Best When Used By……

When my nephew was a toddler, he was getting a little fussy at a family gathering.  He had a little zebra stuffed animal but he wasn’t all that interested in playing with it.  When his attention was elsewhere, I hid the zebra under a couch cushion, then asked “Where’s the zebra?”  We searched together until we found it.  This was a big hit, so we continued to play “zebra hide-and-seek” for the rest of the day.  So the next time I saw my nephew, guess what he wanted to do?  :-)  Yes, I became the “zebra hide-and-seek aunt” every time we got together until he finally outgrew the game (or maybe he just lost the zebra).

Our congregations can get stuck in similar patterns with events or traditions but we don’t always notice when a committee or a program has outlasted its relevance. If we apply the Healthy Congregations® lens and understand the congregation as a system, we may notice the effects of homeostasis—the tendency of a system to maintain an equilibrium between its parts.  In systems, any change within the system elicits one of two reactions.  The first and strongest reaction is push-back:  the system wants to return to its previous “comfortable” state.  The other reaction is for the system to change and establish a new equilibrium of the parts, and a new homeostasis.  It’s the role of the leaders to help the system to respond to change based on the congregations core purpose rather than to react based on habit and individual desire for comfort.

What if we could stamp a “use by” date on committees or programs to remind us that we need to constantly reevaluate what our congregations are offering.  Are we serving our core purpose?  Is it relevant to people’s lives?  If it’s a tradition, does help reinforce a key part of our congregational identity, or is it a snapshot of a culture from our congregation’s history or story that may be interesting or sentimental, but doesn’t inform how we might live into our future.

One of my favorite examples is the church rummage sale. The decision to hold a rummage sale is usually based on a “fundraising income” line item in the church budget.  But let’s get on the balcony to look at everything involved.  Rummage sales take up a week or two of the congregation’s attention.  A large space needs to be set aside from other programming for the collecting, sorting and pricing of all of the stuff.  A large group of volunteers are needed to set up, staff the sale, then clean up afterward.  Most rummage sales don’t make very much money when you look at the profit compared to the volunteer hours.  Also not included in the calculus are the programs and participation not happening because of the rummage sale’s consumption of space, volunteer energy and time.

If a newer member (who is more likely to take a balcony view) invited to volunteer for the rummage sale questions the logic of hosting a rummage sale, they may hear explanations that are expressions of the homeostasis of the system:  “It’s a service to the community.”  (Really?  Buying our unwanted stuff?)  “It builds community to work together.”  (Maybe, but I’d rather be a part of a potluck or a chalice circle.)  “It’s an important fundraiser!”  (Let’s see…6 people working 3 hours a night for 5 nights to set up, then another 4 people to work 6 hours the day of the sale, then another 6 people to work 5 hours to clean up, and we made $500.  That works out to $3.47/hour for our volunteer time.)

Let us be open to checking the expiration dates on our programming so we can respond appropriately; replacing what is stale or sour with fresh and tasty alternatives.

In faith and service,

Rev. Renee Ruchotzke
Regional Leadership Development Consultant
CERG – Central East Regional Group of the UUA

Going Electric

“If congregations can change, they can grow.” That is one of the major findings of a survey of American congregations titled “Facts on Growth: 2010.” The survey produced by The Cooperative Congregational Studies Partnership (CCSP), analyzed responses from 11,077 randomly sampled congregations of all faith traditions in the United States. It measured change in attendance between 2005 and 2010.  You can read the full report at www.faithcommunitiestoday.org

Here, in a proverbial nutshell, are the other major findings:

• Congregations located in downtown or central city area are more likely to experience growth
• Congregations started since 1992 are most likely to grow
• Growth in predominantly white congregations is less likely
• Growth is correlated with a clear mission and purpose
• Joyful worship services and worship services that include children are associated with greater growth in the congregation
• Congregations whose members are heavily involved in recruiting new people have a definite growth advantage, as do congregations that use multiple methods to make follow-up contacts with visitors, that regularly invest in special events or programs to attract people from the community, and whose senior clergy spent priority time in evangelism and recruitment.
• Having congregational programs of all kinds is related to growth, especially young adult activities, parenting or marriage enrichment activities and prayer or meditation groups.
• Congregations with strong leaders, especially leaders 35-39 years old, are most likely to be in growing congregations.
• Congregations that say they are willing to change to meet new challenges tend to be growing congregations.
• Congregations with little or no conflict are most likely to grow.
• Congregations that saw themselves as not that different from other congregations in their area tended to decline in growth

