March 3, 2011
To the Family of God at First Church:
Last Sunday, February 27, 2011, Kevin Emmert, chairman of our Staff Parish Relations Committee, announced to the congregation during worship that as July 1, 2011, both Pastor In Suk Pebbles and Pastor Dave Scifres would be appointed to other churches. The announcement brought an audible gasp of surprise from the congregation. It will be difficult for First Church to bid farewell to both of these beloved pastors. They have served this church with love, humor, wisdom and grace.
Both In Suk and Dave are in conversation with our District Superintendent about their new appointments. At the appropriate time, we will be able to celebrate with them their new opportunities in ministry. It would helpful for you to know that our United Methodist structure will not allow them to discuss which church they may next serve until a formal announcement can be made by each congregation involved.
Later this spring, the congregation will be given opportunity to celebrate their labors among us and to express to each of them our appreciation. As the time of change nears, we will make sure everyone is given opportunity to say, “Thank you”.
Being the quality of pastor and individual both In Suk and Dave are, they both intend to faithful serve this congregation until the day they begin their new parishes. Feel free to continue to call upon them as they can be helpful to you.
The Staff-Parish Committee has already met with the District Superintendent, Dr. Frank Beard, about who will be coming to be our next associate pastor. We have shared with him a detailed profile about our church and about the skills and gifts we believe we need in such an individual. This new pastor will have the qualifications and experience to help us to minister in our parish setting. I expect that this process will move very quickly and an announcement will occur shortly. (In order to understand more about the United Methodist appointment process you might read Bishop Coyner’s explanation at http://www.inumc.org/pages/detail/62 .)
As we move toward the future, we will have only one full-time ordained associate pastor instead of the two associate pastors whose positions are being opened. This decision to move to a pastoral staff of a senior pastor and one associate pastor has been well considered and discussed by the Staff-Parish Relations Committee. It is not a decision which has been driven ultimately by finances, but rather is motivated by the ministry needs of this church.
The decision to have two associate pastors was a decision we grew into rather than one which we ever specifically made. A bit of history will help explain. When Jim Moon began his ministry among us, he came as a youth pastor, planning on entering ministry in another denomination. During Jim’s tenure here, he made the decision to enter ministry in the United Methodist Church. As he transitioned into the United Methodist system, he was appointed here as a student pastor while in seminary, then upon graduation from seminary, he was appointed to First Church as a full-time pastor. He only served this congregation a few weeks after his ordination before moving to his current church in Jeffersonville. The position of the second associate simply grew as Jim advanced through the stages of the United Methodist ordination process. When Jim moved to his own parish four years ago, we simply followed the status quo, continued with two associate pastors, and the Bishop appointed Pastor Dave to fill Jim’s vacated position.
As the economy slowed and other transitions occurred in the life of the church, we have decreased the number of part-time staff. Positions held by such persons as Rev. Warren Otter, Callie Smith, Phyllis Hunter and Rebecca Koppin were not filled as they became vacant. In a process that began in 2009 with the Staff-Parish Committee meeting with a consultant, the Staff-Parish Committee has been reconsidering that gradual and unplanned change in staff philosophy and structure.
We pastors are trained as general practitioners of ministry. Each pastor has essentially the same type of calling and educational background. Our current arrangement of three ordained clergy offers significant depth in persons with essentially the same skill set. We settled into an arrangement, where like many larger United Methodist churches, the second associate position became essentially a residency program where a recent seminary graduate accumulates practical experience. As the Staff-Parish Committee examined our church’s needs, the investment in three staff positions nearly identical in ministry capabilities, with one as a “training” position, did not seem to be as cost-effective as our past system of employing lay staff with specific areas of focus.
In place of the second associate pastor, our current plan is to add three to five part-time staff positions each with having a narrow focus in a needed area of ministry. Among the positions under consideration would be either a retired pastor or part-time local pastor (a pastor who while not ordained has sacramental privileges) who would assist with hospital visitation, pastoral care and perhaps ministry to older adults. Additionally, we would expand the parish visitor position, from which Dawn Scifres recently resigned, and thus continue to insure that our shut-ins and nursing home folk receive the nurture and care we want them to have. We will add a mission’s specialist who will coordinate our outreach to the community and organize adult and youth work teams to areas of need locally, nationally and even internationally. Another position would focus on ministry to families and marriages. One other position has yet to be defined. We think we can fill these multiple staff positions for approximately the same cost as one full-time ordained clergy under appointment.
