Attendees: Rob, Teri, Scott, Lisa, David, Wes, & Jen
1. Consensus vs. Voting
It was presented that Consensus within the community may have a negative connotation due to the way previous decisions had been handled. (Move to Oak Cliff, affiliation with Cathedral, etc.)
Those who were in attendance were in agreement that voting was the best way to be inclusive of all perspectives. It was also agreed that voting needs to be extended even to those who can not be in attendance on decision making meetings. The vote should consist of 2/3’s in favor towards one direction to proceed forward.
There were several thoughts on who should be eligible to vote. The transition team agreed that in order to vote one has to be committed to the community. We agreed that this was best presented before the vote by asking everyone that does not feel committed to this community to abstain from voting.
2. Membership vs. Commitment
It was expressed by some of the transition team that official church membership is desired in order to have a better structure. There is concern, however, that membership is too far away from how we currently do community and that this may seem like a knee jerk reaction to having no structure in the past.
The structure model of ‘The Onion’ by Shane Claiborne’s group The Simple Way was reviewed along with Non-Profit Organization Structure. (http://thesimpleway.org/micro/theonion.html)
All agreed that we should have a Commitment Ballot that will be a part of Sunday Worship that will have the following:
Commitment to the Community & God
Financial Commitment
Service Commitment
Teri is putting together a base for the “Commitment Ballot” for the team to discuss and work through.
The commitment ballot is to be a part of an email for those who will not be a part of Commitment Sunday.
3. Call to Pastor
The transition team agrees to recommend that Courtney Pinkerton be the Church’s pastor through December, 2009 while we all sort through the identity of the church. It is agreed that we will vote on whether to extend Courtney’s current hours from 20 to 32 hrs per week this coming Sunday 4/5/09. This will cost $242 per week. On 5/10/09, we will vote on whether to keep her on through the end of ‘09.
4. Community Meetings
To be held at 10am Sunday Morning through the month of April with exception to 4/26/09.
5. Budget
We ran out of time before we could have a full discussion of the budget. Wes has been working with $5500 per month in income as a guesstimate. We’ll try again next Monday.
6. Denominational Affiliations
Transition team acknowledges that the issue of denominational affiliation has been a topic of lots of conversation over the past week. We agree and confirm that there are absolutely no plans to change or modify the denominational affiliations of Church in the Cliff, regardless of the denominational affiliation of Courtney Pinkerton.
7. Storage
Stuff being stored at PL’s to be moved on Saturday to Jen’s Garage. Lisa is coordinating time with PL.
8. Transition Calendar
4/5
Broad stroke Vision to be presented by Scott Shirley
Vote on extending Courtney’s current 20hrs to 32hrs to address the immediate need of PL and Neeki being gone.
Q&A with Courtney.
4/12
Easter Weekend
Farewell to Neeki and PL
4/19
“Commitment Sunday”
Courtney will be gone, transition team is in charge of Worship.
4/26
Breathing
5/3
Transition Team to present Vision for going forward.
5/10
Vote on Call to Pastor
Did the finger print thing count as official church membership during the last transition?
ReplyDeleteI am unable to make a commitment to being on the Transition Team at this time, which I regret, as I feel that there is so much work to be done and so few people who are committed to doing it. I commend you and I thank you. I hope that the church as a whole can see the true scope of how much of yourselves you are giving to this community. I have nothing but respect for the team and am so grateful for your commitment to us.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of making a commitment, rather than signing on to a statement crafted from someone else, I would rather write my own. During the commitment service could y'all perhaps offer your suggestions rather than a template for commitment and then give us a chance to write it in our own words and bring it up perhaps to the center table and collectively put them into a bowl? The Baptist in me thinks it is important that yes, we have collective principles, but that we are able to articulate those from our own perspectives. Last Spring the processing team put together a similar suggestion, but it was turned down by the staff in favor of a written statement that no one saw before church that Sunday. Being an emergent congregation (with Baptist roots) I think that it makes sense to avoid prescriptions, but to accept guidance from the transition team and then create our own affirmations ourselves. These statements could be collected (with permission) and distributed to the congregation via blog or website. In that way we would create a kind of mosaic, a creative interactive portrait of how we all feel and want to be part of the community. People could also draw pictures or submit artwork. I would be happy to work with Teri to think through this idea and how it will work in the service, since this is one of my areas of expertise. I am happy to help with worship in any way that will be helpful.
