Looking Again at Confirmation

Any other comments, complaints, praises, or suggestions?

An issue is not an issue until it's an issue. I don't think you can practice for it. (1)

Keep up the great work. (2)

Don't expect uniform praise or warm and fuzzy reactions to confirmation class. If you got it, be suspicious. (3)

I'll be watching and waiting to see what happens. (4)

The nature of the course is that at times it will be a dud. It has to piss people off at times. Stop trying to please everyone. (5)

Some additional comments about the process: On some level the need for this review was obvious, but I still applaud Bruce and M. L. (and, I assume in this era of shared ministry, the clergy) for initiating it so quickly. . . . I think it's great that the clergy are heavily involved with the review. Note that none of you have small kids and so be sensitive to that; spend some time with the Children's Ministry Team and with Ginger about the logistics issues for young families and with the Teen Ministry Team and Ginger about the teen confirmation experience, if you that that on. Please don't let perfection be the enemy of the good. If some changes make immediate sense and others are questionable, experiment for a class or two by implementing some or all of the changes (maybe go one way with one class and the other way with the next class and announce the differences so folks can sign up for what they want.) If necessary, spin off topics (like the youth confirmation experience) to other groups. But whatever you do, move quickly. I would also make sure you establish criteria for success for the class and leave the review process in place for several years. (6)

As long as I've been coming to St. Marks, I've heard (some) people get angry at the very mention of the subject of confirmation class -- often as holdouts who've attended for many years without taking it. Before I took it, no one could/would tell me what it was about. The mystique serves to reinforce an impression of us as a self-absorbed congregation in love with our own supposed "specialness." And yet we wonder why membership is dropping off! (7)

I understand that a few people have taken the class repeatedly. I am not ready for such an effort, but I can imagine a "refresher" course. (8)

I have been worrying for sometime about the seeming decline of the adult C. Ed. program. I wonder if there is something inherently different about the psyches of current Conf. Class prospects which make the func. ed. approach less successful with them -- or is it the fact that people's lives are on a more frantic track, and they can't imaging making the commitment of time the Conf. Class requires? Or are people with kids finding it difficult to be away on two weekends? The power of the group process can be so powerful and wonderful -- the classes I've taken here have been life-changing for me, in very positive ways. (9)

As the parish grows and becomes more diverse, a class with tuition and weekends away may not be the best or only way t o build commitment and belonging. (10)

It changed my life and began a rich and meaningful chapter. Part of the reason was my being open to whatever was offered. I came to it with few pre-conceived ideas. (11)

There are a lot of newcomers who must wonder what language people are speaking when the hear people stand up and refer to Unit Five (I only found out what it is this weekend) - how are we going to welcome them when so many people are speaking a different language.

And the idea that you have to take Confirmation Class to take other classes is frankly offensive. As a parish manager, I went to a functional weekend years before I took Confirmation Class and I did just fine - I contributed - I understood what was going on - I have no doubt that others have as well.

I hope if most of what you hear is positive you will understand that the way this has been approached has already discouraged many with suggestions of change. Most of all, I hope this can be looked at objectively and carefully - not to justify the past but to open up the future. And more than anything, I hope that Confirmation Class/func. ed. is no longer viewed as the only route to being a contributing member of our parish community. (13)

Other comments My impression is that this class is put together by well-intentioned, caring, dedicated people. I think that it was done a great deal of good in many lives, and I think we need to find a way for it to keep on doing good. I also believe that it has hurt people from its inception, and the rate of those hurt has accelerated in recent years. I am shocked that it has gone on this way for so long, and it needs to change. It will only change if there are substantive, structural changes in the process.