One major change associated with this revision of staffing is that our Sunday morning worship schedule would shift to having only one pastor preach at all our Sunday morning English language services. This shift to having one preaching pastor each week will likely result in a change in worship times and perhaps in a change in which room a particular service will meet. Over the next couple of months we will invest considerable energy to discerning which schedule makes the best sense.
As senior pastor, I am fully committed to our church continuing to offer both traditional and contemporary styled worship opportunities. The membership of the congregation will be very involved in these decisions. However, I know that everyone is open to change in worship time and style as long as the service they attend does not change. It will impossible to meet every individual personal preference. I trust that we each will seek to have our church offer worship opportunities that meet not only our own preferences but most effectively appeal to others seeking a new church home.
Please feel free to contact me as I can answer questions about the appointment process, the new staffing philosophy and the plans for future worship opportunities.
With faith, trust, discernment and the guidance of the Holy Spirit may we move boldly toward the future of Noblesville First United Methodist Church.
Yours in the service of Christ,
N. Jack Wolfe
Senior Pastor
RESPONSE RECEIVED AS AN E-MAIL
ReplyDeleteMy vote: I like your first suggested venue: 8:00 Sanctuary; 9:30 Celebration Hall and 11:00 Celebration Hall, Contemporary. 100% video high tech needs to be installed in the Sanctuary just as you describe.
I am not saying this is a perferred option, just mentioning it should you feel it makes sense. Another option, should you feel the rush would not bother you, is to have the services on the hour like you did on Faith Promise Sunday: 8:00 am 9:00am 10:00am. We would loose some of the fellowship between services, but your day would end sooner. Not sure if you are aware but a study was done that suggested the most popular time for new-comers to visit and try out a church was 9:30am. This would be splitting that drawing power time between those services.
I loved this paragraph:
I am also aware that church people tend to have no objection to making changes in worship schedule, AS LONG AS the service they attend remains unchanged. However, something will need to change. We need to think beyond our own preferences and seek a worship plan which will be most attractive to those we wish to reach with the gospel.
I, 100%, do not like the idea of playing a videotape of an earlier service for the 11:00 worship; it would be too impersonal. They deserve and need a pastor because this may be the worship plan which will be the most attractive to those we wish to reach with the gospel.
E-mail Response
ReplyDeleteIf your wanting input, here are my thoughts
I have thought for along time that a lot of effort is put out for the 10:45 service for what appears to be dwindling attendance. Many in the choir would probably be happy not to sing two services.
The video tape at 11 in my opinion would kill the service. I think this service has the potential of major growth over time. I feel like the service should stay in celebration hall due to the fact that it would be hard to maintain the casual atmosphere in the sanctuary.
Another question received via E-mail
ReplyDeleteOne immediate question I have is when Sunday School would meet, because some members will want a traditional choir service. Right now, no one in choir could ever be in Sunday school. That doesn't seem right, as study is part of the "method" of Methodism.
RESPONSE:
Good question. At this present time, Sunday School for children would remain primarily at the 9:30 service. There is already a 8:15 adult class that several choir members attend.
I know those who want traditional worship in the sanctuary have fewer options. I do want to use the sanctuary. However, what we have been doing has been on a major decline and one of the places we have had the most significant decrease in attendance.
Comment and question received from E-mail
ReplyDeleteIf the 8:00 service is in the sanctuary, it might be possible to have the choir join that service occasionally, leaving before the sermon as we used to do on Easter Sunday. And/or it might be possible, even with a more contemporary worship style, for the choir to sing all or part of the time at the late service just as we do now. I don’t know whether the contemporary style of that service would work with the addition of a traditional choral anthem or not.
My gut reaction is against having the contemporary worship service in the sanctuary. I think part of the atmosphere of such a service as enhanced by having tables, and I think that families with children who are busy drinking juice and eating donuts have an easier time when there are tables.
Among the options, I like 8:00 sanctuary, 9:30 Celebration Hall, 11:00 Celebration Hall the best. The sanctuary can be made to have more intimate feel by using only the left side, or blocking off the back half with rope. We have an opportunity to do that, because no one will have staked out their personal places in the sanctuary for that service, as they have with 10:45. I also think that because the chapel is often full, we may be missing out on adding attendance to that service which we might gain by moving it into the sanctuary.
