Ian Evison

THE HELP JUDICATORIES NEED

Judicatory Leaders: Assistance from Beyond the Denominational Gates,
Trends and Directions in Alban Institute Work

by Ian Evison, Director of Research at The Alban Institute

One of the more important but least discussed observations that Loren Mead made in The Once and Future Church was that middle judicatories were rising in potential importance to local congregations. Not only do I believe this to be true but I suspect that this trend has accelerated through the 1990’s as many national denominational headquarters have reshuffled in a variety of ways, cutting back on many areas like publishing, curriculum development, research, and direct service to congregations.

The Help Judicatories Need:

Given these challenges and this understanding of the basic trends giving rise to these challenges, how do we understand what help judicatories most need? We do not presume to offer one set of answers to this question. Alban itself approaches this work from a variety of perspectives. Our is constantly evolving and is shaped by the individual people who work in this area the most-Gil Rendle, Roy Oswald, Speed Leas, and Alban’s current and former presidents (Jim Wind and Loren Mead). Yet, some generalizations are possible concerning what we think congregations need. Perhaps presenting these things that we see will help spur a discussion among the various groups working to make middle judicatories more effective, including the middle judicatories themselves.

• Create homemade solutions. Middle judicatories need to create their own solutions. Although we have lots of ideas about trends, and lots of opinions about what works, we believe that middle judicatories need help and support to find their own solutions. What works in individual situations is highly variable. It depends on differences between religious traditions, localities, and personalities. If a solution works in fifty places, it will only work in the fifty-first if it fits and if the people involved believe it fits. I am encouraged by those who describe replicable models for judicatory revitalization. Yet local solutions need to be locally built-or, at least, locally adapted.
  
  
• See the big picture. Middle judicatory leaders don’t get enough opportunity to see the big picture. Providing that opportunity is one of the most important things we do and one of the most important things anyone working with middle judicatories can do. We allow them to look over the fence and see their issues as part of a larger picture. The broadly interdenominational nature of our work allows us to do this well. Alban’s Gil Rendle recalled a time when two judicatory leaders seated next to each other-one Jewish, one Southern Baptist-were astonished to discover that they were facing very similar challenges. The point here is not to create ecumenical or interfaith understanding. Amid the fog of details surrounding their individual work, judicatory leaders find it very difficult to see the larger patterns in their work. When we can help them see similarity, especially similarity across a large gap of differences, they are enabled to begin to grasp their problems on a systemic level rather than on the level of the blur of phone messages or emails to be answered.
  
  
• See their situation as normal. Seeing the big picture gives the participants insight and it also normalizes their situations, taking the blame and guilt out of them. It is natural for frustrations to become personalized and for the personalization to turn to judgment. Seeing the big picture can assist those who are ready to move forward by enabling them to look beyond personalities.
  
  
• Create safe space. Creating a safe space outside denominational structures is important. Alban is in an especially good position to see this because we often do similar training in denominational groups and in interdenominational groups. Alban trains groups of judicatory leaders from individual denominations and there is often a strong argument for this. A denomination often wants us to come, for example, to do one day of a three-day training in which new judicatory leaders learn about denominationally specific matters on the other two days. This can be valuable but it can rob the training of the key element of being a safe space outside their structure. I don’t think that what operates here is so much the confidentiality of the setting as the fact that the different setting and different personalities allow people a little extra space to test different ways of thinking and to say things which they find themselves surprised to hear themselves say.
  
  
• Give a systems perspective. A systems perspective gives participants a way of seeing that transcends their political lives and gives them an understanding of resistance to change and strategies for influencing systems. The specific content of the systems theory which we present changes from year to year and from leader to leader, but a key element that judicatory leaders find very helpful is the systems perspective.
  
  
• Teach process skills. Along with a systems perspective for understanding, we also each process skills for intervening. Middle judicatory executives don’t just need clear goals. They need tools for accomplishing them with their teams. Middle judicatory executives need also to learn how to strategize with their systems to make things different. And yet, middle judicatory executives must learn to be change agents without attempting to be consultants to systems of which they are a part.
  
  
• Create a holding environment. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we find that middle judicatories need what Ronald Heifetz calls a “natural holding environment.” What Alban and other effective programs provide more than a safe environment, some perspective and some tools. Effective event also must be structured as containers in which processes of thinking, learning, and experimenting are accelerated. This container begins to be created by expectations. Middle judicatory executives come to our events to be oriented to a new job and to practice how to do things differently. At the events we give content and structure, but we also give space to allow participants to choose to do things differently. Allowing this space can produce anxiety for event participants and leaders alike. But it is also, we believe, a thing-maybe the thing-that middle judicatory leaders most need.

To join the threaded discussion on The Help Judicatories Need, click here: www.alban.org/talk

To email this article to a colleague, click here: Share This Idea!

To read the entire article, Judicatory Leaders: Assistance from Beyond the Denominational Gates, Trends and Directions in Alban Institute Work, click here: full text.

To learn more about author, Ian Evison and The Alban Institute, click here: www.alban.org.