Minutes, August 9, 2010

Mission Task Force Minutes
Monday, August 9, 2010, 9 a.m. – 11 a.m.
Church of the Epiphany, East Providence


Attended: Jennifer Pedrick+, Standing Committee, Chair; Susan Wright, West Bay Deanery, Secretary; Ricky Brightman, Narragansett Deanery; Modesta Pellot, Diocesan Council; Brian Ehlers, Bishop’s Appointment, Master Blogger; Fran Gammell-Roach, Standing Committee; Buck Close, Blackstone Deanery; Scott Nicholson, Bishop’s Appointment
Unable to attend: Bill Locke+, Chaplain; David Isherwood, East Bay Deanery, Jim Segovis, Central Deanery; Pam Mott+, Aquidneck Deanery.

Following our opening prayers, we reviewed our entire process to date and our goals.
Our goal to design and implement listening process has been achieved. We have linked with the diocesan bodies and staff and this goal is complete. Now we continue to discern what we have heard so that we may write our report and make our recommendations to the Diocesan Convention.

Jennifer presented the observations from our last meeting during which we discussed what we heard in the listening process.

Observations from our last meeting were posted and we refined them and added to the list. These ideas and observations will form the basis for our report as well as any recommendations and resolutions we present.

What we have learned, observed, and discovered in our MTF Journey

This list is based on the listening process, our conversations, meetings, Facebook, prayer, and Diocesan Council reports.

1. People are engaged. There is more energy for mission than we expected. We have talented ministers, leaders, and many resources for mission.

2. The people of the diocese are looking for leadership and opportunities to be part of planning and developing programs. We also heard, “If we are led, we will follow.”

3. As a Diocese, we are confused about the distinction between Diocesan Mission and Diocesan Programs. This is a great problem and an opportunity for us to clarify the difference. Programs should support and promote the mission; they are not the mission.

4. MTF seeks to envision future Mission. While we have listened to opinions about programs, and we have some recommendations about how to improve the administration of programs connecting resources to mission, we are unable to evaluate any current programs. Our focus on mission must be clear. In the future we hope programs will be evaluated based on some criteria that show how they promote diocesan mission.

5. There is a desire for more coherent Mission strategy, definition and communication. We want more connection among parishes and between parishes and the Diocese with regard to mission.

6. The current budgeting process needs revision if it is to be effective in promoting the mission of the diocese as we move forward. Many people experience a dis-connect between the budget, mission, and programs.

7. We have a very strong desire to CELEBRATE our common life in Christ and to offer ministry together. We deeply value and want to share worship, fellowship, service and new life together as a Diocese. We also want to share how we are doing in our parishes. This feeds us.
• As Episcopalians our liturgy is one of the great gifts we receive and share with others. We heard again and again how important it is to members of our diocese that we gather for worship that is the very best we can offer and experience. We hope for greater planning, preparation, and commitment to diocesan liturgy.
• We heard that we want to serve together in “hands on” mission opportunities.
• We benefit from the times we are learning, working and eating together. Gathering for work and play, especially meals, is GOOD! Feeding and being fed brings us together.

8. We noticed an absence of children and youth in diocesan life.

9. We seek greater leadership development and nurturing. This has an impact on our mission or lack of mission. Leaders would like to participate in the planning and evaluation of this.

10. We heard that people in parishes feel that they exist to serve “headquarters” rather than diocesan staff serving/supporting parishes. The absence of a clear mission supports this perception.

11. The Episcopal Church of RI has no “brand”. A revitalized mission could give us greater name recognition and help us to be known beyond our current membership.