RESPONSE
Thanks for your comments.
I think the book is open as to exact styles of the worship. I am trying to conceive of planning a schedule from a blank slate, seeking a fresh start.
As to the tables in the Gathering, I think there is a some awareness that they may not be that effective. More and more of those attending are simply sitting in the chair sections. The tables have tended to become almost reserved seating used by the same faithful folk each week. Some have said they feel like you almost need an a written invitation to enter into that space (it is not always welcoming to new people who are not sure where to sit in the first place). As to the juice and toasted assortment at the 11:00 service, we need to think that through. If we need it at one service, do we not need it at all the services?
Comment from church member in their early 30's
ReplyDeleteI agree with going to 3 services. I do not like the idea of having the 4 and the last being a video. I feel that people need that personal touch otherwise they could just stay home and watch one the guys on TV. I also agree that all places of worship should have the same capabilities and would agree to the need to update the Sanctuary
Received E-mail comment from 11:00 service regular
ReplyDeleteThank you for asking for the congregation’s input on the changes needed for the services at NFUMC. My husband and I very much appreciate the opportunity to share our feelings with you. It seems to me that just listing our thoughts might be the best way –
1. We think that going to 3 services at 8:00, 9:30, and 11:00 will be a good change and should still accommodate the current attendance.
2. We are VERY pleased that you plan to continue offering a contemporary service.
3. The location of the 8:00 service would be fine in either the chapel or sanctuary – we don’t know what the usual attendance is, but maybe moving to the sanctuary would allow some of those who prefer the 10:45 service to feel at home in the 8:00.
4. Due to the nature of the contemporary service, the sanctuary is not a good match – we feel that service should stay in Celebration hall, and should stay at the 11:00 time. The folks who attend that service are generally not “early morning” people. Also, the table seating and flexibility to have a donut and morning coffee during the service is very appealing to the contemporary service attendants and we don’t think that would work as well in the sanctuary. Though the sanctuary is a beautiful place to worship, we believe it is too formal for the contemporary service.
5. Personally, we are not at all interested in watching a recorded sermon during our church service. At that point, we may as well stay home and watch it online. We would miss the personal connection with our pastor that comes from participating in the service and sermon. As you know, sermons seem to adjust themselves to the audience, to speak in a meaningful way to the group that is gathered at that moment. It would be a shame to lose that opportunity for God to speak directly to us through the pastor’s live sermon.
6. Keep the live band in the contemporary service. We realize that there have been some growing pains associated with Matt’s departure, but the band seems to have settled in and adds a valuable vitality to the service.
Thank you very much to the opportunity to express our opinions. We will miss Pastors Dave and InSuk and wish them the best on their new congregations. We are happy to still have them with us for a few more months.
Another comment from E-mail
ReplyDeleteOne thing I would like to discuss is the use of Celebration Hall for the Children’s Christmas Program….it was so hard getting children to come to Sat. afternoon rehearsals instead of Sunday mornings like in the past.
E-mail comment
ReplyDeleteFirst, I think you are a brave person to invite comments from upwards of 250 different people via email!
My husband and I regularly attend essentially 3 of the services - 9:30, 10:45 (the choir portion), then we head to the 11:00 service once the choir is dismissed. We have anticipated the changes that are coming, and have talked about this quite a bit ourselves.
It seems most practical to go with option #1 - 8:00 (sanctuary), 9:30 (CH), 11:00 (CH - contemporary).
I would encourage you NOT to use the videotaped sermon idea. I would think that the quickest way to kill a worship service would be to lose the personal touch that the pastor's message brings to the service.
The 11:00 contemporary service does not seem to fit in the sanctuary worship area. The informal nature of the service (round tables, food and coffee) is made for a convertible space such as Celebration Hall. That would be lost in the confines of the sanctuary setting.
I do not envy you the task at hand! Please know that we would be happy to assist in any way needed, including upholding you in our prayers.
My response
Thanks for the comments. The only way to address such major issues is to generate conversation and seek the wisdom of as many people as possible. It will be quite a ride to sort this out. We have been undergoing a gradual decrease in total worship. Probably whatever we do will make that worse for a while. We have some people who are being counted twice (coming to multiple services) that might come to only one service.
Thanks for your support as we work together to advance the Kingdom of God.