Well, perhaps she's right that "service first/education later" is the key for her congregation. Or, it might be "education never" - and that's OK, too, since the church is catholic and for everybody. Not everybody has the desire to go to classes like this.

But then, I don't understand why anybody would belong to the church simply in order to do service, either. I mean, you can do service in a hundred other ways.

But, maybe it makes sense, too. Maybe this is not a "failure" at all, but an example of what the church offers in the world, without people being conscious of it. Maybe secular service organizations are missing some vital emotional or spiritual component that the church has, just by being what it is. I've had conversations with co-parishioners who actively argue against everything the church is built around: the Bible, the Creeds, the theology, etc. And yet they still attend weekly. They still belong. It puzzles me, because I don't really understand it; I think I'd just go elsewhere if I didn't buy the package (or want to learn more about it). But that's me.

Obviously other people are getting something from the church that they don't even appear to be consciously aware of. If service were enough, there are plenty of organizations that would be thrilled to have volunteers - but perhaps the church offers an overall spiritual atmosphere that people find valuable. Perhaps they simply feel safe in the church - and maybe that's enough.

I've been struggling with this as well and discovered, quite by chance, that adult formation can take place in the context of the liturgy. It turns out that by paying close attention to scripture in my sermons, I have, over the course of three years, been training congregants in how to read and interpret scripture. I blogged about that experience here: http://gracerector.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/preaching-scripture-teaching-scripture-and-the-episcopal-church/

I think LeeAnne speaks here for many contemporary parish clergy - certainly for me - I know and feel exactly what she is talking about. I love the people of my congregation (St. Paul's Parish, Medina, OH) but I often feel a failure (especially in the education/formation area) just as LeeAnne says. (LeeAnne and I were at seminary together. We were practically next-door neighbors in the dorm at CDSP.)

I'm back with another comment ...

A colleague, seeing LeeAnne's video, asked, "Why can't the Church convince the Church that faith is important enough to think about?"

My initial reaction to this question was, "Well, yes, that's the question." And then thinking about it I realized that it isn't the question, really. The question is how do we present a Faith that is important enough to think about to and within a culture which seems to have come to a point where it believes that *nothing* is important enough to think about. Politics is all about feeling and emotion now (facts are ignored); entertainment is all excitement and fast-action (intelligent, slow-paced movies, for example, that require thoughtful engagement are a thing of the past); popular religion is soothing pablum (Joel Osteen's feel-good messages get much more traction than anything preached in an Episcopal congregation). In other words, thinking about *anything* is out of style. Where, in a culture like that, is there a place for a Faith whose Founder said (among many other things), "Love God will all your mind"?

Who says adult formation has to be done as a class? Who says a class has to be lecture or discussion?

Try asking people, "Where is your faith being challenged right now?" or "Where is your faith challenging what you see around you in daily life?" And then build conversations, groups, programs around the answers, weaving the information that would normally be covered in classes seamlessly and invisibly into all those encounters.

Do that for a couple of years, then see what faith formation has occurred. Ask, "Where were you awed to unexpectedly encounter God?" "What changed in your life, your faith, your relationship to God during this time?"

She is surely "on to something". I heard her as more sad and depressed than angry. I have been in her shoes.

What Andee said...from a slightly different angle.

Didactics are only a tiny piece of a clinical medical education. Most of the education of 3rd and 4th year med students/interns/residents occurs around short discussions--on rounds, after rounds, in conferences where the patients are presented. Seems to me the logical place for formation is right after outreach activities, or at a time shortly thereafter. What would happen, after an outreach activity, if the announcement were made, "Everyone that helped at the XYZ last week, please stick around at the tail end of coffee hour and let's have a brief post-mortem of that." Seems to me the EfM method of appreciative inquiry in theological reflections would work well here. It would be organic--arising from the experiences and feelings associated with the project and the people who are being helped. Questions like, "how was your faith challenged by this activity?" and "where did you see God in this activity?" might be great springboards to further learning.

I don't think LeeAnn is a failure. It is an important realization that what she want for people is not what they want for themselves and she is only going to burn herself out trying to force them into the mold her professors gave her.

I had a fabulous Sunday School experience as a kid, but my attempts at trying adult education never amounted to much. I did one year of EFM-- which was awesome, but it met in the evenings with other people who were really interested.

In my experience, adults don't have much time to set aside for learning

As an example, in 2011 I decided to work on learning a new language and learning the guitar. I rapidly discovered that after work, kid-homework supervision, and standing engagements, I really only had time to learn one new thing and work on it during the week between lessons.

If the adults in a parish find the motivation to go to service activities rather than the time to attend a class, I suspect they still learn things about their faith as a result. I learn things about my faith by reading about current political issues, helping my son with his homework, and reading thoughtful fiction. My relationship with god permeates my life to such an extent that I am surprised at how much I think about god in a day.

If people do service that springs from their faith, then I believe that they are already actively involved in faith formation with a bonus of living that faith where people outside of the congregation can see it-- if that isn't spreading the good news, then I don't know what is.

I agree. I think that whatever the seminary profs may say, LeeAnne is living our her ordination vows very well: she's equipping the saints for the work of ministry, because clearly people are getting something in worship that makes them want to go out and serve the world.