I am disappointed that the present committee looking at this does not include more voices who have been hurt by the process. I am also disappointed that the committee does not include, as far as I can tell, folks who have more professional expertise in the areas that the class touches on. Paul and Stephanie certainly bring a number of skills, and perhaps they are enough. And perhaps others on the committee do this kind of thing professionally, and I'm just not aware of it. But, given the kind of work that needs to be done on the class, I hope that this community makes the kind of commitment needed to get the work to happen (14)

I think I've made all the suggestions and then some that anyone could possibly want to hear. Ditto complaints. I must add that I appreciate the steps that are being taken towards shining some light into Christian Ed's darker corners. One of the discouraging things about volunteer work, particularly in some place you're passionate about like your church, is the ever-present risk that you'll work your butt off, pour your heart in, and get nothing but a raft of whining and complaints for your trouble. So I do want to say that I imagine your task is a lot of work, and not much thanks, and I appreciate you all for taking it on.

Also to repeat that I had a very positive confirmation class experience whose benefits I continue to reap to this day.

In closing, I have noted that I have found myself, in talking to my new friends from the recent confirmation class, frequently saying, "Oh, that does sound horrible. But you know, I've known that man for six years and he's a really good person." Or, "God, that doesn't sound like her. We sing in the choir together, and she's really got a big heart."

So as disturbing as the recent dispatches are from confirmation class, I have the huge benefit of a bigger context and off-setting experiences to balance the thing out. When I imagine what it must be like for the newcomers, to be treated this way by people with whom they have no history or reason to trust, I shudder.

I've always thought it was a bad idea to present confirmation class as a sort of fraternity initiation rite that you can't be a REAL member without doing, no matter how long you've been here or how active you are. Now I wonder if maybe it should be recommended that you NOT take it till you've been around a while so that you don't base your entire impression of the place or the people on this fairly peculiar experience.

I hope this helps you in the important work you are doing. (15)

One suggestion for the class: a syllabus. It would go a long way toward preventing concerns about manipulation. Again, one has to give up the notion of revelation, but we would gain much in terms of trust.

Also, our class began to rely on closing prayers (thanks in large part to Stephen Edmonson's leadership). It often soothed a raw nerve or refocused energy at the end of the evening. I hope that this is a practice that will be adopted for future classes.

Again, I hope that you will listen to the concerns of our class. We love St. Mark's and we want functional education to work. I hope that you will recognize my commitment to our community, given that this dispatch comes from the remote trenches of a Kentucky congressional campaign. My class and I will gladly listen to the concerns of everyone at St. Mark's when it comes to this very important issue, but we also intend to be heard. (16)

The problem with Confirmation Class is what comes after it. As I've said, CC sets out what life at St. Mark's is about, helps people feel included, prompts them to question, etc. But after Confirmation Class, everyone has one choice: more func. ed.! (That is changing with the Bible Study class, I know.) Fathers, through func. ed.; mothers through func. ed.; community, through func. ed.; sex through func. ed.; and so on.

And, when used like that, it can be so self-absorbed! After all, we grew up when self-revelation, therapy, touch-feely stuff wasn't new. So func. ed. is not the ONLY place to be real in that way.

I think that is what doesn't sit well with some of the folks in my age group. But it's not the old memorize the church calendar vs. spill your guts dichotomy. It's more, CC class is great to get the func. ed. ball rolling, but let's modify the approach in terms of topics, format, etc. for what comes after func ed.

So, those are my thoughts. In general, flexibility is the way to go. The "in my day we took that class and we were happy to do it" no longer works. We have to change things like requiring two weekends, money, etc. -- but those seem a more superficial than the above. (17)

I spoke to someone at Shrinemont at length about Confirmation Class who told me that, for her and her husband, the Confirmation Class they took several years before was invaluable. When I related my experience to her, it didn't sound as if we had taken the same class. The class made me very angry at the time, although I have been able to put the anger aside. However, I have not taken any other func. ed. classes because I do not care for the model. I do understand that not all func. ed. classes are like that, and I will try another one at some point. I no longer feel anger toward the process but I still don't know what I got out of it that was helpful to me in living my life spiritually and in faith, which is my focus, and the reason I come to church. I will be interested to see the evolution of Confirmation Class with a return to it' spiritual roots. (19)

The course is obviously designed for a required trust of the leaders. When this does not happen (and it did not happen during my class), the course can inflict horrible pain, or actual abuse.

