I’d kind of forgotten that there are lots of evening meetings when you’re a minister of a mid-sized church; small churches just don’t have that many meetings. Yesterday, I left home at 9 a.m. and got back at 11 p.m.; today I left home at 9 a.m. and here it is 9 p.m. and I am still at church.
This is one of the unspoken reasons why many ministers don’t want the membership of their small church to increase. They look at the ministers in mid-sized churches, they see that those mid-sized-church ministers typically attend three evening meetings a week, and they don’t like what they see.
This is one of the unspoken reasons why many church members don’t want their church to grow any larger; for there are many church members who prefer an informal organizational style, and don’t want the more formal organization required by a larger church, the type of organization that engenders a formal decision-making process requiring many evening meetings.
On the other hand, there are those of us who actually prefer more formal organizational structures. We also like evening meetings (in moderation: no more than three per week). And we like the increased diversity, the greater financial stability, and the additional programs that come with mid-sized and larger churches.
Both smaller churches and larger churches have their strengths and their weaknesses. It’s not that one is better than the other, they’re just different.
dear one,
I’m not seeing any behavioral response to the stress related illness of last week. Twelve-14 hour days are NOT what the doctor ordered. Ahem.
Stop it.
yours truly.
Out of curiosity, what are the definitions of the various sizes? One of the things UU’s do TERRIBLY is to scale their congregations. I hail from your old stomping grounds in Maine and nobody seems to know how to do it there, even in older larger churches that can physically accommodate more people (and probably did, in their respective denominational heydays).
We cannot look to the minister for everything, which is why we have boards, committees, DRE’s, music directors, etc., etc. And if one looks to larger churches, other roles, such as community and youth ministers come in. Or at least, they would if we took such things seriously.
I suspect that in order to grow a congregation (and I share the opinion held by Peter Morales that this is a critical issue for us), we may have to look to other models in other churches. We’re a 20th century denomination with a 19th century congregational model in the 21st century. And we wonder why we risk sinking into irrelevance???
My advice is to lobby for the 7:00 meetings to take place at 5:30. If people are hungry, the same amount of work will get done in a lot less time.
On the other hand, speaking as an educator who teaches often at that hour: people will be cranky, sleepy, and resistant. Unless…you bring snacks. Which I do.
There are definitely major prices to growth. Three evening meetings is a doable lifestyle. But 11PM? Time for more efficient meetings!
My minister does not start her day at 9 am. So she has plenty of energy for 3 7:30 meetings a week. It makes sense to me. It seems to me that ministers have to maintain appropriate boundaries on their time (with in reason – I know you are always on call) I would love to see what it is like to break 150 some day. It would be exciting to try.
The problem at our church is actually whether meeting should be at 10:30 am or 5:30 pm or 7:00 am or pm. It sometimes becomes a generational fight.
Ms. M @ 1 — short day today! Then two days off in a row!
Jeremiah @ 2 — I used deliberately vague definitions of sizes in this post. But you’re right, it is best to be specific. The best definitions of church size that I know of may be found in various Alban Institute publications (e.g., Size Transitions in Congregation, etc.), and are based on average year-round attendance at all worship services.
Jean @ 4 There were excellent snacks at both evening meetings this week. Baked goods at one, and peach slices at the other. Yum.
Christine @ 5 — I got home at 11 p.m., but I left church at about ten — then a fifteen minute walk to the train station (exercise and decompression time, by the way), a short wait, and a half hour train ride home. The meeting did go late, but we were actually talking about exciting big-vision stuff — the kind of conversation that happens all too rarely — it was not a meeting devoted to trivia and minutiae.
S. @ 7 — This is they key issue, isn’t it? Who has access to the meetings? — evenings are good for people with day jobs, but elders who don’t drive at night won’t go to evening meetings, and people who work second shift can’t go to evening meetings. This, is fact, is an essential question for all organizations run on democratic principles — how do we make access to decision-making bodies as easy as possible?
Dan Check out http://www.whereiwrite.org/
Meet online. It works incredibly well. Synchronous or asynchronous. Either one.
And this is from me, now *teaching* online and once and formerly incredibly resistant to anything not face to face.