Thank you, LeeAnn, for articulating what so many of us have felt. I do not see you nor do I see Saint Mary's as a failure. Your comment about things being 'too slow' is on target... as well as how we have to fight for people's time and attention. Maybe, despite it all, the priest is called to be relational, in community, holding the people of God in prayer...and then, maybe, things can percolate but in ways that our seminary professors could not ever imagine.

After thinking about this for 24 hours, and posting it on Facebook to see what others thought, this is what I've come up with:

A. In *no* way is LeeAnn a failure. For proof, look at the article in the Washington Post a few days ago, on Page 1, that said colleges and universities are having to rethink lecture-based classes. Meaning: The way in which LeeAnn was taught to teach may be a thing of the past in her parish. But having to learn a different way of doing things does not mean LeeAnn failed. It means times and people change.

B. One of my colleagues in Virginia told me that he spends the vast majority of his time going to see parishioners where they work. He doesn't just drop by to pick them up for coffee or lunch, but goes to their places of work and stays there, asking them: "Where do you see God in this place? How do you manifest God in your work?" Now, granted, this colleague is not a rector. But ... what if LeeAnn and others who face the same dilemma were to do *this* kind of teaching, which is more discussion and mutual searching that leads to more discussion and more searching?

Teaching is teaching - the venue and style are not as important as helping people to become the people God wants them to be (and not the people *we* want them to be).

C. LeeAnn is obviously doing a great deal correctly, because her people *are* coming to church on Sundays and they are then going out into the world to do what God is calling them to do. What's wrong with that? Isn't the whole point of liturgy to nourish and strengthen us to go out into the world? Isn't the whole point of Christian *Formation* to help us become the people God wants us to be? And does not God ask that we take care of each other?

LeeAnn, you are very brave for not only voicing your concerns but doing so in such a public way. Thank you for the opportunity to seek and serve and discern together.

Lauren R. Stanley
Missionary

The other pradign that's common is service and fellowship first, education whenever.

That can work well; indeed, some argue that fellowship is the secret to success for the Latter-day Saints. But the danger, one suspects, is that things devolve to works without faith, which may be every bit as problematic as faith without works.

The "works first" thing is dangerous, too, when people start to feel burned out, or when they feel ignored in their time of need. So, fellowship and sevice have their roles, but it's important that these issues don't usurp other, more important, matters.

Eric Bonetti

I don't think that LeeAnn is a failure.

I think that people contemplating Baptism for themselves or their children should make a decision informed by some sense of what they're vowing.

People would be horrified to learn that parents were being encouraged to sign over their babies to the military without the parents being informed or wanting to be informed about what the child might face on that path or how the child might best prepare for it.

And yet we set people on the way of the Cross all the time without informing them that it's more than a nice ceremony, and that what we're vowing before God to do will involve effort and sacrifice, could put us at odds with our culture, and has lifelong (eternal-life-long!) implications.

I don't question the validity of such baptisms, but I do wonder about the point if nobody involved treats that Baptism as a sacramental affirmation of intentionally vowed discipleship.

If I were in such a congregation, I'd want a chance before at least one prayer in the liturgy each Sunday for us to ask one another, "what does this mean to you?" and "what might be different about your life if you got what you were praying for here?"

I'd happily skip the sermon to get a sense that what was going on in the rest of the service means something, and if so, what.

I don't think God cares whether we have church programs and when. So cancel the programs that don't accomplish anything. Jesus calls disciples, not churchgoers.

But I hope we don't stop informing people of what Christian discipleship is. It's not a problem if they then say, "wow, that's pretty demanding; I think I don't want to do this," and then they go off to the local soup kitchen or beach clean-up day. I think that's better than inviting people to swear falsely week after week.

Sure, the pledging income might drop if people who weren't all that interested in Jesus went elsewhere. We might not be able to afford a building then. But God doesn't dwell in houses made by human hands; God dwells in communities of people, and shows up wherever disciples gather in Jesus' name.

Blessings,

Sarah Dylan Breuer

Hmmmm I come to this article as an adult educator and trainer...

From my own experience as a recipient and facilitator of adult formation I feel there are several issues that need attention at parish, diocesan and national levels as regards adult formation.

First, we need to use our laity more and our clergy less as instructors and facilitators. Nothing helps adult motivation to learn more than to be called to teach.

Second, clergy should be resources, not the sole source of knowledge and wisdom in formation. Teach your best and brightest to give over the Gospel and coach them at various times and places.

Third, recognize that folks learn in a variety of ways and at a variety of rates. One shot lectures or sermons are least likely to work...informal conversations concerning real world applications are memorable and effective.

Fourth, we forget that 80% of our knowledge is usually gained informally - a chance conversation, a book we read or a comment overheard...conversations over coffee ala the Alpha Course or a parable or even a joke can be an entry into learning.

As to Sarah's point about baptism as "...sacramental affirmation of intentionally vowed discipleship" perhaps we might want to think about adopting a Cursillo or Benedictine-type experience immediately prior to Baptism for adults and a Benedictine Community ethos for adult formation and worship as well?

Thoughts?