by Peter Davison
Q: Why does the church have so many rules? I thought the gospel was about freedom.
A: With Lent coming on, a good question. Lent is a period of discipline, not only for avoiding excess, but also for making positive changes to our lives. Discipline is, however, a dirty word for many who licence with freedom. Laws are necessary to protect the common good. Even with the best of intentions we need rules to guide, and sometimes restrain us. This is particularly true of what we call corporate governance. If society has codes of both criminal and civil law, the church has orders of worship, and laws (called canons) for regulating our life. Our Diocese is currently updating its canons to resolve some issues not covered by current rules.
The church is, however, notoriously lax about good corporate governance. Congregations can have unrealistic expectations of their clergy and lay leaders. Good job descriptions may prevent abuse of authority, but also protect people from serious overload and burnout. We also need to know how boards function in relation to volunteers and paid staff. Church Committees and boards usually have two functions: setting policy and overseeing practice. But many boards get inappropriately involved in day-to-day operations. They tend to micromanage and take on functions properly carried out by staff or designated volunteers. They forget the maxim: "No authority without responsibility, and no responsibility without authority." This leads to unhappiness all round, because people fail to respect boundaries and become embroiled in power struggles. We all know of clergy who think ordination confers dictatorial powers; or of “lay popes” and church committees who think their priest is simply their private servant; or people who think their parish or other institution exists for their personal benefit.
A useful tool for church institutions is "power mapping." Stakeholders examine both the formal and the informal power structures within their community. Canons or other documents set forth the rights and responsibilities of various people, and how they are to be exercised; but there may be undefined areas or unspoken assumptions about who does what and why. In healthy communities these will be examined periodically. In at least one diocese I know, despite all the formal structures, many big decisions were made when the bishop and a key lay person met for breakfast. As a result, people felt the formal decision-making bodies were reduced to rubber-stamping what had already been decided elsewhere.
We often forget how the power structures of the church have changed over time. Not long ago the role of the laity was largely passive. "Ministry" was seen as the exclusive preserve of the clergy; and at inductions laypeople were asked simply to "pray, pay and obey." Now, however, we see the function of the clergy as being to encourage and empower the laity to minister, not only within church structures, but also in the wider world. This changes the expectations and the prerogatives of all of us. One source of conflict within global Anglicanism is the different decision-making structures in various parts of the communion. In much of the "Global South" bishops make pronouncements without ever consulting synods or other councils. They cannot understand why North American and other bishops need to consult with their clergy and laity about important decisions.
So, yes, rules are indeed important for the greater good of all of us. But we need to remember that it's not just the letter of the law that matters, but the spirit with which we observe it. Without God’s Spirit to animate us, everything else is of little use.
