Why fear change? Change is good, right? Congregations know they need change. Pastors often demand that congregations be willing to change. Everybody wants change . . . but everybody is a bit timid.

Pastors can experience the same fears. Undefined change might threaten their role as leader as they see it.

Change means facing the possibility that we won’t fit in any more. Good leaders motivate and move people toward change by addressing this fear early and making sure that all are part of the change process.

Change is a word used as currency. Politicians throw it around freely. Vote for change! This has become true in the church as well. The problem is that change, both in the political sphere and in the church, is often mandated with no definition, masking other motives.

Most churches advertise that all are welcome. But are they really?

In the church, a trendy synonym for change is “transform.” Bishop Claire Burkat of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the ELCA co-authored a book on the subject. Then she put her ideas to work in East Falls. She identified Redeemer as a church that needed transforming. But she left the people of the congregation out of the process. While she was reporting to the rest of Synod that she was working with this congregation, she in fact had very little to do with the people of the East Falls. She announced the church was closed without discussion. She had already offered the congregation’s property for sale! By the time the resulting conflict reached the courts, she had changed her tune. There, she explained her intent to close our church and reopen it with a new name and a new pastor who would form a new governing council. We have it in writing that the Burkat Plan for Redeemer would not allow the current members any leadership role in their own transformation. The members and all the people of East Falls were locked out. SEPA knows best!

Church transformation where the people are expendable, is not a biblical concept.
Change in this case is not being fostered but imposed. Lutheran bishops or pastors do not have the right to hand pick or approve congregation councils.

If change is so good, so desirable, why has Synod’s plan for changing Redeemer been so hateful and ugly?

The fact is this congregation had experienced plenty of change already which went unrecognized. The average age of church members had dropped dramatically in the last decade. Membership had grown five-fold. The ethnic makeup of the congregation had changed to become a lively multicultural mix reflecting the changing neighborhood. Style of worship had broadened well beyond the standard hymnals. The organ was supplemented with piano, guitar and drums. Languages other than English were heard in worship. But this was not the change the synod had in mind.

The people who are to live with the consequences of change must have key participation. Shoving them aside to the point of locking them out of the church is not about ministry and mission. It is about control, power and greed.  It shouldn’t be like this. Change is something that needs nurturing . . . water daily!

The Redeemer situation exemplifies why congregations can wisely fear imposed change. We hope that it can be a primer for how not to “transform” ministries.