No doubt the tragic death of 150 people involving Germanwings Flight 9525 on March 24 is of such extreme seriousness that no trite applications of what happened should be put forth. At the same time, the actions and lessons of such a tragedy make our minds wander and have implications for other areas of life.
Congregations are a high priority area of my life and ministry, and I am always thinking of ways that various events and actions apply to congregations/ This Germanwings tragedy is no exception. It brings to mind other similar tragic events.
The Sept. 11, 2001, death of almost 3,000 people in New York City, rural Pennsylvania and Northern Virginia as airplanes were used as weapons resulted in several actions that were major shifts in the airline travel industry. One was new reinforced doors and locking systems between the cockpit and the passenger compartment of airplanes worldwide. It also initiated a whole new generation of airport security.
Both of these actions were appropriate but were focused on fixing what went wrong in the past. Fortunately the TSA process modulates its regulations continually as it discovers new threats or determines regulations put in place were not necessary or effective.
In immediate response the Germanwings tragedy European airlines — and perhaps others — adopted the two people in the cockpit rule that has been standard in U.S.-based carriers for more than a decade. It is a little late now. They needed that rule much earlier.
Yet, it is folly to believe that correcting yesterday’s security issues will stop tomorrow’s tragedies.
Congregations address yesterday’s mistakes
Frequently congregations address yesterday’s mistakes when a pastor leaves. They change the formal expectations and position description for the next pastor to keep him or her from doing what the last pastor did not do well or even did wrong. Apparently they make the assumption that all pastors have the same life habits and ministry perspectives.
The next pastor must take years to prove he or she is not that pastor — referring to the former pastor. The next pastor, and the next pastor, and the next pastor are going to have their own set of gifts, skills and strengths. They will also have their own set of weaknesses and personality quirks lay leaders would like to correct.
After several pastors and with the corrections that happen once pastors leave, any new pastor has a whole set of management regulations that make it hard to minister with ease. They are paying the debts for the weaknesses and failings of former pastors.
What’s the answer?
First, I seldom see congregations who want to fix what the last pastor was ungifted or unskilled in doing, or just plain did wrong, who also have a clue of where they are headed under God’s leadership. The absence of a captivating vision leads to restlessness in congregations. Therefore, the starting point is to get their vision and spiritual strategic journey figured out. They will want to do this before they call their next pastor or they may have a mismatch from day one.
Second, congregations need to understand their next pastor is a person of worth created in the image of God with his or her own set of gifts, skills and personality preferences. They need to design strategies and policies that will empower the faithful, effective and innovative service of the next pastor as well as the congregation as a whole. Policies should be empowering rather than controlling.
Third, congregations need to prevent policy changes made to fix a short-term problem from becoming a long-term part of the management culture. Almost every time the question is asked, “Does anyone remember why we established this policy?” the policy is no longer needed. All policies should have a sunset law causing them to go out of existence unless renewed every five years.
Fourth, ask innovative future-oriented questions in a proactive way and not a reactive way. Congregations establish a security policy or hire a security guard only after they or a neighboring church have a security problem. Congregations decide to do background checks for all workers with children only after they or a neighboring church have an incident with a child. What if congregations proactively conducted a comprehensive security review every 18 to 36 months and then updated their policies and procedures?
What are some other answers you have in mind? What will work for your congregation to focus more on tomorrow’s challenges than yesterday’s mistakes?