COOPERATIVE MINISTRY PART 2

Alas the Rangers lost , but that gives me the freedom to root now for the Penguins without any misgivings.

I said I would say more about Cooperative Ministry as it is experienced in the Pittsburgh Lutheran United Ministries (aka PLUM).

PLUM was started several years ago as a result of a discussion between some pastors who were looking for alternatives to the "Lone Ranger model of ministry" for their small and declining congregations.

The typical institutional response to the problem of churches that have people but are not capable of supporting their own individual "full time pastor" is to look for a couple of congregations that are near each other and  convince the leadership that they would be able to survive if they made the decision to call one pastor who would serve both congregations. In some cases, if the pastor were a member of the "Superpastor Club," they might even convince three or more churches to join together in a "yoked" ministry (as well as the potential Superpastor, of course.)

On the surface this might seem logical to people who are used to relying upon their pastor to do everything for them. The only tough part for the congregations is figuring out how to equitably divide the cost of having a pastor between the "partners in ministry."

Conflicts may rise up when they are forced to set up a Sunday worship schedule. Who gets to have the pastor for the early service and who gets the pastor for the later one? Do we have to change our regular worship service time?

Other issues might arise when the pastor has to schedule specific meetings to attend-- Council meetings, committee meetings, etc.  but those can usually be worked out if there aren't too many churches sharing the one pastor.

In any event, the only real advantage such an arrangement has is that it provides worship leadership  at a lower cost to the congregation. The pastor pays a price for the "privilege" of being able to do twice as much as other pastors our required to do, but isn't that what Jesus was talking about when he said that anyone who wants to be his disciple must be willing to take up his cross?

In a "cooperative ministry" relationship there are at least two "pastors" for two churches from the beginning.  In time there will be other congregations involved in the shared ministry, and there may be some cost savings, but the cost of ministry will be shared by everyone and, more importantly, the work of ministry will be shared as well as people begin to discover their spiritual gifts and use them in the service of the gospel.

One of the less visible but very important features of bringing churches together for cooperative ministry is that the new "body" discovers it has resources that it didn't have before. Instead of having two congregations operate in isolation from one another, they now begin to think about ways they can offer one another resources that would benefit each other.

Another equally important feature of this relationship is that it gives the pastors an opportunity to share in pastoral ministry with one another. Rather than having to do everything alone, they benefit from the interaction that takes place as they think together about the ministries of the congregations they are serving. Sermon preparation, educational programs, pastoral care of members, conflict mediation, and just regular prayer and reflection is richer when there are two minds rather than one moving in the same direction.

Sadly, we have designed the pattern of pastoral ministry of the church in such a way that failure is much more likely than success in most cases. We continue to foster unrealistic expectations of those we call to serve us and we deprive them of the possibility of having a collegial, interactive, supportive relationship that will bear fruit for the entire community of believers. More to come . . .