last week to discuss the best way to proceed.  We are eager to meet with a group representing the 37 people who signed the Letter of Concern around the new personnel policy.  We certainly see a way forward that includes compromise and deep listening to each other's concerns and ideas.  We know we are all acting out of love for our church and seek reconciliation and understanding.



Since this is an important issue for all of us and there is conflict in it, we have reached out to The Rev. Dr. Colleen Samson, who is the Associate Conference Minister of the Western North Carolina Association of the Southern Conference of the UCC.  Her ministry (and job) is to assist and support local churches in our association - our celebrations, installations, ordinations and, if necessary, consulting and working with congregations that are dealing with important conflicts and concerns.



She has spoken with us and would like to set up a meeting with representatives of the group of letter signers.  She is waiting to hear from them so a mutually agreeable time can be set up for a meeting using Zoom. 



The letter signing group is welcome to contact Rev. Samson directly, or I can facilitate that if it would be helpful.  In addition, I am available to participate in this meeting with Rev. Samson if the letter signing group felt my presence would be helpful.



I expect there will be a second meeting involving Rev. Samson, representatives of the letter writing group, the HRM, Karla, and I at a future time.



I remain optimistic that these conversations will increase everyone's understanding about both the details of the process and the concerns about the policy change.  And I pray that a mutually acceptable outcome will be possible.



Thanks,

Phil

April 28: Initial Response from Phil

Hi Bob,



Thank you for your group's letter of concern.  The HRM will be meeting later this week to discuss the letter and to plan future steps.  Be assured that we are certainly willing to have the requested conversation.  How to structure that conversation and how to have a safe conversation during this pandemic will be addressed in the near future.  I expect you will be hearing from us after the HRM meeting.



It was not clear to me if you were going to send the letter to Council or if you wanted me to do it.  In the interest of full transparency, I will forward the letter to Council this afternoon.



Thanks,

Phil

April 16: Email from Karla

Beloved FCCH, Over the past several months, the Human Relations Ministry (HRM) of our church has been working to develop a clear policy regarding the return of former clergy to the life of this church. This work was handed over from the Transitional Leadership Team, who was tasked by Council to address recommendations from the succession plan developed by forty leaders of our church two years ago. A policy was developed, approved by Council in March, and was communicated to you, the congregation. Many people have expressed their approval of the policy and its wisdom, which encourages social contact between the former pastor and the congregation after a year of a newly settled pastor, but doesn’t permit former pastors to return as members. There are some people, however, who have expressed disappointment and dissatisfaction with this policy.  Please know that my heart is filled with compassion and concern for each of you who have expressed your dismay regarding the new policy.  What I want you to know is that this issue is of critical importance, not only for the health of the church, but for the vitality of my ministry as your settled pastor. It is for this reason that UCC guidelines, based on best practices and a multitude of real life experiences, suggest a one to three year evaluation and discernment period. This process involves the new pastor, the retired pastor and the Committee on Ministry of the Western NC Association of the Southern Conference of the UCC. HRM concluded, and I agree, that such a prolonged review process would be detrimental to everyone involved. First, I fully support this new policy. I believe it is wise for this present time, and wise for the future. It is my general experience that once a clergy person has served as a pastor to a congregation, they are always regarded as such.  Whether intentionally or unintentionally, former pastors can create awkward and unhealthy situations for congregants and the new settled pastor. It can also be difficult for former pastors to come back to the church where they were once “in charge,” making it difficult to move on to a healthy new phase of life.  Clergy are former employees, and as such, understand they are subject to personnel policies of a local church, the guidelines set out by the denomination in which they serve (in our case, the UCC), along with being subject to the UCC Ministerial Code of Ethics for clergy. It is unfortunate, I think, that there was an assumption communicated that retired clergy, upon invitation by the settled pastor, can automatically rejoin the congregation they leave after a year. Since I believe requiring a new settled pastor to make this determination is unfair to all involved, the policy of the HRM is a wise and clear path forward, both now, and for all future pastors of this church. When my ministry here is ended, I will embrace this policy because I believe in its wisdom. I am grateful for Rev. Weidler’s rich legacy of ministry at FCCH. For many of you, Rev. Weidler’s ministry touched your lives in profound and personal ways~~through walking with you as you experienced grave illnesses, through celebrating your great joys, through the message of progressive Christianity, through the Open and Affirming process, and more. This is good pastoring, and I join with you in honoring that legacy.  Finally, after careful discernment and much prayer, I do not believe it would be in the best interests of Rev. Weidler, the church, or my ministry with you to invite him to reenter the life of the congregation. This position is not intended to reflect negatively on the character of Rev. Weidler, the church or myself. It is my deepest hope that members can enjoy their relationships with Rev. Weidler outside the context of congregational involvement. I know my stance will disappoint some of you, and change is hard. In my time as your Pastor over the past 15 months, I hope I have acted in a way that cultivates a level of trust that enables you to feel confident in my leadership. And more, I hope you will support me as I affirm the wisdom of this policy. The people of our Human Relations Ministry have worked prayerfully in careful discernment, and your support is of critical importance to our church, and to my ministry going forward. I love and care for each person who is part of this beautiful congregation. I ask for your prayers as we focus together on our ministry of love, justice and hope in these uncertain and evolving times.  In faith and with love, Karla

April 27:Letter sent to Phil, Karla et. al.