So what are we to make of this? Some factors, like location, age of the congregation, and community demographics may be difficult to impact. But look at how many of these factors are well within the ability of congregations to do something about: Having a clear mission and purpose, having joyful worship services (the study finds a positive correlation between electric guitars in worship and growth in congregations), engaging the congregation in recruitment of new members (see my previous blog on Friendship Sunday), implementing a variety of programs for people of varying ages, cultivating strong leaders, managing conflict, creating a niche. These are not all easy to establish, but they are certainly well with in the range of possibility if we are truly committed to growth.

The Reverend Dan Dick, Director of Connectional Ministries for the Wisconsin Annual Conference, said this, “Turnaround churches almost all agree: They knew what they needed to do before they did it. Churches that truly want to grow do so. Churches that want to serve do so. Churches that want to climb out of financial hardship do it. For every declining church you can name, there is a growing one just like it in most ways. The key difference? Declining churches expect their answer to come from the outside; growing churches take responsibility for their own solutions.” Rev. Dan goes on to say that, “The hard reality is that our own health, vitality and future rest squarely with us—no one else will guarantee them for us . . .”

And David Roozen, Director of Hartford Seminary’s Hartford Institute for Religion Research, which oversaw the Facts on Growth 2012 study, concludes, “The clear message…is that in today’s world growth and decline are primarily dependent upon a congregation’s internal culture, program and leadership, and therefore a congregation’s own ability to change and adapt.”

So it seems like it’s up to the members of the congregation to make the decision to stay or grow, to roll up their sleeves and to go about the difficult work of creating a stronger and more vital spiritual home. As a consultant, I would hate to think that you couldn’t do it without me. But I know this. Without a willing and committed congregation, you couldn’t do it at all. So find your focus, commit to your vision, prioritize your tasks and get to work. And it wouldn’t hurt to get out that electric guitar either.

With respect,

Mark Bernstein
CERG Regional Growth Development Consultant

The Hunger for Freedom and Order

I just finished book 3 of the Hunger Games trilogy and am looking forward to seeing the movie next week (or as soon as the rest of my family finishes the book). Of the many rich themes and biting social commentary, the one that stands out for me is how this dystopian society organizes itself.  The story highlights two competing human desires—one for freedom and the other for order. Order (and the safety that it promises) has the upper hand throughout most of the three books.

As fierce protectors of the free church tradition, Unitarian Universalists naturally drift toward the freedom part of the spectrum.  Thus, it is easy for us to poke a stick at the power and authority of President Snow and the Capitol, who oppress the residents of the 12 districts while providing bread and circuses to its citizens.  Their power is based on fear, with just enough hope thrown in to keep the oppressed from giving up completely.

In book 3, Mockingjay, we meet the backers of the rebellion—a remnant of District 13 that has been hiding underground since the previous rebellion 75 years earlier. They also exercise a high level of power and authority, but it is held with the implicit understanding that the rules imposed are for the good of the whole because they are at war with the Capitol.  Their power is also based on fear—the fear of the enemy—and they exploit that fear to manipulate the uprisings in the other 12 districts.

In order to be faithful, we Unitarian Universalists need structures of governance that use a minimal amount of power and authority.  We do need some order…but we also need the space for creativity and grace to make their presence known in our congregations.  We do need accountability…but an accountability structure that doesn’t unnecessarily constrain our leaders.

Unfortunately, our governance structures sometimes—unintentionally—undermine our congregations’ effectiveness.  We amend bylaws to address problems that should be dealt with via policies.  We adopt Policy Governance® when what we really want is for our leaders to be accountable to our mission or purpose.  We keep stewardship information secret so that people who have implicit accountability for raising money—such as the stewardship committee or the minister—are denied access to pledge information.

Fear underlies these kinds of situations as well:  Fear of backlash if a board passes policies that some members don’t like, fear that if we don’t measure our staff’s performance using hard data we can’t know if they are doing their job, fear that talking honestly about money might make all members of the congregation more accountable in financially supporting the congregation.

If you are in the process of reviewing your congregation’s governance structure (or perhaps should be thinking about it!), remember to invite hope to the planning table and keep fear in the other room.  We want our leaders to be able to lead whole-heartedly within reasonable expectations of accountability to mission and purpose.

