"Two Services: Coming Soon to a Church Near You"

pdf format: click here

The Rev. Suzelle Lynch
November 23, 2003

When I was 28 years old, I decided it was time to go back to church. To a Unitarian Universalist church, of course. That was my religion, one I'd never seen any reason to part with.

Why did I go back to church after not really attending for at least ten years? Well, like Dan Wakefield, I knew that it was time to live my life in a larger context than my own personal concerns could shape. I didn't think church would solve my problems, but I hoped it would help connect my life to a greater wholeness, a larger flow of meaning in the world. I wanted a way of to be with people of all ages and to be part of something deeper, broader, more vital -- something transformational.

I believe that on one level or another, this is why most of us come to church. We sense that to be fully human, we must be about the work of transformation. And we know in our guts that the work of transformation requires community.

"Community means different things to different people. To some … it is a place of emotional support, with deep sharing and bonding with close friends. Some see community as an intense crucible for personal growth. For others, it is primarily a place to pioneer their dreams." So say Corrine McLaughlin and Gordon Davidson in their book Spiritual Politics: Changing the World from the Inside Out (found in Spiritual Literacy, ed. Brussats). I believe community is a place where, as we said in our New Member ceremony, we accept each other's differences with love. A place where we support and care for one another, where we stand up and step out together to take action on the values we share, knowing that those values can help make our world a more compassionate place.

When I went back to church those many years ago, I was far, far away from the church I grew up in. The UU Fellowship in Midland, Michigan had about 75 members and no minister or other paid staff. University Unitarian Church, the Seattle congregation I joined as a young adult had 600 members, a flock of staff people, and two ministers. They also had two services, a huge choir, and a pipe organ.

But University Unitarian was, somehow, exactly the same as the Midland UU Fellowship. Even though it was more than ten years later and the church was ten times as large, the experience for me was one of homecoming. Sitting near the back of the sanctuary with the familiar blue hymnal in my lap, rising to sing hymns with lyrics carefully hand-corrected to wipe out sexist language, I cried and cried because I knew I was home. Listening to Peter Raible -- the white-haired, red-faced, pulpit-pounding minister -- preach his learned sermons, I was every bit as at home as when my own mother had slipped behind the lectern at the Midland Fellowship to give what those UUs carefully referred to as "a talk."

How was this possible? I'm not entirely sure, but I believe it was because both of those churches were clear that they had something important to contribute to the world. They facilitated their members' growth in spirit and their deeper engagement with the wider community. They each were, and still are in their own different ways, beacons of liberal religion in their respective communities. They had all the qualities of living churches as described in our second reading.

I see those same qualities here at UU Church West. I really do.

Do you see them?

Do you believe our church is a living church? A growing church?

I believe we are both.

Here are some facts and figures: in the eleven weeks since our Ingathering Sunday, we have had an average of 337 people in our building on Sunday mornings. By people, I mean adults in worship, children in religious education, nursery, youth group and worship, and adults teaching and helping children. Two hundred adults, on average, have attended the service each Sunday. One hundred and eight children and youth on average, have been in religious education each Sunday, and an average of 29 adults per Sunday have volunteered there. Our highest Sunday worship attendance was for a Family Service, when 231 adults and children packed into this room.

There's a rule used in church life that says that if 80 percent of the chairs in your sanctuary are full, your church will stop growing unless you do something to make more room. When fewer than 20 percent of our seats are empty on any particular Sunday, it becomes difficult for newcomers to find a place. They may have to sit separately from their family or crawl over the laps of strangers. They may have to stand in the back, feeling conspicuous as they wait for an usher to pull out an extra chair for them. When these things happen, newcomers do not feel that there is a place for them here. And it isn't just newcomers: often long-time members, or older members who have a harder time participating in church activities, feel they are no longer welcome or needed when the sanctuary or parking lot gets full.

Something similar happens when classrooms for children become full, or if the church nursery isn't top notch.

Now I'll bet that some of you didn't hear me say "we are full when fewer than 20 percent of seats are empty ON ANY PARTICULAR SUNDAY." But that's truly how the 80 percent rule works. We're not full when the sanctuary is consistently 80 percent full. We're full, and therefore unwelcoming, when on ANY Sunday, 80 percent of the seats are occupied.

Here's our facts. I have been told that our sanctuary can hold 340 people and still comply with fire safety regulations. I'm told we've had that many people in here many times before, but that when we do it is packed, hot, and pretty darned uncomfortable.

On a normal Sunday, like today, we have 240 congregation chairs set up in here, and 40 choir chairs. That's 280 seats, with 240 available for non-choir members. How many people can we seat according to the 80 percent rule and still have room? One hundred and ninety two. Our average attendance is 200. Are we full? Not if you subtract the choir, who essentially have reserved seats. If we subtract 25 choir members from our average, it drops down to 175. On an average Sunday, we still have room for 17 more people.

