Nov 13 : Update from Phil

 

Church Conflict Update November 2020     Dear Members and Friends of FCUCC:   I want to bring you up to date on recent developments regarding our church conflict over the departing pastor policy:  ·     October 14th - Church Council discussed the Center for Congregational Health (CCH) report, but did not take any action.   ·     October 21st - The Human Relations Ministry (HRM) unanimously voted to repeal the revised departing pastor policy (which had been suspended since June).  ·     October 22nd - Church Council unanimously voted to repeal the revised departing pastor policy as recommended by the HRM. Acknowledgement was made that the process was problematic.  ·     November 4th - the Moderator convened a small group of volunteers to review the three possible processes described in the CCH report on page 20, and recommend the best one for our church. This group was comprised of Ed Argue, Steve Hogenboom, Dawn Kucera, Linda Laderach, Stephanie Lowder, Karla Miller, Diane Rhoades, and Phil Taylor.                  The processes they considered were:              (1) A “lay-led” process              (2) A “consultant and leadership team-led” process              (3) A “consultant-led” process  The group agreed on the following recommendations for Church Council consideration:   ·     Select the “lay-led” process as the best one for our church. This process requires member involvement and also respects our church autonomy. Please note that our autonomy is subject to our covenant with the WNC Association, the Southern Conference, and the national UCC. ·     Follow the CCH report recommendation to create a committee of trusted people as the leadership team. We have not established how this team will be created. ·     Use the consultant’s report as the basis for useful information on areas of disagreement and/or misunderstanding among our members that will need to be addressed in this process. ·      Develop a process for members of the congregation to release their hurt feelings and forgive each other for past actions.  This will allow us to focus on the future and get a fresh start on working together.  ·     Inform the congregation on a regular basis of all steps being taken. If any new policies are developed, the congregation will be consulted and vote on them. ·     The group noted that the pandemic currently makes it impossible to hold an in-person congregational meeting. We’ll need to explore other options.  On November 11th, Church Council voted to accept all the recommendations.  The next step is for church leadership to create the team for the lay-led process and recommend goals and topics to address as we work to create our fresh start. Church Council will approve team members, goals and topics before any work in the process begins.  I will keep the congregation informed of our progress; you will have the opportunity to comment on our plans before they are implemented. Please watch for future Constant Contact messages as we move forward in our conflict resolution process.  Phil Taylor Moderator

Nov 10: Status Updates/ Former Pastor Policy rescinded!

This entry differs from the others in that it is not a copy of written communication or documentation.  This entry includes updates since the final report from the consultant group.

Oct 14:  There was a Zoom council meeting to discuss the report and next steps.  A number of folks from our group were allowed to speak at the beginning of the meeting.   The most important update was from Gary Cyphers who announced that the HRM would meet the following week and very likely would vote to rescind the Former Pastor Policy announced on March 11.  Phil Taylor announced we would form an sub-committee of 8 to decide which one of the processes included in the consultant report should be used.

Week of Oct 19:  HRM did vote unanimously to set aside the Former Pastor Policy and the council had an online vote and also unanimously to accept the recommendation.   This represents a major milestone in the 8 month process.

Nov 4:  The sub-committee of 8 met and decided to work "in house" without outside facilitation.   This recommendation will be brought to the council later this week. 

Nov 6:  The following email was sent by Bob Miles to the concerned group 

Dear friends,

Since the last email to this group, Diane Rhoades and Stephanie Lowder agreed to serve on the church committee and the committee has met.  We can remind ourselves that the former pastor policy has been rescinded and we are now having the conversation with church leadership that we asked for back in April. Following are summaries of the meeting and a note from Bob.

From Diane

Diane Rhoades and Stephanie Lowder met on Wed., Nov. 4th for a Zoom meeting with the newly formed committee of 8, which included 2 people from our group (Stephanie and Diane), 2 from the congregation who have not participated in our group (Ed Argue and Steve Hogenbloom), 2 from church council (Dawn Kucera and Linda Laderach) with moderator Phil Taylor and Pastor Karla.  

The intention of the group is to move forward to better assess where we are with a Former Pastor Policy and to foster healing. The committee evaluated the three options that Michael Cheuk from the Listening Project had suggested; to work within our church or with a facilitator and our lay leadership or to have a facilitator do the work. 

Ed Argue made the case that church leadership abandoned the core of our church, that it was too much of an abdication of our congregational input to have left the fellowship out of the last policy.  Steve Hogenboom said the new former pastor policy was a mistake and that it was a mistake to wait so long to respond.  

Karla was in agreement about the policy being a mistake. Dawn and Linda were concerned that we are not completely autonomous in making policy and that we have structure with UCC to follow.  Stephanie countered by reading the guidelines and affirming that we are free to make our own policy within UCC structure.

It was clear that most of the committee was in favor of working in house without outside facilitation. If the need to engage outside facilitation became apparent, we could go in that direction. 

"I feel a stirring that healing is possible.  Looks like our congregation may have the opportunity to weave ourselves back together.”  

From Stephanie

Committee of 8 met with one concise purpose: *To Recommend a PROCESS* to develop any new policy that the congregation might think needed or appropriate. 

After full and free discussion, the 8 Recommended that the PROCESS for moving forward be *Lay-led* and that any decisions about new policy be made by the full congregation. 

Phil will present this Recommendation to Council at their next meeting.

Details and particulars of who, what, when, where, and how remain to be decided.

I hope this helps 

A note from Bob

I want to clarify that I have not decided to leave the church.  I said earlier that I was inclined to resign because I felt a loss of the church community that is important to me and would decide after the election.  I am encouraged that the committee has had productive discussions, and will remain as a member as long as the church is making progress in healing our differences. 

I remain concerned, however, that important questions remain unresolved and will be looking for indications that the Church Council addresses these issues with a greater sense of urgency, believes it can “assemble a committee of trusted people in the congregation to form as a leadership team,” and will involve the congregation more meaningfully in church decisions-making.