In faith and service,

Rev. Renee Ruchotzk
Regional Leadership Development Consultant
Central East Region of the UU

Door Sticky. Be Strong!

As I walked into the little bookstore(1) in the Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh, I couldn’t help noticing this sign:

Door Sticky. Be Strong!

The sign didn’t tell you what to do (such as “Push Hard” or “Lift Up”), it told you how to be in order to deal with the door: “Be Strong.”

This sign made me want to make my own set of signs to hand out to my churches:

“Traditions Sticky. Be Adaptive!”

When I work with churches, many of the leaders want tools and techniques to help them in leadership.  We have lots of those and we do share them.  But I sometimes have a hard time helping leaders to understand that the most important tool they have is their own presence and functioning.  In other words, “Be Strong.”   “Be Adaptive.”  I might even add, “Be Wise.”

What do I mean by “wise?”

I’m currently reading the book This Odd and Wondrous Calling by Lillian Daniel and Martin B. Copenhaver.

They have a description of wisdom that resonates with my understanding of what “presence and functioning” means:

…wisdom is more than a single attribute.  It is more like a cluster of attributes, including a clear-eyed view of human behavior, coupled with a keen self-understanding; a certain tolerance for ambiguity and what might be called the messiness of life; emotional resiliency; an ability to think clearly in a circumstance of conflict or stress; a tendency to approach a crisis as an intriguing puzzle to be solved; an inclination to forgive and move on; humility enough to know that it is not all about you; a gift for seeing how smaller facts fit in with the larger picture; a mix of empathy and detachment; a knack for learning from lifetime experiences; a way of suspending judgment long enough to achieve greater clarity; an ability to act coupled with a willingness to embrace judicious inaction.(2)

Because we are the people of the Living Tradition, I believe that in order to be faithful, we need to develop the wisdom that allows us to keep Unitarian Universalism vibrant.  But our institutions resist change, much as a sticky door resists being opened. We just need to develop the capacity—the strength and wisdom—to meet the challenge.

In faith and service,
Rev. Renee Ruchotzke
Leadership Development Consultant

(1) Caliban Book Shop, 410 S. Craig St. Pittsburgh, PA
(2) page 109

Communication: Keeping it Real

George Bernard Shaw wrote, “The problem with communication is the illusion that is has occurred.” Is communication in our Unitarian Universalist congregations an illusion…or are we taking steps to ensure that information is shared openly and in as many different ways as we can think of? One sign of poor communication in an organization is the presence of rumors and gossip, the terrible twos of congregations.

Rumors are misinformation that is fabricated in the absence of accurate information. They begin when evidence pertaining to an important topic is ambiguous, concealed, or otherwise unavailable. When normal channels of communication break down, people seek alternate means of obtaining information and theorize on their own and with others to try to explain what is confusing or mysterious. Rumors are an attempt to provide structure in an uncertain situation, bring a sense of closure, and simplify complex situations.

Gossip, on the other hand, is information that may be more accurate but becomes problematic because it is spread outside formal informational channels. Gossip tends to be more trivial and nonessential than rumors. Gossip fills an information void, but it is also a way to bind people and communities together. It is talk with a social purpose and can create a sense of shared intimacy which enables bonding and a greater sense of belonging. It is when gossip is deceptive, arbitrary and mean-spirited that it begins to break down a community.

It is tempting to point fingers at people who gossip or spread rumors. But such behavior exists only if the system itself permits and enables it. In a congregation where such behavior is extreme, leaders should ask themselves several pointed and difficult questions:
• Do employees not feel safe communicating directly and truthfully?
• Do rumors or gossip hint of high anxiety or negativity in the organization?
• Do the rumors or gossip indicate that necessary information is being concealed?
• Do the rumors or gossip require a response from the leaders?

In an Alban Institute article entitled The Sabotage of Rumors, Arthur Paul Boers describes two primary principles for disabling rumors, gossip, secrets, and third-party complaints. First, since secrecy is one of the primary problems, churches and leaders should not keep secrets about secrets. Exposing secrecy can be risky, but when secrets are revealed, anxiety usually decreases. Refusing to keep secrets about secrets, Boers continues, means naming and addressing unhealthy behavior, not ignoring it and hoping it just goes away.

