8. We can see things we are losing in the new structure. How will these changes work out?

This is such a great question because it puts right in front of us the reality of our situation. At whatever level of church we consider, this question is inescapable. Delegates have affirmed the direction, and we think it is good. Conferences around us in Mennonite Church USA are moving in the same general direction. Still, we cannot predict for sure how every detail of our best efforts will turn out. Many things will work, and some will not. We will need grace with each other. Daniel Gardner’s song catches a sentiment some of us feel sometimes:

My life is in you, Lord

My strength is in you, Lord

My hope is in you, Lord, in you, it’s in you

One could say we are in a time of letting go and finding our hope in God.

Some feel the loss of a maximal structure where any issue can find a place. Three standing commissions are going out of existence: justice, peace and service; mission; and nurture. Congregations away from the Elkhart County center have asked if the minimal structure is a way to justify larger churches spending more on themselves and forgetting the smaller ones.

Others wonder if the new structure contributes to a further fragmentation of the conference: will we lose a cohesive Mennonite identity, our sense of being Indiana-Michigan Mennonite Conference? How will we address the red/blue political divide that has permeated our churches? or the economic divide? or the multi-ethnic divide?

Fear is a natural response to the unknown. Fear can incapacitate us, binding us to inaction. Fear can help us move wisely and thoughtfully. Perhaps we can combine that wisdom with a curious adventurousness as we think about the losses and the possibilities? The redesign will not remove the challenges we face as churches. But it can be nimble and responsive to unanticipated bumps in the road. We can plan that we cannot plan for everything that will happen.

Yes, there are losses. Yes, there are unanswered questions. No, there is no perfect redesign. We celebrate what has been good in the old. We look toward possibilities. We expect new leaders will need to tweak and adjust. As a team we are inclined to lean toward the unknown in anticipation of where we will find God already engaged in the world around us.

9. What are the opportunities of the new design?

Opportunities in the new design are as numerous as our missional imaginations allow! The redesign invites us each to dream and provides the space needed to explore new relationships and activities. The new design depends on creating that “thickening web of relationships” at multiple levels between leaders and congregations.

Perhaps one of the greatest opportunities is focusing congregations and our shared life, in purposefully missional directions. Accountability can now include questions about whether congregations are nurturing a missional imagination, whether pastors are learning leadership aptitudes.

The idea in the proposal adopted last summer—that the life of the conference is in the congregations—opens the door for imagining and creating as many options as there are congregations. Decentralization of the structure is an opportunity for the churches outside Goshen/Elkhart to create a closer connection to “conference.” Learning through a network of relationships means multiple congregations will learn from successes and failures across the conference.

The idea of mission cells and affinity groups creates a way for congregations with similar passions or challenges to develop working relationships. For example, a congregation in southern Indiana might find commonality with a congregation in upper Michigan. Conference staff can be helpful in making connections, and the congregation determines its course.

Minimizing the structure and focusing on relationships can strengthen the connections that will carry a conference across the bumpy terrain lying ahead. The strength and flexibility of relationships will sustain the structure is it continues to adapt.

The present conference regional ministers are offering pastor networks to work with Missional Leader materials by Alan Roxburgh. These networks have been affirmed by the Transition Team and Executive Committee as a way of leaning into the new. The all-day workshop with Alan on June 20 will offer ways of thinking about the ever-shifting reality churches face.

10. What about Amigo Centre and Bethany Christian Schools?

A good question and one that is challenging to answer. Both institutions are owned by Indiana-Michigan Mennonite Conference. Structurally, both Amigo and Bethany participate on the Advisory Council. Both occupy unique places in the conference web of relationships and can support the vision of conference to “cultivate a missional imagination in every congregation.” In the same way we expect congregations to engage in missional experiments, these ministries will probably also experiment with different initiatives. Yet they are two different institutions—a camp and a school—different from a congregation and different from each other. Needless to say, there may be shifts in the relationships. There have been some initial conversations with the heads of those organizations to think about the relationships, and more are needed. Both can play significant roles in our future.