Pastors see lots of different and unique situations over the course of years of ministry. I remember hearing someone (who escapes my memory) say pastors see the good, the bad and the ugly. Transitional ministers, called intentional interim ministers in the LCMS, are usually called to serve congregations who are in the midst of major transitions. For example there will almost always be great potential for instability when a pastor of many years leaves suddenly especially if it is completely unplanned as in a death. Or if there is conflict in the congregation that seems unsolvable or has lead to a large exodus from a church. So it has been a common expectation that a congregation that has secured the services of a transitional pastor are somehow in the "bad and ugly" category. But that would be a mistake. Increasingly congregations between pastors are proactively utilizing the transitional minister to engage in a period of "intentional" reflection to seek to maximize untapped potentiality and be as faithful as possible as Christ's disciples in the ministry of the congregation.
Transitional ministry is about far more than just answering what should a congregation look for in the next pastor. The pastor is a very important, even essential part of a congregation, but not the only part. The congregation is composed of many parts united into one as the family of God in that place.
Paul writes in 1 Corinthians chapter 12:
12 Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 14 Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.
Congregations are composed of individuals who share commonality. They share a culture with rules, roles and values. There is quite often an understood way of doing things that can be very productive or may be a hold over from a previous era of productivity but isn't quite getting the job done today because something has changed. You may know the old story of the young lady observing her mother cutting the end off the roast before putting it into the pan to cook. When asked why, she said my mom taught me to do that. When she asked her grandma why she did that she said, because my pan was too small.
The point is that for a congregation to seek out the assistance of a transitional minister is not a sign of weakness but rather a sign of strength and a sign of faithfulness to ministry. In fact it is the congregation in decline, experiencing instability or conflict, that is not weathering a change in situation well, that closes in and determines to keep on keeping on doing the same things resisting self-discovery and transparency, even sometimes accountability, that is falling short of its potential and missing an opportunity for recovery and growth. As it is has been said it is the definition of irrationality to keep on doing the same things and expect a different outcome. And of course if a congregation is experiencing difficulty navigating turbulent changes in situations or conflict or is suddenly experiencing an exodus of members and the leadership seem to be overwhelmed or ineffective then certainly the help of an intentional interim minister can be useful, perhaps necessary.
Congregational systems can be very interesting. When they are working and working well changing them for the sake of change can be foolish. It depends on the direction of the congregation because just as individual people experience change over time so do congregations. If a congregation is stable and growing then for that place and time it may have very effective systemic structures operating which would incur risk of instability and negative trajectory if too much, unneeded or unnecessary change is introduced. A lot of conflict, instability, and loss of membership can be traced by to the imposition of unwanted and unnecessary change. But sometimes systems get stuck, flow in sort of an orbit which we think is stable but only after time discover was slowly degrading. Intentional and proactive examination and wise decision making regarding changes can help boost the congregation back into a healthy trajectory. And if your congregation has a negative trajectory, you know it. You can see it and feel it -- usually.
Congregational systems can be very interesting in another way too. The longer they endure they more likely they are to take on a life of their own. For example a pretty common characteristic of some congregations is that of a key central leader. It is not unheard of to have a congregational president or head elder or treasurer or some other influential leader be in place (either holding one office or different offices) for years. But time passes and no one lives forever. But nature abhors a vacuum and systems like to stay the same (we call that homeostasis). Systems have sticking power. So even if Mr. Ed the head elder of 40 years passes away, the system will almost certainly raise up someone similar to Mr. Ed to fill the void. The people change but the system endures, sometimes over generations.
For example a congregation large enough to have many elders operated with 3-4 of those elders forming an "executive committee" who worked very closely as an extension of the long-term and beloved senior pastor making most of the decisions in that congregation. But when the pastor died and this became dysfunctional because of a weak head elder and conflict erupted between the executive committee and the church council, the dysfunction was named and the "executive committee" was eliminated and the held elder retired. But within a year there was another small group making the decisions. The decision making mechanism was not transferred to the council or even the Voters but rather in the vacuum of the "executive committee" another small group arose comprised of the new senior pastor, a few elders and a few other officers making most of the decisions for the congregation and informing people what would be what. The unique and curious thing was that the members of this new small group were mostly new leaders, but soon they were functioning very similar to the old leaders. In effect the "executive committee" was reborn. Why? It is an unconscious group mechanism for systems don't like to change, even if the congregation has grown beyond them and they no longer function as they should. Systems often need to be intentionally changed by design for there to be productive and lasting change.
This is why from time to time any congregation can benefit from a period of "intentional" examination especially if it is experiencing the moment of a transition because transitions are pregnant with potential for growth and restoration. It is not something a pastor, congregational leadership, or congregational members should be afraid of considering. It is not a sign of weakness to say we could benefit from an time of intentional examination and reflection using outside eyes. Indeed, it could be a sign of weakness to refuse to acknowledge that "we" need this. Intentional self-examination done with transparency, accountability, and honesty almost always leads to some form of growth. But when we navigate the transitions poorly, allow dysfunctional leadership and systems to remain in place, when we see our congregation faltering, potential wasted, settling for less than we should, even members exiting for what they see as greener pastures, and double down on doing more of the same or hide our heads in the sand we do God's people a great disservice.