The second principle, according to Boers, is this: “viruses cannot be spread if we do not spread them. We disable rumors, gossip, secrets, and third-party complaints, by refusing to pass them on or perpetuate them. Rumors can be undermined by providing prompt and accurate information about decisions and process. Correct information is especially important when rumors are apt to spread or are already spreading.”

Transparency is the watchword. The more trusting and honest the leadership and the more willing it is to share information willingly and lovingly, the less room there is for unhealthy communication habits to germinate and grow. It’s also helpful to develop a “communication road map” that outlines appropriate channels for finding out needed facts, expressing concerns, and relaying information. If you are worried about the safety of a child, whom do you talk to? If you have a concern about the minister, where do you go to express that concern? If you are angry about the worship service going on too long, where do you go to be heard? And if the concern isn’t addressed at the first stop, whom do you talk to next?

Above all, what leaders need to instill in their congregations is a sense of trust. As Jack Welch said, “Trust happens when leaders are transparent, candid, and keep their word. It’s that simple.”

And that’s no illusion.

With respect,

Mark Bernstein
Regional Growth Development Consultant

Leadership for the Zombie Apocalypse

This past Sunday, the boys in my middle school class used their check-in time to describe their latest strategies for the Zombie Apocalypse.  This meme has been permeating the culture of the millennial generation lately, from Facebook postings to Humans vs. Zombies games  on college campuses.  Even the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have gotten into the act by publishing a Zombie Apocalypse preparedness guide.

I love a good apocalypse story.  I like the initial part where—in order to survive the initial onslaught—we humans go into hyper-problem-solving mode. The engineering part of my brain savors a good puzzle.  But the really interesting apocalypse stories—Stephen King’s The Stand and George Stewart’s Earth Abides being a couple of my favorites—follow the initial catastrophe with a story of realistic humans reimagining how they will adapt to the altered version of their world.  Such two-part apocalypse stories provide an example of the difference between adaptive and technical challenges.

Preparing for a Zombie Apocalypse is basically a technical challenge.

(I might even argue that preparing for a Zombie Apocalypse is “work avoidance” because—frankly—it seems less daunting to deal with the brain-sucking undead when compared to real-and-present issues such as fracking or climate change…)

Let me share the back story of the CDC jumping on the Zombie Apocalypse bandwagon (or maybe we should call it the Monty Python “bring out
your dead” wagon).  Andy Goodman’s Free Range Thinking newsletter tells the story of how the challenge of getting Americans to read about how to prepare for a disaster led to some creative and courageous leaders at the CDC to create the zombie-based disaster preparedness guide.  Learning how to prepare for a disaster—whether it be a hurricane or a zombies at your door—is basically a technical challenge.  Figuring out how to get the American people to pay attention to your carefully crafted preparedness guides was the main mission of the CDC—and that is the adaptive challenge. I love that a few folks at the CDC had the imagination and guts to use the zombie meme to that purpose.  Sure, they had some critics who reacted negatively.  But they had over two million hits on their website within a week…and their campaign cost less than $100.

Our congregations are facing some really crucial adaptive challenges in the next decade.*  But if the CDC—a stodgy government agency—can respond to their adaptive challenge with such courage and creativity, there is no reason why we—the people of the living tradition—can’t do the same.

In faith and service,
Rev. Renee Ruchotzke
Leadership Development Consultant

*For more on these challenges, read Robert Putnam’s American Grace and John Roberto’s Faith Formation 2020.

The Purpose-Driven Pledge

As the holidays wind to a close, many congregational leaders are looking ahead to the spring stewardship campaign. What they may not realize is that the integrity of their leadership during the rest of the year has as much impact on stewardship as the campaign method itself.

What successful non-profits have known for years—and churches are just beginning to learn—is that people give money—even in a weak economy—when they are confident that their gift will effectively serve a higher purpose.

An important book on Stewardship that has been making the rounds is Not Your Parent’s Offering Plate by J. Clif Christopher.  Although it is
steeped in Christocentric theology, its basic points can speak to Unitarian Universalists with a little theological translation.

People give money if they can change lives.

What is your congregation’s purpose or mission?  Are you serving in a way that makes a real difference for actual people? Or are you just maintaining a beloved building and underwriting the programming that keeps your members happy and comfortable?

People give to people.

