Laura Everett

Laura Everett, Associate Director

MCC Annual Meeting Report - Saturday January 24, 2009

Mr. President, my ‘Bishop’ Rev. Thomas, esteemed Church Leaders, Members of the Board of Directors, Reverend Clergy, fellow staff of the MCC, dear friends:

Blessings and greetings in the name of the One is not done with us yet! I have been asked to speak briefly about what the Massachusetts Council of Churches is uniquely capable of doing. This is less a report than a perspective on why a council of churches is distinctive in our mission together and what we might poised to do through a council of churches.

Now the dirty family secret might be that it’s tempting for churches to go at it alone. And we often do. We celebrate the Lund principle from 1952: churches should act together in all matters except those in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately. This is hard to practice. Ever time a local congregation insists on creating their own new curriculum rather than looking at the denominational resources, ever time a judicatory holds an event of common interest just for their own team (and I’m purposely not looking at anyone right now)- we break this principle.

The strategic planning report of the NCCC puts it this way:

“Ambassadors of reconciliation should be reconciled. But the way we actually live as churches – with relationships of cordial neglect, still divided by the very things we are called to expose – drastically undercuts the power of our proclamation. When we look around us we see, yet again, that the world is too strong for a divided church.” “Relationships of cordial neglect.”

The norm was intended to be unity, with separation as the exception. Instead, our separation has become the norm, and unified work seems like a blessed surprise. At their best, councils of churches give us a mechanism for living out the Lund principle- the mechanism for our acting together in all matters, except those in which deep differences of conviction compel us to act separately. How do we get to a place where unity of mission and witness is the norm, and separation requires explanation?

Councils of churches are not the only way to heal the ruptures of Christ’s still-divided Church, but they are a unique tool in institutionally embodying the work. And councils of churches, as privileged instruments of the work of reconciliation among the churches, bring some distinctive institutional resources to our common mission.

I take my cues on how I think about councils of churches from Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, current General Secretary of the National Council of Churches in Christ, USA. Dr. Kinnamon has said that the essential principle of conciliar life is this: that through a council of churches, the churches are accountable to one another. A council of churches is not a super-agency that provides services on behalf of the members. “There is no “Council and the churches;” but the council is you in relation to one another.” A council of churches is an instrument of accountability. And so we measure- how accountable are the churches to one another? How accountable are the various parts of the ecumenical movement to one another? How accountable is the MCC staff to the churches? How accountable are the churches to God for our common witness in the world?

How well are we living up to this accountability? Are we more accountable to one another than we were 107 years ago? 50 years ago? 5 years ago?

What are the unique capacities of a council of churches that help us be accountable to one another? This is certainly not exhaustive, but I’ll name 9.

1. Convening Because there is the Massachusetts Council of Churches, the churches gather around a common table- a board table until the day when we can gather around Christ’s table- but a common table nonetheless. By consistently bringing together representatives of the churches, the MCC offers a neutral space that simultaneously is owned by no one church and shared by all. The convening roll of the MCC is critical to staying accountable to one another. If we don’t gather, we cannot maintain our covenantal relationship with one another. This happens with the Church Leader’s Covenant group. This happens at the annual meeting. This happens every time the Board meets to tell one another the joys and concerns of their common life. In practical terms, the MCC can convene the churches together when no one church could. In the same way, and further off-record, the council of churches was able to convene the MCC Board members and church leaders to hear what each different denomination thought about the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts and to explain what their theological rationales were for the positions they took. Needless to say, the churches were not of one mind. But because we were able to stay in relationship to one another and hold one another accountable to those conversations, the churches could not caricature each other’s positions.

2. Compiling The MCC has a compiling function. The visual image might be a funnel. Information about the good works of the member churches come in from wide and broad ranging points, and is collected in one place. The MCC’s office is a central location for compiling information about the churches and hopefully getting that information back out. And because of this compiling function, we can sometimes spot trends- be they positive, like the increased number of congregations undertaking solid outreach strategies or negative- in the increasing closings and laying off of staff. This compiling function allows MCC staff to share information back out to the churches- not just about your denomination, but about what all of you sister churches are up to as well. Thus, when MCC staff saw that the American Baptists were undertaking an email update about the good outreach strategies of individual congregations, we were able to link the Baptists to the UCC folks who had already been undertaking this communications strategy. We were able to link a local church rebuilding with Mass. Interfaith Power and Light. We were able to link up City Mission Society and the peacemaking film they created, with the World Council of Churches Decade to Overcome Violence. The common calendar in your meeting packets is another example of the compiling role of the council.

3. Leading - There’s a dynamic relationship between the facilitating and leading functions of the MCC. The MCC has a ‘leadership’ function only in so far as it derives this function from the churches themselves. Because the MCC has a compiling role- three years ago, we could see that UCC and the Greek Orthodox across the state were undertaking environmental actions, the UMC and the Presbyterians deeply engaged in the health care debate, and the ELCA and the Episcopalians had undertaken very intentional anti-racism initiatives. The MCC took the lead in creating the theological and policy statement (with representatives from all of these churches working on the statement) and Adult Christian Education Curriculum on environmental health and racism in Massachusetts- but could only take this step on behalf of the churches, and with the consent of the churches. The trick is to balance our compiling function, with the leading one.