ReplyDeleteTiana,
ReplyDeleteThe finger print thing did not count as official membership. That's essentially what we'll be asking people to do again the week after Easter. It's largely symbolic. We just want people to take a moment and consider whether they are committed to moving forward, helping figure out who we're going to be. It carries no notions of membership or voting rights. It's just a moment to consider where you see yourself in the church.
Stephanie,
ReplyDeleteWe considered something like that last time. Instead, we decided to provide a broad statement that would allow people to read in their own perspective. Maybe we missed the mark.
What you're saying resonates with the conversation the team had last Monday. Shaine Claiborne's onion is an attempt to honor the kinds of commitments different people want to make. Some people want to be in leadership and some want to just hang out. Both are completely valid and necessary. People also need to be able to shift between those roles.
There will be a fill-in-the-blank portion of the commitment. We need some practical information: time, talents and treasure. We need numbers to craft a budget. We need to know where people are willing and able to take on responsibilities of the church because we can't afford enough staff to do all the things that need to be done. But we could also leave some room for people to flesh out their understanding of the commitment.
We'll talk it over some more at the Monday meeting. Good thoughts.
I am very encouraged by this post and those below. I think the commitment to increased transparency shows in these posts. That being said, I have a few "qualms" about what I've read. In no particular order:
ReplyDeleteThe debate of "membership vs committment" is complex one. Part of it is theological (e.g. does God require a declaration of membership to be part of "the club"), part of it is sociological (e.g. does being a member result in a highe rlevel of participation than simply saying "I'm committed) and part of it is practical (e.g. some people have to be "members of good standing in a faith community" to keep endorsements and the like). My understanding of the Transition Team suggests to me that this question is not one they should be answering. it seems instead to be a topic that should be researched and discussed quite a bit, with a decision being made much later.
In that vein, there is also the difference between "we agree" and "we propose." I think some things should be decided by the transition team. Voting on increasing Courtney's salary, for example. It needs to be done and needs to be done soon. If the Transition Team agrees we should vote this Sunday, so be it. But the question of membership vs committment is, of course, something that should only be agreed to by the community at large.
One of the things I did not see in the posts (though I plan to reread them to be sure) was an update on the status of whatever decision-making team will be in place once the Transition Team dissolves. Who will be on it? Will they be nominated? Appointed? Will they make decisions or simply proposals? Will they be more exploratory in capacity (exploring the ins and outs of various decisions and allowed the community to draw conclusions) or "legislative" (drafting prosposals upon which the community votes)?
Finally, a lot has happened in the past year--much of without either a community vote or without in-depth attention paid to the ramification of the change. Should there be a team in place to review the past decisions and allow the community to vote on those where a vote did not take place? (e.g. Should we have severed our relationship with CoH? Should we have dropped the name "CityChurch?" And so on.)
Sorry for the long reply. Hope it made sense. Feel free to ask for clarification if I didn't communicate myself well.
Carl,
ReplyDeleteYour paragraph on membership exactly mirrors the discussion on the team. It's complicated. We probably won't try to resolve it, deferring to a future leadership body.
Most of the conversation was in the context of taking votes on things now. It would all be easier if we had a clear group of eligible voters. For example, someone mentioned a quorum last Sunday. I'm not even sure what that means in our current memberless setup.
But we're just going to do our best for now. We hope that we can create a consensus so that things will pass regardless of how the vote would be counted. That's a big reason why we want try to get information out early so that we can get feedback. For example, I'll be laying out a tentative plan in broad strokes this Sunday. We won't vote on those things for another month.
And, yes, absolutely most decisions need to go back to the community for healthy discussion and a vote. Membership, organizational structure, staffing, budget, etc. We're not making decisions about any of it. Ideally, we would create a consensus, a shared vision, and then put it to an up or down vote. If we can't get consensus around certain things, we have a lot more to consider.
As far as a leadership body, we are going to work on that, but we haven't gotten to it yet. We're trying to square away things like staffing first, things that will keep the trains running.
On past decisions, it's my feeling that the ship has sailed on some of those. A future leadership body could consider some of them, but I would just see that as a part of their regular business. For example, if we want to change the name, we could consider the merits regardless of how we got the name in the first place. We haven't discussed any of this on the transition team and I haven't heard any plans to.