Are you finding ways to share the stories of the people whose lives are being changed? Perhaps there is a youth struggling with their gender identity who found a supportive community within your walls.  Maybe you sponsored a family of refugees as they tried to establish a new life in a strange country. Or perhaps you open your doors once a month to homeless families as a part of an interfaith organization.

Serious givers expect accountability to mission

As Clif Christopher states in his book:

It is the people leading that church and those programs that make the difference. When they have confidence in those people to perform, gifts follow.…. People know that programs are just words on paper until others take them and put those words into action. Only then do lives get changed. So, though I may like a certain program or idea, I do not give to it without having supreme confidence in the people who are going to be in charge of carrying it out.

Although the language is simple, the implications for congregational leaders are profound:

• Know your purpose
• Serve that purpose with integrity
• Share the stories

And last, but not least:

• Invite others to support that purpose with you

In faith and service,

Rev. Renee Ruchotzke
Regional Leadership Development Consultant
Central East Region of the UUA

The Arc of Faith Development is Long….

… but it bends toward Leadership Development.

I paraphrase this quote from Unitarian heretic Theodore Parker because I truly believe that faith development and leadership development are all of a piece.

Actually, I prefer the term “formation” over “development” because our faith journeys don’t just add on to what is already part of us, they also can change—in deep and transformative ways—the way we are in the world.  As I went through the process of discernment and formation in my journey through seminary and the fellowshipping process, I was transformed in significant ways.  But I believe that you don’t have to go to seminary or to go through the fellowshipping process to experience this kind of transformation.  But I do believe that you do need to be in some sort of intentional process within accountable relationships to do so.

Faith formation includes connecting to our deepest yearnings and passions and making sense of the world around us.  As Unitarian Universalists deeply rooted in congregational polity, we believe that formation best happens in a faith community, among people who have agreed to walk together in their journeys and to learn from one another.  This requires a level of vulnerability and trust that can only occur when a congregation’s members are truly living their covenantal promises to one another.  My dream is to see our UU congregations make and live into those promises by being intentional about faith formation for all ages and creating learning communities that provide a deep level of engagement and accountability.

Leadership formation follows this arc by adding a dimension of service…a dimension that is vital to any faith community.  Each congregation  must find its core purpose and define it in a way that is manageable and actionable. To use theistic language, “What little bit of God’s work are we called upon to do in the world?”  That core purpose becomes the DNA that permeates everything that the congregation does.  With this clarity of purpose, we help our members to discern their own role based on their gifts, and equip them to fulfill that role.

 In faith and service,

Rev. Renee Ruchotzke
Regional Leadership Development Consultant
Central East Region of the UUA

The Warmth of Other Chalices

Our Unitarian Universalist congregations vary widely in character and personality.  Some feel warm and welcoming the minute you walk through the door.  Others feel a little stiff and formal.  A few unfortunate communities almost quiver with the tension of unresolved issues and unconsciously “leak” their anxiety, then wonder why visitors never return.

When someone with an identity that is marginalized in our society (a person of color, someone who is transgender etc.) walks through our doors, how they perceive us has much more to do with our own emotional reactions to that person than do the words that come out of our mouths.

I’m just finishing the book The Warmth of Other Suns: The Epic Story of America’s Great Migration by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Isabel Wilkerson.  (I read this after reading Taylor Branch’s compelling trilogy on America in the King Years:  Parting the Waters, Pillar of Fire and At Canaan’s Edge.  These books describe in detail the Civil Rights movement in the South from 1954 to 1968.)

The contrast of the experience of the Jim Crow South to the experience of the African Americans who migrated to the North and California highlights the insidious nature of  institutional racism (and other isms) in our country and the toll that it takes on so many of us.

UUA General Assembly 2009. Photo by Nancy Pierce

We have a core group of congregations whose ministers and lay leaders have been working to recognize, understand and dismantle the ways in which the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) DNA manifests in our congregations so that our values of inclusiveness and diversity can become a reality.  It usually starts with ministers who are committed and make themselves accountable to this work. But it for there to be real change in a congregation, a critical mass of lay leaders also needs to commit to the work.   This means more than just taking a workshop or two.  Instead it is a spiritual engagement with the underlying causes and effects of racism in ourselves as well as in our institutions and society.