April 27, 2020

To leaders of First Congregational United Church of Christ-Hendersonville:

Background

Many members of this church anticipated that the newly settled pastor would decide after about a year whether to accept the former full-time and interim pastors as members of the congregation, the practice followed for two previous former pastors.

Church members raised questions and expressed concerns with HRM members and other church leaders soon after receiving the notice of the new policy that excludes former pastors from church membership.  A significant number of us connected with each other, which led to a Zoom meeting on Saturday, April 18^th, in which 20 people participated.

We have been told that UCC churches follow a practice of not accepting former ministers as members to their congregation, but some of our previous UCC churches welcome retired pastors as members.  We view this congregation as a body of people immersed in love and justice for one another and the world and embrace everyone who enters our doors, while supporting our beloved, settled pastor as the leader of our body. 

We appreciate that Karla expressed in her letter “compassion and concern for each of you who have expressed your dismay regarding the new policy” and are grateful for the growth in membership since Karla became pastor.  We also understand that, as the new pastor, she could be in a difficult position to have sole responsibility for the decision whether to accept a former pastor as a member of the church. 

Concerns and questions

 During the Zoom meeting, members shared that they feel “saddened” and “heart sick.”  Other comments that were expressed include: “Nothing about love and compassion;” “My sense of the church was crushed;” “It’s not inclusive. It’s not congregational;” “We don’t want to lose values of this church;” “All inclusive means ALL;” “The schism in this church is a tragedy.” “Richard and Pastor Mike could have been grandfathered under our past practice.” “Former pastors should be welcomed at Ashley lectures, weddings, and memorial services.” and “Trust and hope that with open and complete dialog and understanding, total healing can and will be achieved.”

We agreed that the congregation needed to be informed that the HRM was considering a new policy and given the opportunity to vote on a procedure and the policy itself.  We have questions about the process that was followed, ask for more information about UCC policies and practices that the HRM consulted, and believe that alternatives are available to total exclusion, which to some feels like banishment or excommunication.  We also believe that church leaders need to be concerned about differences that have emerged within the congregation since the policy was announced.

Two former pastors of this church have returned to become productive church members.  A founding and fundamental assertion of congregational churches and the UCC is the autonomy of local churches to make such decisions . 

We understand the need for confidentiality in discussing sensitive personnel issues. We also understand from talking with HRM members that they considered questions that appeared to concern Rev. Weidler.  If so, did he have an opportunity to address those concerns?   

Request and intentions

We ask for a conversation with church leaders about the policy, the process by which it was adopted, and our deep concern about excluding any person from our open and affirming fellowship.

We invite healing among members of the congregation who feel wounded by this decision.

We ask for consideration of alternatives to the policy.

Possible format for a conversation

A conversation, probably as a Zoom meeting, would have to be planned with an agenda, a list of questions, and possible alternatives to the policy.  We suggest that Karla, Phil Taylor, and representatives of the HRM be involved.  A limited number of us could present concerns and questions and other church members participate as listeners.  We ask that it take place as soon as possible. 

Summary

A significant number of church members are disappointed and heart-broken about the policy and the way the decision was reached, and believe that it interferes with faith and trust in the church we love.  Although some have decided to leave the church, most are committed to doing all we can to bring healing and a renewed sense of community to the church.  We urge church leaders to hold a conversation with those of us who have concerns and questions.  

Prayers for peace, forgiveness, and community:              

Ann Allen, Cary Battle, John Bodamer, Karel Bodamer, Diana Brantley, Richard Brantley, Anne Cain, Kirsten Cone, Ben Coonrod, Joanna Coonrod, Susan Huff, Heather Fitzwilliam, Jimmie Harris, Roy Harris, Nancy Irving, Jim Jolly, Donna Jones, Jim Jones, Joanne Kimmel, Connie Knight, Joan McKinney, Robert Miles, Jim Nourse, Judith Nourse, Joady Perrett, Nancy Pew, Bonnie Rash, Jim Rash, Mark Ray, Diane Rhoades, Claudia Schopper, Jeannie Stewart, Milton Steward, Diane Swift, Joyce Tierney, Kevin Tierney, Pete Tintle, Tess Tintle, Carolyn Wilson