The majority of our leaders really were not as well schooled as my classmates in matters of emotional and psychological reactions and interactions. Reading from the papers provided to the teachers without any ability to react to current conflicts occurring in the class (and with little understanding on how the human psyche actually reacts) provided more horror within the class.

I had a real sense that there was a specific agenda with a set of correct answers and the majority of the leaders ignored anything else that was said. We were not brought back to task gently if we strayed from this agenda; there were often harsh words and individuals were singled out without warning as they were naughty children.

This class missed such an outstanding opportunity because this gathering of students was just plain brilliant. If we'd been treated like the intelligent people we are instead of enduring punishment when no crime had been incurred, we would not be as apprehensive about our role at St. Mark's. It is seriously time to revise the curriculum and ensure the leaders have substantial training before more damage is done.

Please take all our comments seriously. I know my class mates have submitted intelligent and thoughtful comments on Confirmation Class. Please listen. (20)

Please remember: the people most adversely affected by the class are least likely to be filling out the questionnaire. We may be the exception that proves the rule: there are perhaps many more people than generally acknowledged who have been repelled by the class; they're the ones likely to check out of the church (emotionally if not physically), and hence least likely to participate.

Thanks for your consideration. (21)

Things to do differently: shorten the class by half, develop a reading list, change the name. At a minimum, make newcomers aware of its functional thrust. (22)

I am currently taking Teacher Training to learn more about Functional Education. I find the technique of "dimensioning issues" quite useful but I think we should examine other models for teaching. I also think the basic structure of the classes has gotten pretty lazy - there have got to be other ways besides the basic: We start in a large group, then we break into small groups, then we go back to the large group. I think sometimes the transcripts dictate the structure of the class. When the question "What gets in the way…" is posed to class members, I have frequently been tempted to reply "Func Ed gets in the way." Sometimes teaching teams have been such slaves to the structure that they seem to cut off discussions every time the class begins to get into deep issues.

I'd like to see the element of "hazing" removed from Confirmation Class. I say this not only because of the manipulation which my fellow class members and myself felt went on in the class, but also because of the attitudes which church members who have taken the class convey to newcomers -- "Just wait until you meet Ann and Tom" - I was actually somewhat disappointed when Ann and Tom turned out to be a simple role play. But, as a newcomer, I was definitely left with the impression that I would be "hazed" in Confirmation Class.

I'd also like us to reexamine the cost. It certainly a fair price in terms of the two weekends, but it could be prohibitive for many of the people we might want to attract to St. Mark's, particularly people of a lower socio-economic status. Perhaps we need to find less expensive alternatives, or a way of raising money for scholarships for low income people.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. (23)

I have heard it reported that (1) there will be NO confirmation class offered at St. Mark's until the current task force completes their work - which, in essence means no fall 2000 confirmation class and (2) the only people who might be considered to lead the "newly designed" confirmation class would be those on the current task force.

These may well be false rumors but even so, they are disturbing. To begin with, I do not think that the bitter complaints of the fall 1999 class should determine the future of Confirmation Class. Secondly, I do really can't subscribe to the view that Confirmation Class is sufficiently "outmoded", "evil", "broken" that it needs to be shelved until it is completely re-designed.

And finally, as much as I respect the members serving on the Task Force I bridle at the notion that this small group of people are "elect" and therefore have a lock on teaching confirmation class in the coming year or two.

I also think that part of the reason that you may not be getting as wide a response as you expected or hoped is that this survey was difficult respond to thoughtfully and in a manner in which it might be productive.