Thanks for the feedback.
Sounds good. I would like to suggest that some "decisions" be labelled as "short term." I think the "membership" question is one example. Perhaps it could be decided "for the next month," allowing a more in-depth discussion to take place once we get through the transition, but not crippling us at such an important juncture. I think many people (myself included) will close their yappers on some of the larger topics and focus on the immediate details if they know the "identity questions" will be revisited in a month or two.
ReplyDeleteWow. I use "quotations" a lot... :P
ReplyDeletehi all
ReplyDeleteyes, thank you everyone on the "t-squared" for your involvement, thought and leadership. great ideas and discussion from the meetings.
since my participation is limited right now here are a few thoughts:
1.re: going forward - short-term/long-term
after yesterday's conversation and buddha book ACTION section, it seems action is the way forward for CITC. since my involvment in CC/CITC in 2006, there has been much conversation, and, quite frankly, the many actions from those conversations have been taken by the same few people over and over. At this point CITC may need much action like our dart stations of the cross (great ide.
why? CITC need new blood and keep the "old" (literally and figuratively) blood coming - for community, resources (time, money or both), spiritual growth and creativity.
why consider this? a. several of the "long-time" members will be leaving after Easter Sunday, and b. we have "lost" many of our CC members in the move to OC. Thus to come anywhere close to a $5500 budget will be a stretch at best given the last actual weekly contribution #'s i heard.
2. re: budget
after avoiding money/budgets for the past couple of years myself, budget topic could be at the top of the agenda (or close to it)since it is one of our biggest challeges (if not the reason we have the "t-squared" in the first place). running out of time for the budget discussion ....???
re: membership or commitment
maybe i am old school, but why are people reluctant to be "members"? we are using a blogsite and facebook that calls us members!
consternation over membership or commitment is swell so how about calling it a "membership commitment" and have it free form? who will remember a year from now what we call it?
3. re: intellectual property of CC/CITC
you all probably have addressed this: since all emails, electronic files, etc. are the property of CC/CITC,you probably want to retrieve any/all emails, e-files, etc. from pl and neeki if on non-church computers. just a suggestion.
thank you, gracias, merci beaucoup, bless you all for taking on this time-consuming, sometimes/many times thankless role. will try to join you thursday am.
hugs and blessings,
rebel
When I read about CitC and its emergent ideas I was immediatly excited about my find. Yes I had to look up what an emerging church was, but to say the least I was there the following Sunday.
ReplyDeleteA little bit about myself, I never went to an organized spiritual gathering beyond one time at anypoint in my life. As a little child I was very sensitive to alot of the fear, pressure, and judgement that came along with organized religion, to point that my parents gave up on making me go.
This is probably part of the reason why I havent followed my normal practice of jumping into something with two feet. I have kept a sort of distant hot/cold approach in feeling my way into CitC, but I did come back so I know there is value and excitement there.
I have no background in how a church operates, or the different beliefs and thots in christianity, nor is it really important to me. I dont think that is what it is really about.
For me CitC is about MY relationship, journey, and experience down MY spiritual path and connection to myself. It is about community, converstion, reflection of oneself, learning from others experiences, and holding a space for ones evolvement into becoming ONE.
One of the things I see as an outsider with very little bias or past experience in church is trying to merge this wonderful emergant philiosophy and ideas, with all of these traditional ideas and theories of membership, committment, raising money, marketing, small groups, etc. I am not saying it will or will not work, I dont think I have enough experience to say so. But I must say my experience is congruiency is a really big key to success in anything.
A lack of structure opens the window fully open to all the beauty and abundance that is in this universe, but at the same time creates a lot of unknown, obsticles, and lack of predictability. This balance is also a wavering titter todder in my life and business as well. A think at some point you have to define your core values and then trust the universe and the community.
An example is I am new and while I am following what is going on. I think I am too new to the community to have a say in the voting of the changes. But I dont need to be told that through a membership ritual, I naturally know that and my gut says it is not right for me to do that YET. So I guess what I am saying is you have to trust people, trust life, and just like nature give it what it needs on a fundamental level and get out of the way.
I dont know if this rambling really has a lot of value, but I thought be a newbie my insight could be helpful. It great to see that people are really passionate and dedicated to CitC. Based on all the LOVE I have no doubt it will all come together perfectly,
loveLIGHTLaugther
Brandon