Based on some of the responses to the book, it may be important to say that each of these cultures can be spiritually vital.  I could give numerous examples of churches in each catagory that are strong, God-honoring and serving congregations.  Conversely, each can become moribound, and examples of this could be given for each culture as well.  What we are talking about here is not ways of displacing God but ways in which God operates and connects with people in different kinds of congregations.

When we understand this, we understand why different kinds of congregations have very different pastoral transitions.  Our experience is that attempts to force a one size fits all approach to pastoral transitions is unhelpful, and, as some of you have pointed out, disastrous.  It is difficult to grasp this because we all tend to see things from our own cultural perspective.  It is like going into China and speaking Spanish.  There is an immediate disconnect.  It takes work to see beyond our own framework.

I greatly appreciate the work on this website to get this information in front of people and the weekly encouragement for people to read the entire book.  It is an entirely different way of thinking about pastoral transitions and unless the power of the whole is grasped, the individual pieces tend to get judged based upon an old paradigm.

Blessings to all on the journey!!

Russ Crabtree - Co author

I sometimes wonder if pastoral transition is another good by-product of human mortality!  One of the common things I have seen in large church cultures (of all types) is the natural, human tendency for congregants to increasingly tie the life, vitality, and even future of their church to its senior pastor, in an unhealthy “co-dependent” manner.  Of course, there is a definite connection between the life of a church and the leadership the pastor supplies, otherwise I wouldn’t be one of those who believes in training pastors to be better leaders!  But the disturbing part of the equation is that parishioners often easily (and subtley) shift their focus of dependence (and thinking and planning) exclusively on to the senior pastor and HIS vision, to the neglect of a vision for the church itself.  What results is a vision that cannot outlast the tenure of the pastor.  What exacerbates this probem is that the pastor often does the same thing!  At one staff meeting I attended, the senior pastor declared his vision based on his estimate of how much longer he was going to be able to serve in that capacity (about 17 years).  What saddened me about that was his lack of sensitivity to the staff (and congregants) who would surely be there at the point of his departure.  He had absolutely nothing to say about the future of the church past his tenure.  He had obviously given no thought to the transition that would occur.  And just as surely, had made no plans or provisions to aid that process.  I predict the usual trauma when he leaves--and the resulting staff losses (and parishioner “transfers") when the new leader arrives with his own narcissistic vision for the church.  I think the Holy Spirit deserves to “lead” the church in the truest sense of the word, because He knows (as we all do) that the church is meant to outlive and outlast any human leader.  Inevitable pastoral transitions protect the church from the potential tyranny and abuse from any one human leader--that’s a good thing.  But the inevitability of pastoral transition ought also to motivate us all to pursue a “better way” than the typical, i.e. to think bigger than any one leader--to develop a vision for the church as a whole, and to constantly be raising up the next generation of leaders in the church (both professional and volunteer) to ensure that the loss of a senior pastor is not the end of the church’s vision.

Dr. Dyke’s point is an important one.  Focusing on a planned pastoral transition process before it happens forces the church to think more broadly than the current pastor.  That is certainly what happened in the ministry of Jesus.  Because Jesus acknowledged that his time with his disciples was finite, it encouraged a thinking beyond his own ministry.  Jesus had a transition plan that enabled him to say “greater things you will do.”

However, pastoral changes in and of themselves do not automatically result in less pastor dependent churches or churches that are more vision driven.  Without an intentional discernment process that goes beyond any one pastor, they can be catapulted into a cycle of grief, reaction, unrealistic expectations, failure, grief, reaction, unrealistic expectations, failure, grief...and on and on.

Developing a pastoral succession plan for a church puts real teeth into the assertion that the church does not belong to the pastor...it belongs to God. 

Russ Crabtree

This week in California a judge in San Francisco legalized sodomy as marriage.  Now as I live through these incidents Chirst brings me revelation through the Bible story of Lot.  In Genesis 19:7 Lot calls all the men of the city of Sodom brethren.  Looking at the historical context this happens after the God of Abraham saved them from slavery to the four kings.  What righteousness did Lot have that he was saved from destruction?  Now we need to look for the righteousness of Christ for this is the only rightousness God will accept.  First Lot tried to save the messengers by bringing them home.  Next when confronted Lot was willing to rebuke his brethren “I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.” Next Lot put his life on the line standing between them and the door.  Now how does this week’s blog fit in my life.  First there is a family culture here: (i.e. expects the pastor to maintain and guide the church as a parental figure who carries the family traditions and heartbeat.  Examples could include most mainline Protestant churches and smaller community churches.) The church expects the pastor to maintain and guide the church as a parental figure who carries the family traditions and heartbeat.  This church has an open door policy.  The pastor is accessable to everyone.  So was Jesus.  The church is making love their central theme.  Everyone is welcome.  The church has a living demonstration of reaching out to those that are hurting the poor and homeless with the loving kindness of a home cooked meal every week.  This church is a mainline Protestant church and a smaller community church.  Second there an icon culture here the pastor is expected to symbolize in his or her public persona the character of the church and to be the face or voice through which people enter the church.  Third there is an archival culture here were the church expects the pastor to be an activist curator.  It insists that the pastor be in touch with the great historical and universal traditions of the church so that they can be made relevant to the present.  Luther was a rebel to what he perceived as in justices of his day.  Last there is a replication culture were the church expects the pastor to replicate ministry through multiplication of called, equipped, and deployed leaders and workers.  The Methodist church on Thomas avenue serves 200 plus homeless every week.  There is a dentist office, legal counsel, and many other active social ministries.  The social worker involved also started God’s Extended Hand ministries on 16th street downtown where meals are feed to the homeless for breakfast and dinner to hundreds almost everyday.  But there is also something missing from these cultures and it is the righteousness of Christ without which nobody will be saved.