While I sincerely doubt that any of you will spend the time to read and "inwardly digest" what I have to say, I do, however, appreciate the opportunity to say it. (24)

As I re-read these thoughts I realize that I sound more negative than positive. I don't like how it reads, but I too, like Elizabeth, was told by one of the supervisors after the completing the course (during a pub lunch discussion about some of the things I have mentioned above) that "we can't change confirmation class just because your class didn't accept the process. This process has worked for several years and your class isn't going to change that." We seem to hit a wall of resistance that we are accused of. This effort that you are part of, will in large part, be evaluated by how open you all can be to some new wind, new ideas, new ways of offering this important educational event.

I want a safe portal for new members to go through. I want them to come through feeling challenged, excited, stretched theologically and spiritually. The feelings that swirl around this event currently saps too much energy and emotion that we could use to make a difference in other arenas of our church life together.

I hope you can hear this in the spirit of wanting to support real change in this process and my belief that we could offer something far more empowering.

Thanks Bruce for encouraging me to sit down and write this. We are leaving tomorrow for a three week holiday and I feel better for having taken the time to do this for you. I know this is a tough assignment. Thanks for the effort I know will go into all of this. Take care (26)

Like it or not, as long as the full name of our church remains "St. Mark's Episcopal Church, we are members of both the Episcopal Church of the United States of America, and the Greater Anglican Communion. Confirmation Class should be oriented toward teaching its students just what being a "confirmed communicant" of that greater community means. As functional education is decoupled from the Confirmation Class, elements of, if not the whole of "What Episcopalians Believe" should be incorporated. The Confirmation Class as currently constructed would stand better as an introductory course for functional education, even as a prerequisite for further Christian Education classes. It should not however, be the basis for attaining the status of "confirmed communicant." (28)

Yes. Nothing makes people, including myself, so furious as to have our problems and complaints treated as an expected part of a process. Nothing is so upsetting as the attitude that our very objections show how the things we complain about are "working" and we would see this and appreciate it if only we weren't so clueless about the process. Sometimes there's a grain of truth in this, but mostly it's bullshit. And frankly, this attitude is STANDARD. It is not the exception among the True Believers. I have felt extremely patronized as if only the gurus of func. ed. understood the processes of education, and I have not dealt well with this experience at all. And I appreciate the process and the discipline. I find myself defending it. I can only imagine the feelings of those who really feel mistreated by it. (Though not a lot of imagination is necessary. As I imagine you are finding, they are pretty articulate.)

Thank you all so much for tackling this. It occurs to me, looking over this, that I may have expressed myself harshly at points. I thought of toning it down but decided that the feelings needed to be communicated. I hope the written word does not make things worse. I am sincerely grateful to all of you and to every teacher I have had at St. Mark's. We need Confirmation Class. We also need a class that prepares for Confirmation. I have long felt that the only way for Functional Education to survive and sustain us would be for it to grow out of its dogmatism. It looks as if this may happen. Bless you all.. (29)

I've noticed that a lot of enthusiastic, new Confirmation Class alums seem to drift away later. Do we have any data on membership in St. Mark's 1-5-10 years after the class?

My sense is that a lot of people attracted to Confirmation Class are looking to fill a spiritual void left by their rejection of their childhood religion. The attraction of St. Mark's has been that it affirmed their rejection was OK. I think we've been really good at that affirmation, and we've been not so good at offering a substitute people can articulate and develop over time.. Thanks for asking! (30)

I've babbled on enough. I personally loved confirmation class, but then I also loved Jim (one of our teachers) - he called me a "wild horse" unwilling to come to the watering hole. Jim and Ann (or whatever, I forget) were no threat to me - Mary Lacey played Ann and she was so stiff she reminded me of my mother, from whom I never expected anything anyway so it seemed utterly normal and unthreatening. I remember one of our group (a nurse who will go unnamed but later became a Famous St. Marks Leader) was REALLY really upset that she couldn't comfort her. I think it was a real shock to her and it seemed that she learned a lot. We had one person who dropped out because we were so gloom and stress with no good news, but she came around too, a couple of years later. Gosh, our class had lots of later-famous people in it - the Blacks, Ed Kneedler, Winnie, Karen and Peter, Woody, and others too numerous to mention . . . Rick was one of our teachers too. We had a great time. But Adams was the core - he made sure there was a theme. (31)

