The committee on ministry here at First Unitarian has been slowly working on a covenant, mission statement, and goals for our church. Recently, one member of the committee on ministry and I searched the Web for church mission statements. I must have read more than a hundred mission statements of Unitarian Universalist churches. They are not good. They are bad:– unrealistic, verbose, full of insider jargon, boring, uninspiring, —

Instead of just being nasty and snarky, maybe I should say what I think makes for a good church mission statement. My criteria for good mission church mission statements come from two main sources, Peter Drucker and John Carver. I’ll give an overview of Drucker and Carver first, next give you my own six criteria for good church mission statements, and end by giving the only two good mission statements for Unitarian Universalist churches that I was able to find.

I/ Peter Drucker on mission statements

The late great Peter Drucker devotes the first chapter of his “Managing the Non-Profit Organization: Principles and Practices” to mission statements. He began by saying, “The non-profit organization exists to bring about a change in individuals and society. The first thing to talk about is what missions work and what missions don’t work, and how to define the mission. For the ultimate test is not the beauty of the mission statement. The ultimate test is right action.”

Based on these premises, Drucker offered a few mission statements he thought were particularly good. One hospital emergency room had this mission statement: “It’s our mission to give assurance to the afflicted.” Drucker also liked the mission statement of the Girl Scouts of the U.S.A.: “Girl Scouting builds girls of courage, confidence, and character, who make the world a better place.”

He disliked vague mission statements, such as the typical hospital that claims, “Our mission is health care.” Not so, says Drucker: “The hospital does not take care of health; the hospital takes care of illness.” Worse than that, such a mission statement gives us no indication of what we’re supposed to do, what action we are supposed to take. Drucker goes on to say:

“A mission statement has to be operational, otherwise it’s just good intentions. A mission statement has to focus on what the institution really tries to do and then do it so that everybody in the institution can say, This is my contribution to the goal.”

Another typical problem is mission statements that try to say too much. Drucker called these “a kind of hero sandwich of good intentions.” Instead, Drucker said, a mission statement “has to be simple and clear.”

II/ John Carver on mission statements

John Carver, in his book “Boards That Make a Difference,” has a somewhat different take on mission statements than does Drucker, but it’s a difference of emphasis rather than a fundamental difference of opinion. Carver begins by offering a few thoughts on what constitutes a good mission statement for a non-profit organization:

“Mission, defined as the briefest, broadest Ends statement, does not determine everything about an organization’s intended results, but it tells us the range within which all further results will occur. A mission defines the arena and answers these simple questions: ‘What is this organization for? How will the world be different as a result of our being in business?'”

Carver adds that a good mission statement will have six “critical characteristics,” including:

1. “Results terminology…. The change itself is the mission.”
2. “Succinctness…. Ideally, the mission should be stated in a few words, no more than a sentence.”
3. “Authoritative generation,” meaning that the mission statement must require Board of the organization to do more than sit passively by.
4. The mission should take in to account “horizontal integration,” that is, being aware of whether there is anyone else out in the community who is doing the same thing better.
5. “Unless a mission is pervasive, it will lose its compelling power in organizational affairs. It simply cannot be repeated too much (which is another reason for succinctness). The mission should appear on all documents, on the phones, and in the conference rooms.”
6. “Vertical integration: The mission must be the theme and the backbone of the organization…. Every department, every program, every job, and every objective must be tied to the mission.”

III/ My own six criteria for good mission statements

I feel Carver doesn’t understand churches very well, but he has specific criteria for what constitutes good mission statements. Drucker, on the other hand, really does understand churches, but he’s a little vague. So I put the two of them together, filtering everything through my own experience working in and belonging to churches, and came up with this list of criteria for judging whether a church mission statement is good or bad:

1. A church mission statement takes into account the limits of church resources, while also taking into account the needs of church members and friends (and potential new members and friends).
2. The surrounding community must be able to understand a church mission statement — especially potential newcomers, and potential allies in community activities.
3. A church mission statement must result in positive action. It must inform the actions of every aspect of church life, from the Board, to the Sunday school, to the worship service, to potluck dinners, to committee meetings, to pastoral calls, etc.
4. A church mission statement must result in heartfelt commitment from church members and friends (which also means that it cannot violate unspoken or explicit church norms).
5. A church mission statement must be short enough to appear on stationery, on Web sites, in the order of service, on every publication issued by the church. It must also be simple enough to be understood by a twelve year old.
6. A church mission statement must tell why our church is different — we’re not just another social service agency, we’re not the Rotary Club or Masons, and we’re not an evangelical church nor yet are we the Baha’is.

IV/ The exceptions: two good mission statments covenants

At the end of my Web search, I did find two church mission statements that I liked — except that they’re actually covenants, not mission statements. But a good church covenant can take the place of a mission statement; and besides, covenants are more in keeping with our religious tradition. Here are the only two I liked:

(a) North Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Lewis Center, Ohio, states:

We gather together in love and fellowship to worship and foster spiritual growth, to serve humanity, and to understand ourselves and our universe.

I’d go to that church!

(b) And the covenant of the Unitarian Universalist Society of Geneva, Illinois, is a little too long, but very compelling:

Being desirous of promoting practical goodness in the world, and of aiding each other in our moral and religious improvement, we have associated ourselves together — not as agreeing in opinion, not as having attained universal truth in belief or perfection in character, but as seekers after truth and goodness.

Now you tell me — did I miss any succinct, compelling mission statements for Unitarian Universalist congregations — or for other liberal churches, for that matter?