12. During the listening process, these were the specific mission areas of interest/passion identified as important to individuals:

• Offering a spiritual resource for individuals and for parishes, e.g. study, liturgy, music
• Serving beyond our Diocese, e.g. Haiti mission, New Orleans
• Developing ecumenical relationships
• Caring for the homeless and hungry and working to eliminate conditions that perpetuate homelessness and hunger
• Serving the imprisoned and helping those released from prison make a successful transition back into the community
• Addressing immigration issues, welcoming the stranger, defending families who are vulnerable due to their immigration status
• Promoting literacy
• Serving, supporting and empowering youth
• Raising awareness about the faces of racism and promoting the dignity of every human being regardless of gender or sexual orientation
• Feeding people through food pantries
• Feeding people through soup kitchens
• Reaching out to the homebound
• Promoting and working for justice in society and in promoting policies that support the marginalized
• Continuing to expand the racial/ethnic/cultural reach of the Episcopal Church in RI encouraging a more diverse body of Christ
• Leading the parishes in a campaign for environmental stewardship
• Growing and distributing food through community gardens
• Supporting and educating parents

13. Our energy needs a focus – building on strengths is a place to begin.

14. The diocese seems to have no programmatic evaluation process. The evaluation reports from Diocesan Council on current programs revealed that there is no evaluation process for diocesan programs. The reports revealed that there are:
• No clear plans for diocesan programs. There is a significant absence of strategy, vision and goals in all programs evaluated.
• There do not appear to be current evaluation mechanisms.
• Since nothing is measured, we do not notice or celebrate successes and we do not address failures in diocesan programming. We do continue to fund them, however.

15. A question came up again and again, “How can Episcopal Charities link resources and support to Diocesan mission?” There may be an opportunity to get the resources of Episcopal Charities to promote the Diocesan Mission, this could revitalize EC, and be a way to engage and promote the Mission. Something we heard many times was the hope that we might focus the resources for Episcopal Charities to give larger grants to fewer agencies, thereby having a larger impact.

16. We do not have a vision for where the Diocese of RI will be or what it will look like in five years. We keep hearing and saying that this is a critical time to have a strategy in this time of change/apparent decline. This strategy should apply to both the number of parishes and the structure of the diocese in the future.

We cannot afford to ignore these significant issues,
• Not financially
• Not pastorally
• Not spiritually

17. We seek to be free to engage our mission as parishes and as a diocese. We are not currently free because we experience ourselves as bound by financial burdens and concerns for our buildings, whether as parishes or as a diocese. This is distracting us from engaging in mission.

We have an opportunity now to plan for a different future.


Now --- Moving ahead
Our Recommendations:
We affirmed that we wish to propose a new mission focus to our Diocese.
o The Mission focus we propose for next 3 years:
 Feeding the Hungry
 Transforming the world in which there is such great hunger
• As a Diocese our Mission is to feed spiritually and physically
o We hope to do this as we gather as a diocese in Worship, fellowship, service opportunities,
o We hope the diocesan staff and structures will support parishes in feeding the hungry, strengthening the parishes and leaders of the diocese and helping them to feed others

We discussed many ideas for how we could do this. We discussed resources that will be needed to sustain this focus and our vision for mission. We decided to work on this in the future as we prepare the report and have enough to present to the convention. The point was made that there will need to be some body, either a reconfigured “MTF” or an existing diocesan body to develop the mission strategy. This is beyond the scope of our work and our goals for this year.

Scripture cited for basis of mission to the hungry: “Feed my sheep…” and Matt 25, “when did I see you hungry…sick…imprisoned…”

We discussed the possibility of convocations and conventions that are focused on mission. We had some ideas about reading a book together as a diocese, having the author come to speak to us, and then at our tables with members of our parishes, planning for mission through our ministry. We like the idea of having a more sustained effort and follow through when we gather for learning.

Example of a book that could be promoted for all in the diocese to read and discuss: Take This Bread by Sarah Miles.

We had a discussion about the power that seeing and understanding injustice has on people. We want our new mission to go beyond simply feeding the hungry and eventually we want to transform the system, conditions, policies that exacerbate the plight of the poor. We also said that if we suggest “Feeding the Hungry” as a three year mission priority that we begin by feeding within and then move out, eventually addressing the systemic injustice of the poor.

We will ask for money in the 2011 budget. Jennifer and Jim Segovis will work on this.

Jennifer will be working on our deliverables during the week of August 23-29. We agreed to meet again during that time. She will connect with individuals regarding various parts of the process.

Date for next meeting was not decided but the group decided that a morning meeting works better for people than an evening meeting.

Closed with prayer.

Respectfully submitted by
Susan Wright