By charging a fairly steep amount for the conf. class, we create unnecessary blocks for young adults and others, the very ones who need us most! If we can't offer it as our ministry to persons who are seeking, then let the rule be "pay what you wish" and budget funds to make up any shortfall. Do this without requiring individuals to request scholarship assistance. Other churches do it and still stay afloat. We could too. (33)

Some people fear having their beliefs challenged and avoid examining their lives. To them Confirmation Class is a fearsome prospect. Absent that experience, they feel they don't quite belong, and they complain a lot. (35)

I would like to see it continue but not necessarily a prerequisite, not something just anyone can teach. People allow themselves to be very vulnerable and that needs to be respected and handled properly. (36)

Don't create/leave us in despair on Saturday night (it's artificial). Discuss Episcopal church and its teachings. Modify the class (occasionally) so weekends are not away -- easier for couples with kids to attend. Make the class free for all! (37)

I think the weekends are essential. I think the length could be shortened -- homework could be given. I'd like to see a stronger spiritual component, similar to the one we had in out spirituality class. (38)

It should not be called "Confirmation Class." How about Intro. to Func. Ed.? (39)

I continue to believe in Confirmation Class (which confronts us with the issues of our lives and taking responsibility for our decisions) is a very important part of the foundation of St. Marks and helps us be who we are. (40)

Be open to new ideas (41)

The first weekend (or equivalent) need to retain the experience of being up against something that can't be fixed; the "ethos" of the class needs to retain letting people "sit with" their distress rather than letting class members or teachers try to "fix" the person's distress; teachers need to be trained in providing a reflection and summary for each class; perhaps more planning time needs to be spent on "what we hope the class will discover in this session." (42)

I don't think the Penniman materials work well in Confirmation Class. How about a search for some theological material which is more accessible? There must be some out there -- not to mention the Word itself . . . Also, get rid of the manual. Let's have the teachers struggle with what they are trying to do in the class and not get away with blindly following a recipe book. (43)

Take a look at what it is that one is confirming . Still to "gushy" and difficult to explain to a newcomer once you get past the initial questions. (44)

Also, going away is good, but it has become too expensive. In our class of 40 only 1/4 still attend St. Marks. P.S. I do love St. Marks and have enjoyed choir, arts council, bible study and worship. My sense of community has come from (rest cut off on the photocopy) (45)

There is something "cultish" about the confirmation class, and those who don't take it are definitely second class citizens. (47)

Reaffirm what I've said about 1000 times in 100 ways. I'm not alone in this. Why is no one listening? Let's talk bout the elephant in the living room! (51)

Perhaps the newcomers who resist Confirmation Class can be courted by explaining it is a training to learn the St. Mark's ways and language, just as ancient Christian adults undertook 40 days of preparation and instruction prior to baptism (see Wills biography of St. Augustine). And explain that it is not content but a thinking process and it is not something concrete you can point to at the end of 3 months, but instead the beginning of a growth process to continue the rest of our life. (52)

I found the leaders to be dedicated and prepared. However, as said above, I found it to be a leader dominated process even though the presentations generally suggested leader and participant as partners. I support continuing the Confirmation Class as a extremely important gateway to belonging. I also support rethinking the leader-participant relationship and inviting more participant input such as asking people to write reflections as homework and share in small groups in the class. (53)

I realize that Confirmation Class as it is currently structured has provided a meaningful experience for people who have taken it in the past. I also know that the people who teach the course have genuine commitment to providing the participants with a positive experience. This was certainly true of my teachers. However, the course is potentially destructive or hurtful to those who take it. Consequently, I think we need to be very careful about what we're doing. Clearly, the methodology needs to be revised and updated, and I think the group doing this needs to include individuals with the appropriate training and experience in this sort of endeavor.