4. Representing: Because there is the Massachusetts Council of Churches, our interfaith partners and our elected leaders know where to come when they want to interact with the broad Christian community in this state. If the MCC didn’t exist, the Jewish Community Relations Council, and the Islamic Council of NE might have to invent us. With this ‘representing’ role, the MCC helps the churches voice their perspectives together, to show the wide range of Christian traditions. We could have Christian/Jewish Dialogue where the Baptists talked with the Reformed Jews, the Methodists with the Conservatives, the Orthodox with the Orthdox, the Episcopalians with the Reconstructionists- but instead, the MCC facilitates representing a common Christian witness to our interfaith colleagues. And that witness hopefully shows all of the different facets and traditions of our common life. We have done this together with the Sept 11, 2006- Release of the letter “People of Faith Share these values” and the recent statement on Israel and Palestine. This happens with the Annual Interreligious leaders gathering to take the temperature of the religious climate in the Commonwealth. The 2006 conference on Interreligious relations in a divided world- commemorating the 40^th anniversary of Nostra Aetate. 2004 conference on Christian Perspectives on Interreligious relations.

5. Interpreting: Because of the convening and compiling roles of the council of churches, the MCC is uniquely capable of interpreting the incoming information about the common life of the churches in this place. I think, though that in the staffing structure we’ve currently got, we’re less equipped to fulfill this role. When we’ve done it together, we can do it well and with professional excellence. We saw that there was a need among the churches for renewal of spiritual disciplines at the same time that the broader culture was overwhelming families with programs and time. The years of the Take Back Your Time campaign created ecumenical resources for churches across the state to use in helping their members find holy and healthy balance between work and rest. The Lenten devotional invited people to pray ancient prayers from the Armenian Church, litanies from the Book of Common worship and read John Calvin’s thoughts on the holiness of work. Or in a different direction, together the churches were able to interpret their concerns about religion coverage for the Boston Globe editorial staff. In 2006, I spent time each day for three months carefully monitored religion coverage in the Boston Globe’s Boston Metro edition. MCC Church leaders meet with senior Globe editorial staff. Editor Martin Baron received the report and recommendations from the churches and together, we were able to hear what they need from us. I’m not sure any church on its own has the capacity to do that level of research or call for that kind of meeting. In a leaner staffing model, we’ve got less capacity to take on these kinds of projects that would pull senior staff off of some of the ongoing work. But there is great potential here, and, when the interpreting roll is pointed in a good direction, these kinds of projects can be a great asset to the member denominations.

6. Strategizing Because the council of churches can convene and help lead, there is a role for the MCC in developing strategies for the churches to work together. This is an extension of the interpreting role. As we get in the information from the churches, the council is uniquely positioned to see where we might go together and how we might have the most powerful collective effect. We’ve done that as we’ve strategize on gambling opposition- where it made sense to do workshops on advocacy in the Baptists and United Methodist congregations and encourage the UCC and Episcopal parishes doing blessing of the animals services to highlight the Greyhound Protection Act. Because we’re good at it, and we’re perceived as a sort of neutral third-party, the MCC has had a convening role among advocacy coalitions- in our work with Casino Free Mass, we’ve given a lot of staff hours and with the Church Financial Scrutiny Act in 2006- we were the major convening and strategizing force. The MCC was the strategic hub behind the defeat of this bill- not because the council did anything heroic on its own, but in its strategic role in recommending, designing and holding the churches accountable to the strategic plan to defeat the bill. With a presence at the statehouse and an in-depth knowledge of how various denominations require financial transparency between congregations and their parishioners, we were able to speak with authority to the legislators. We organized both the communications strategy to explain to the press why this was overreaching and a first amendment issue. We designed the ground game to turn out treasurers, finance committee member and pastors to contact their legislators. We held ecumenical and interfaith district meetings, and coordinated state-house visits. The council can play this strategic role in designing and coordinating our common Christian witness.

7. Sustaining The longevity and the prospective future existence of the Massachusetts Council of Churches is part of what keeps us accountable to one another. The council of churches has been here for 107 years. It was here before this formation of the staff was here, and God willing, it will be here after we are gone. But the consistent presence of the council gives the churches something to depend on- that this tool for reconciliation is a given- not something to be voted on, not something new. And God willing, our continued vitality and high level of engagement from the churches will sustain our ecumenical work into the future. The long relationships of churches one to another means that hard truths can be spoken with the confidence that there is history behind and before to sustain the relationship during the desert years. Our sustained presence matters- both in terms of building relationships among the churches and in our common Christian witness. We’ve had a sustained presence at the statehouse for decades- we’ve been high profile on some key issues that have raised our visibility. We’ve established the MCC as an even-handed, non-partisan, well-researched and well-respected organization. Each denomination can’t have an advocate at the statehouse, but this helps. Regardless of the wisdom of this for governing, the combination of the Legislature’s low turnover rate and long tenures of MCC staff help establish a sustained presence for the MCC in the public debates over our common life as a commonwealth.