But remember that these issues don't turn on averages. They crop up on any given Sunday. When newcomers show up for a Family Service and 231 of our 240 seats are occupied, we have a problem. On such a Sunday we should have 290 seats set up. And there have been other high-attendance Sundays this fall as well; Sundays when seats were hard to come by and cars were parked all over the place.

I know some of us do not want to believe this, but using the 80 percent rule, we are full. And there is no simpler explanation than that for the paradox that this church lives: People tell us what a friendly and welcoming place this is, yet our adult membership and attendance have remained the same for thirty years.
And so we are now at a point of choice: either do something to make more room, or commit to turning people away and remaining the same as we are now.

And actually, a bold decision has been made. We're going to begin offering two worship services next fall.

This decision is based in the research done by our Two Services planning group, which is currently helping our committees figure out how to implement the changes. The Two Services group's research shows us that we both need to and can implement two services here.

But the decision to have two services is not based only in numbers or research, but also in who we truly are as a congregation.

Last year, when I was still one of your ministerial candidates and not yet your minister, people told me how much they love this church. How excited they were about its future, as well as how good they felt about its present direction. I heard over and over how much people want to reach out into the community - to give support, to act for justice, and to welcome people into this place of spiritual strength. From folks in the UU realm beyond our walls, I heard how much potential UUCW had to truly be a beacon of liberal religion in Milwaukee's western suburbs. I could feel the energy here - hope about the future, engagement in the present work of the church, and a growing understanding of the causes and dynamics of past difficulties. I could see so much that was going well.

The ministerial packet was frank about some of the challenges here too - for example, an infrastructure that is better suited to a smaller congregation than one of our current size.
But it was clear that people had confidence in this church, and that's why I am here. I believe in you, and in your confidence in what this church is and can be. That's why we are moving in faith toward our vision for our future, rather than simply trying to fix problems that plague us at present.

And our vision for our future includes performing well as the size of congregation we are - a midsize congregation. Alice Mann, an Episcopal priest and expert with the Alban Institute, has some wisdom for us on this issue. She's done a lot of work with UU churches recently, including being the theme speaker for the Unitarian Universalist Association's Midsize Church Conference. During that conference, she said, "When a church is changing sizes, it has to dismantle one way of doing things, and construct a new way…that's called transition, and it is always uncomfortable. It can be stimulating and life giving, but it is always uncomfortable. Sizes can go upward and downward…but it is hard to be in a growing church that doesn't want to let go of the old way of doing things. People need to sociologically 'rearrange the chairs' to accommodate the change." (from UUA website)

By offering two services next fall, that's exactly what we are doing. We are rearranging the chairs, not just physically, but also sociologically and, in fact, spiritually. We are acting on our faith in this church, our belief that we have something truly good and important to offer, and that there is a need in our wider community for our religious values. In other words, we have decided that we can no longer afford to turn away those who are ready to say yes to what we have to offer.

Will offering two services on Sunday be easy? Probably not. We're planning, as you can see from the white sheet in your order of service, to offer two equally attractive worship services with good music and good religious education for children at both. Offering two services takes more volunteers every Sunday - more greeters, more ushers, more religious education volunteers, more worship helpers, more offering-counters, more coffee-hour helpers. It also means asking our families with children in Religious Education to commit themselves to coming to one service or the other, because otherwise we'd never be able to plan curriculum or staffing for the two Religious Education sessions. And without two RE programs - our services will be lopsided. Having two services also takes more resources and staff time, especially support staff and music staff time. And more resources and staff hours means more money.

Can we afford it? Listen to Alice Mann: "Faith," she says, "involves risk. And the first thing to understand is that if you wait until you can afford to have a second worship service, you will never be able to afford it." (from UUA website)

Again, let's revisit why we are adding the second service. Remember that our UU principles are deeply rooted in a kind of radical hospitality. We believe in every person's inherent worth and dignity. And we believe that our congregation is a good place to engage in life's spiritual journey. Few of us were born into this faith, let alone this particular church, and that means that someone was here before us to make sure that there was enough room here for us. Having been given this gift, we have an obligation to make it available for others. And besides, we want this place to be open and welcoming so that new people can bring their gifts and insights here, as well as be strengthened by what they find here so that they can live our values in the wider world.

This might be a good time for us to do a little exercise. Tell me - if all things were equal between the two services: equally good music, sermon, RE for kids - which one would you be more likely to come to?

Stand up if you would prefer 8:45 a.m. (40 percent stood)

Stand up if you would prefer 11:00 a.m. (60 percent stood)

I know that many of us feel anxious about having two services, and not only because of the additional resources and additional costs. We worry that offering two services will divide our congregation in half. We worry that we won't feel like a community any more. Offering two services demands a shift in how we think about ourselves, and that shift is not an easy one to make. It asks us to let go of some of our personal preferences for the good of the whole. It asks us to let go of the need to see everyone together on Sunday, and to recognize that that's actually a fantasy. Think about it: not everyone comes to church every weekend; we're never really all one community on any given Sunday anyway. But many of us still like to think that we are.