I also think that we should not establish a class that functions exclusively within a "functional education" model as a prerequisite for entry into the St. Mark's community, even if the current methodology is revised and updated. Indeed, calling such a class "Confirmation Class" is a misnomer. As I mentioned before, people come to church for a variety of reasons, and they should be able to pursue their goals as full fledged member of the community whether or not they choose to undergo rigorous self-exploration in a "functional education" model. It is certainly worthwhile to offer functional courses, and to offer a rigorous prerequisite to some of those courses. It is also entirely appropriate to expect the teachers of functional courses to participate in a series of exercises, training, and experiences prior to assuming the role as educator. This should not, though, be required of people who simply want to come to church and to join in the activities they choose to pursue as members of the St. Mark's community.

I would like to see our community more actively acknowledge courses that do not use the "functional education" model. I have benefited greatly from my participation in Education for Ministry, and from the courses on the history and liturgy of the Episcopal church offered by St. Mark's. These activities have been rich and rewarding, and I believe that they prepared me well for my confirmation. I do not know if I will ever take another "functional education" course, but I may. I do expect to continue with Education for Ministry, and to take advantage of future offerings of the Christian Ed. program at St. Mark's that interest me.

In closing, I want to stress that despite my misgivings about Confirmation Class, I am delighted to be part of St. Mark's. Happily, I got through the Confirmation Class experience without giving up on the church, and I now feel welcome in this warm and interesting community. Joining St. Mark's and being confirmed in the Episcopalian tradition is one of the best things that has happened to me in a long time.

I sincerely hope that the current reevaluation of Confirmation Class results in a process that is more fulfilling and more positive than what I went through. (54)

If the class format were changed, could the class possibly include some of us "oldies?" The questions remain the same, but as life goes on we seem to need to learn its lessons over and over and realize we know what we know (and use what we know). Thought that I was pretty young then in many ways and wonder what revelations it would bring now. (55)

I hope Func Ed can continue to change with the times, while keeping its value of personal growth through the examined life. (56)

I think that we might want to hire a Harriet Gregory-like person until Paul is comfortable with the openness and vulnerability that functional education demands. (57)

The name could be changed. It is confusing to someone like me who was confirmed in the Episcopal church at age 12 or so. (59)

Don't give up 2 weekends away! Is there a weak ling between "Life at St. Mark's" class and confirmation class, or are people just not taking the life class? (61)

As the rector gains strength in this approach, he will be the one to proclaim the Confirmation Class as keystone to our Christian interpretation. (62)

We need a course to teach the flow of categories in depth -- perhaps over 2-3 years [ask me]. (63)

Thank you for doing this work. (64)

I praise the desire to close the gap between our human experiences and the spirit-filled life of Jesus. I complain about the lack of trust between the staff and participants, the secrecy of educational goals and purposes. I have submitted our Fall '97 classes Evaluation to the Christian Education Co-Chairs and the Rector with our feedback as to what suggestions we would offer. (65)

Hope this is useful. Thanks for your work. (66)

Recent experience (last 4-5 years) with Func Ed. classes have not been favorable. Regardless of topic or subject matters, they have been very similar, repetitious, and ultimately, boring. I've hardly lost interest or ability to learn, so I conclude that the program has become stale. (68)

I applaud and praise the desire to look at how we (?) grows, how we as a community can become -- I appreciate being asked how I feel and think. Thanks (69)

I want to be flexible to the needs of those much younger than I, at the same time that I believe it takes hard work and not a little pain to grow up. (70)

Please consider changing the name so we can have a proper Confirmation Class for teenagers.

The class does not need to be heroic for either students or teachers -- it should be a meaningful introduction or initiation to the functional approach and our take on the Christian Community. (71)

The concept of having people explore their faith and continue their spiritual journey via grappling with here and now, real-life is wonderful, and the most powerful aspect of functional education. Keep it!

Something to consider: It isn't really a Confirmation Class; is it "transportable" if one moves to another Episcopal church? The Confirmation Class I took as a teen (in the Episcopal church in Florida) entitled me to transfer my membership here. I didn't really have to take the Confirmation Class at St. mark's, even though I did.