8. Connecting As an institutional embodiment of the one ecumenical movement, the MCC has a connecting role to other manifestations of the ecumenical movement. We do function as a sort of ‘home office’ for the ecumenical movement in this place. We have convened MA Christians who attended the WCC meeting in Porto Alegre Brazil, and met with the delegation from MA that went to the 50^th anniversary of Faith and Order in Oberlin. We have been visited here by Rev. Sam Kobia, General Secretary of the WCC and by Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, General Secretary of the NCCC. We have held luncheons with NCCC Shanta Premawardana, NCCC Tony Kireopoulos, WCC’s Hans Ucko, WCC’s Tamara Gretzelize. In the last years, Msgr. John Radano of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Rev. Dr. Thomas Best former general secretary of Faith and Order for the World Council of Churches and Rev. Dr. George Tavard of blessed memory have been the keynote speakers for the Commission on Christian Unity Plenary Address. We just had a visit from current MCC President Archbishop Vicken Aykazian. Jack will go to the Ecumenical Advocacy Days with the NCCC in DC in March, and gather the advocates from MA with him. I will be with the Massachusetts delegation to the National Workshop on Christian Unity in April. Because there are so many amazing ecumenists in this area at the seminaries, we draw on their ecumenical experience. The Connecting role of the council is unique in ways that an individual denomination could not accomplish.

9. Recollecting: Churches, through a council of churches, can recollect and remember what they already are. The good news is, we are one in Christ. Not something to negotiate, vote on, deliberate over, appoint a study commission to discern. We are one in Christ. We are in the paradoxical position of becoming what we already are. And membership in a council of churches is a sign of that reality. The danger comes when the ‘ecumenical ministry’ potentially gets ‘outsourced’ just to a council of churches or just to ecumenical officers and staff. The professionalization and clericalization of ecumenical life is contradictory to the baptismal vows that bind all Christians to Christ and one another. We are all responsible for the work to reconcile Christians one to another, churches one to another, simply by virtue of our baptism. Here, a council of Churches can have a ‘recollecting’ or re-minding role. The MCC does this through the Ecumenical prayer calendar, pastoral letter during the week of prayer for Christian unity, hosting the Ecumenical Institute to allow a space for ecumenical formation. The staff can serve as an imperfect sign of unity when we attend your annual meetings and bring greetings and you intentionally use that visit as a way to teach about our oneness in Christ. We can do that when we visit congregations and tell stories about the things they’re doing together that they don’t even know about! And we need intentional invitations in order to do this better. But those visits cannot be the whole symbol of our shared life. Every annual meeting, ever baptism in every local church, every instillation of a new pastor, every time you celebrate the Eucharist while the churches are still divided or there is a Christian from another tradition in your church who can’t receive, every time you use a hymn in worship or a bible study from another tradition, every one of these occasions is an opportunity to teach about the gospel call to our oneness in Christ. The MCC can help that occur, even teach about the places where it can occur or be evangelists, but if this work is solely the responsibility of a council of churches- then the church remain perpetually divided and in my estimation, fail to live out Christ’s will.

We are not the only council of churches grappling with our mission and our accountability to one and other and to God. Similar conversations are going on in every state council, at our national council and at the World Council of Churches. There was a report a few years ago- a WCC staff person visited every national council of churches in the world. And he concluded his report with this statement:

“The key issue is that most churches show only partial commitment to what is involved in being a fellowship of churches. Where there is commitment, it is often to the Council as an institution and not to the other churches that comprise its membership. Most councils, thus, are an ecumenical façade behind which the churches remain as unecumenical as ever.”

This is a pretty damning assessment. I recently chatted with the Speaker of the House at a legislative reception and I thanked him for his continued opposition to casino gambling. He said, “you know, I got pretty well crucified over that.” And I said, “Well, the good news, Mr. Speaker, is that as Christians, we believe after crucifixion comes resurrection.” We believe after crucifixion comes resurrection, after the sins of our division come the grace to renew our commitments to one another, after our shortcomings comes God’s strength to stretch us beyond our comfort. We believe in new possibilities and a different way of being together. And that gives me hope for our council, even in these hard times. For sure, some things will have to die, some programs will be laid fallow, some positions may have to be cut, but we do not yet know what might break forth. Even if budget shortfalls and diminished denominational capacity forces us to work together in new ways, grace may abound.

Again, Dr. Kinnamon puts it this way. “This is not an organization you have joined, but a community you have formed on the basis of commitments to one another.” We have the awesome task and responsibility of holding one another accountable, in Christian love. We are doing well in some areas, but there is much work to be done. I pray that we grow in our commitments to one another and that MCC, this privileged instrument of our Christian unity in this place, can continue to be a helpful mechanism for realizing that which is already ours- our unity in Christ.