Oddly enough, in my experience, having two services actually creates a stronger sense of community. With fewer people at a service, we are more likely to know each other's names and recognize each other's faces. With fewer people at coffee hour, it's easier to converse with one another. With more people becoming UUs, we increase the possibility of finding others who share our values out in the community.

Some people have asked me whether offering two services will be a lot of extra work for me as minister. I usually say that it won't be, and that I was used to it anyway, because my previous congregation began offering two services five years ago. And truthfully, the minister's Sunday responsibilities don't increase that much with two services.

But if our congregation continues to grow, my work load will definitely grow, too. And that will push us even more readily to develop the programs and infrastructure needed in a church our size.

Let me say a little more about what I mean by that. When I joined University Unitarian Church in Seattle lo those many years ago, what kept me there was not just the high quality of the music or Peter Raible's preaching, though those things certainly were important to me.

What was more important, though, was the presence of a small group that became my true spiritual community in that large church and allowed me to find my place there. It was a group of young adults - people, like me, who were in their twenties and early thirties. We did social action projects together, played together, developed an outreach ministry to other UU young adults, and attended Sunday worship services together.

Small groups for people with various interests and needs, lay networks for providing pastoral care, workshops, programs, and classes are all key to a successful midsize church, which is sometimes also called a "program church."

The program church is part of a model of church development put forward by Arlin Rothauge, director of the Seabury Institute and author of several books on congregational growth. Rothague's model uses average Sunday attendance, including both adults and children, to measure a church's size.

The smallest category, with up to 50 adults and kids attending, is called Family Size. These congregations are like extended families where everybody knows everybody. Decisions are handled informally and authority revolves around a few matriarchs and patriarchs.

The second category is called Pastoral Size - with 50 to 150 adults and children in average attendance. The life of these congregations centers around the pastor, who coordinates the activity of committees and groups and serves as kind of a switchboard that connects everything together. The Board is closely involved in the day to day operation of the congregation.

Everybody does not quite know everybody in a pastoral size church, but the pastor does and there is still a sense of one highly unified group.

The third church size category is the one we are in: Program Size - with 150 to 400 in average attendance. In the program-size congregation everyone definitely does not know everyone else. There are multiple circles of involvement because the way members meet their spiritual and community needs is through programs and interest groups. The minister no longer is the primary point of contact for most people, and works more to equip, guide, and encourage staff and key lay leaders for the many groups and programs.

In this size congregation there also is a need for more part-time staff like youth group leaders, membership coordinators, bookkeepers, sextons, and so on.

In a program size church, committees, volunteers, and staff coordinate through networks like a committee council, and the Board provides oversight and visioning, and less management. Pastoral care is shared between minister and congregants, with an organized system in place to track people in need.

The fourth category is called Corporate Size - with 400 to 1000 attending each Sunday. This type of congregation may have multiple ministers and program staff, and focuses on its excellent worship and music program. Corporate churches usually have many specialized programs designed to serve narrowly defined groups.

Each of these different church sizes has certain ways of doing things that work best; which "fit." And when congregations grow from one size to another, the ways they are accustomed to doing things no longer work so well. Tensions develop, of course, usually around issues of identity and purpose, and the congregation either adapts successfully to the needs of its larger size, or after grappling or refusing to grapple with the problems, shrinks back to a smaller size.

This is the second, and less pleasant, explanation for our 30-year size plateau: that we have been unwilling or unable to make the changes that would have us act our size!

The question before us now is whether we can make those changes. Offering two services is a start - indeed, it is an energizing and exciting jumpstart. But all by itself, it can't propel us over the hurdles of anxiety and fear about growth that we face. All by itself, it won't retrain our hearts and minds and hands to do things differently. We are going to have to do that ourselves.

Personally, I believe we can do it, and that we will be successful. Some of you know that I have been involved with three different churches that grew and changed - all of them offered two Sunday services, and two of them made the transition to offering two services while I was either the only minister or part of the ministerial team. Now, I'm no messiah for having done this, but let me witness to you today: if those churches could do it, surely we can, for this is an amazing congregation - full of resources and enthusiasm! And let me also say that offering two services truly is exciting, because it always results in more opportunities for service, for spiritual growth, for community-building, and for social action. And thus more opportunities for transformation.

I believe that we can and will become who and what we are meant to be: a liberal religious beacon, reaching out with support, action, hospitality and spirituality to our wider community as well as our members and friends. I believe we will do this because we are a living church.

A living church: full of noisy children and passionate adults, full of plans that demand we pay attention, raise funds, and give of our time and energy.

A living church: full of commitment to our community that asks us to transcend differences and reach out in faith and solidarity; full of caring and support for our members from birth to death.

A living church: dreaming great dreams of beloved community; feeling the fresh wind of love stirring our hearts; leaping the hurdles between our present and our vision of what we yet can be.

We are a living church.

Amen