There are many stories and examples of congregations who have chosen to do the soul work of building anti-racist, anti-oppressive, multi-cultural (ARAOMC) communities.  This doesn’t necessarily translate into a visibly diverse membership. But it does create a community with a warmth toward difference that is worthy of our chalice flame.  (For more on what a multi-cultural UU community looks like, see this article. )

As our demographics in our country shift further and further away from the WASP identity of our Unitarian Universalist forebears, our congregations will also need to shift to remain relevant.  I consider multicultural sensibility to be core competency of every leader and a key aspect of any leadership development program. I hope that you encourage your leaders to take the time to attend the conferences that we offer and to check out the free resources on the UUA website to help your congregation be ready for the next 50 years!

In faith and service,
Rev. Renee Ruchotzke
Regional Leadership Development Consultant
Central East Region of the UUA

Tolerating the Stranger

I entered the congregation through the front door and was recognized immediately by someone who knew I was the Regional Growth Consultant. The welcome was friendly enough and I was ushered into the sanctuary where I took a seat on the left about five or six rows back. Behind me was a young couple. I turned to introduce myself and we chatted amiably for about 30 seconds until we had nothing left to say. As I turned to face the front, another young couple came down the aisle in the row in front of me. Recognizing the couple behind me, they began a very animated and joyful conversation about the last social event they attended together and other such matters. As the conversation continued, I noticed that the couple in front of me had not yet acknowledged my presence. Now understand this picture. They were both standing in the row in front of me, right in front of me, and yet never once looked at me. I purposefully kept my gaze upward trying to meet their eyes. But it was to no avail. It was as if these two couples were talking over the back fence…AND I WAS THE FENCE.

This wasn’t the first time that I felt a deep sense of isolation when visiting one of our Unitarian Universalist congregations. And this isn’t going to be one of those blogs where I bitch and moan about how unfriendly people are. I’m trying, though, to understand why it is that so many of our members shy away from contact with others; why we appear to be so reticent about welcoming the stranger.

In the book Radical Hospitality, Father Daniel Homan and Lonni Collins Pratt point out that we human beings “hide out, isolate ourselves, and deny our natural need for others. We erroneously think we need safety the most. What we need most is acceptance….We need to connect and feel the deep acceptance of another human being and that will make the world feel safer.”

I was invited once to deliver a sermon at a UU congregation. As the membership was filing into the sanctuary, I took the opportunity to walk around and introduce myself to as many people as I could before the service started. I was amazed at how many people had startled looks on their faces when I stuck my hand out in front of them. Was I making them feel unsafe? Was my effort at reaching out and connecting to them making them uncomfortable?

Congregations that practice radical hospitality demonstrate an active desire to invite, welcome, receive, and care for those who are strangers in their midst. The idea is that these visitors are also on a spiritual journey, albeit just beginning and our response to them can assist them on that journey or detour them onto a completely different trail. Radical describes that which is drastically different from ordinary practices, outside the normal, that which exceeds expectations and goes the extra mile. Based on many of my experiences, what is outside the “normal” in most of our congregations is even one person saying hello and making me feel welcomed.

Okay, maybe I’m overstating things a bit and not being fair. And I said I wouldn’t complain and I mean to stick to that. But I know this. Whenever I enter a congregation, I do so with a bit of trepidation, with concern that this sense of aloneness might be repeated. I want to believe that we Unitarian Universalists are open and accepting and willing to take risks in order to welcome a newcomer. I want to visit a congregation where the sense of embracement is palpable and where I might even feel that this could be “home.”

“Here is the core of hospitality”, wrote Homan and Pratt, “May I know you better? Will you come closer, please? No, it will not be easy, but make no mistake about it, your life depends on this saving stranger coming to you and stretching your tight little heart. The real question is not how dangerous that stranger is. The real question is how dangerous will I become if I don’t learn to be more open? Choosing against hospitality means you will eventually lock your heart away from others and grow cold and hard inside. You cannot take seriously the spiritual practice of hospitality and remain as you are. If you are serious about it, nothing will ever be the same again.”

In reviewing the Homan and Pratt book, Todd Weddle of the St. Joseph News-Press noted that “…radical hospitality is not something people do, but rather something people become.” I don’t want people of our faith to just practice welcoming. I want them to do it because it is at the core of who they are. If enough people do that, than we cannot help but grow our faith.

I’m not complaining, am I?

Mark Bernstein
CERG Regional Growth Development Consultant