Something else to consider: Our teens do not have a "Confirmation"
RITE of PASSAGE (yet)?!?

Why not have a class for them that includes the "membership" nuts and bolts info. plus the "soul food"--spiritual journey aspects? (72)

Christian Ed. should be open to the best methods for approaching issues or a mix of techniques and not be locked into Fund Ed. and it's steps. (80)

I'm sure that this has come across as quite negative. Actually, I think that the concept of an intensive class to build community is a WONDERFUL idea, and I've never been to any church that could come close to succeeding at it. We have a great thing in the Confirmation Class, it's just gone astray and needs to be updated and refocused so that it can once again be a strength and not a sacred cow that newcomers gather to complain about. (81)

Let students know what is going on, create an open atmosphere, let the class finish discussions, if it doesn't get finished in one session continue the discussion, open up access to transcripts. Penniman would advocate that the class and the people are more important than fitting the units. On the other hand, if people know about what unit they are "supposed" to be dealing with they could adjust accordingly (82)

From Don Ellison to the Confirmation Class Review Team:

I wanted to provide a response to the committee on some observations I have had about functional education and confirmation class. I do believe that it is a valuable discipline but one that is also fraught with many problems at this point in time. I lay some of them out below. I want to also add that some of what I discuss is influenced by my professional experience and training as well as 22 years of experience at St. Marks. I say this not as a form of justification, although there is something to that probably, but as a way of saying when I discuss a topic like the absorption of the psychoanalytic concept of resistance into functional education, I know something of what I am talking about. It isn't some wild-ass opinion I cooked up, although I am fully capable of doing that.

I also want to add that I took confirmation class in the Spring of 1980 and got a tremendous amount out of it. In some ways it helped to literally save my life. I was moving towards a fairly suicidal position at the time due to a failure to get anything out of three years of psychotherapy, other than more despair than I could bear. It was awful being 25 and feeling like I was 110. I found in my teachers three relative strangers willing to be honest with me. That is not something I could say about my therapist of three years. So I dumped him, found another and life changed gradually albeit along a sometimes very painful path. So while some of my comments may sound a bit harsh, I have to call it as I have seen it. Confirmation Class has meant too much to me to do otherwise.

I also want to say that although your committee is looking at Confirmation Class, it seemed that I needed to speak more broadly of functional education since that is the discipline in which it resides. I hope this does not seem too irrelevant at points. If so, just substitute the phrase "confirmation class" for "functional education."

1. What do we mean by "Functional Education?"
   
   I find that a lot of our discussions, debates and disagreements about functional education are often hard to understand, I think because we are often talking about very different aspects of functional education. In a sense "functional education" is a code word for several different things. I think the following reasonably describes some of the different elements people refer to when they use the term. This taxonomy could probably be added to or reconfigured slightly, but I think it works for the sake of this discussion.
   
   The culture of functional education. Sometimes when people talk about functional education they are referring to the culture surrounding it. For example, there is a general group of people that are more likely to take functional education classes than others. Pete Eveleth said to me a couple of years ago that he stopped taking classes for a while because he kept running into the same people and wanted to get to know others in the parish. Functional education also provided, until the early nineties, a gateway function into leadership roles at St. Marks. One would not consider running for the vestry, for example, without first paying one's dues teaching and taking functional classes. While this has abated considerably, e.g., the last two Senior Warden have never taught a functional class, there is a sense with some newcomers and mid-timers that there is still a gateway function provided by the education program at St. Marks. In other words, you have to pay your dues in at least confirmation class or you are a second class citizen.
   
   The philosophy derived from the functional discipline. The functional process implies a set of values, such as authenticity. This has had a profound impact on our corporate ethos. It could be argued that it is what comprises our corporate ethos, i.e., the lessons learned from 45 years of functional teaching. This is not what people usually refer to when they complain about functional education. In fact, it is often what opponents of functional education say they like about St. Marks, i.e., the values. However, they are not usually aware of where the values came from originally.
   
   The pedagogical aspects of functional education. By this I mean the planning tools, e.g. dimensioning, the teaching methods, e.g., large groups and small groups, cue question, as well as the process, i.e., the units. Sometimes when people object to functional education, they are referring to this. For example, you hear people say that they are tired of Saturday night being always about despair. Frankly I think this particular issue is due to the failure of most teachers to understand the true dynamics and meaning of despair, which is not depression or despondency, but instead the inability to make happen what we want to happen, usually because of the limits of our humanity. I think there are many elements of the pedagogical aspect of functional education that are botched by many teachers because of their inexperience and lack of training. I discuss this in more detail below. Needless to say, some of the criticisms around this area are quite valid and worth taking note of.
   
   The code language of functional education. People who have spent a lot of time around functional education fall into using the code language of the discipline. This is a bad practice. It is a form of group exclusion. Those who are outside the functional education sub-culture understand this, i.e., they are not a part of that group. Given that functional education serves a gateway function into the parish, this type of exclusionary behavior has the added effect of leaving people with the sense that they are second class citizens if they haven't gone through the process or have gone through it and do not embrace the discipline.
2. Functional Education as a type of experiential learning
   
   We often seem to consider functional education a completely unique discipline. While Penniman's theological foundation is unique, the teaching model is not. It is a type of experiential learning, of which there are numerous models. In Christian education - the general category not St. Marks institution - there are several models of which the Catechisis of the Good Shepherd is one example. Experiential models, religious and secular, use the concept that one must experience before learning can take place. This concept was not invented by Penniman nor the creators of functional education. It was borrowed from the general field of organizational development.
   
   Additionally, while Penniman provided a theological foundation, the early creators of functional education had to invent the teaching method. i.e., the methods used to facilitate the process, such as the idea of a launch. Elements were borrowed from other experiential models as well as general group process models. Lillie March can elucidate on this as can Janice Gregory. The use of plenary and small group breakouts, for example, is a very common practice in experiential learning as is the use of newsprint. Go into any organizational development consulting firm and you will find closets full of the stuff. I should also add that we are behind in "newsprint technology." The four-foot wide strip of paper that festooned the stage in the recreation hall at Shrinemont this year is a standard item among most trainers these days. 2 x 3 newsprint pads are becoming a thing of the past.
   
   This is all to say that there is nothing sacrosanct about the general teaching process we use. It was created, often on the fly, as needs arose and as insights were gained about where people needed to go in their spiritual journey. To accomplish this, elements were borrowed from other models. It is also important to note that in its formative years, the Christian Education program periodically brought in professional consultants to help them think through aspects of the functional education model. At some point it seems, we decided that we had all the knowledge we needed and anyone not experienced in functional education was deemed incapable of understanding the process. This has always bothered me. First, functional education is not that hard to understand when explained clearly. Also I believe that cross-fertilization among varying ideas is a strength not a weakness. So walling ourselves off from more encompassing fields such as organizational development has stunted our growth. These fields have moved forward dramatically in thirty years and therefore have a lot to offer us. The Future Search model, which was integrated into a functional framework by the Shrinemont team for this year's retreat, is an example of this. We could benefit tremendously from re-discovering some of these disciplines.
3. The failure to ensure teacher competency
   
   I am concerned about the level of training and knowledge, or lack thereof, that many teachers possess. As someone who has had extensive formal training in group process and experiential teaching methods - which functional education is subset of - it is concerning that we hand over a powerful tool like functional education to people who have little or no formal knowledge of experiential methods. There is a real potential for damage to some individuals because of teacher inexperience and also a more likely potential for simply ineffective teaching. Many of the complaints I have heard about confirmation class sound uncomfortably valid and suggest a certain degree of teacher inexperience.
   
   As an example of how things were once done, in the early 1970's the Christian Education program contracted with MATS (Mid-Atlantic Training Seminars) to design a teacher training program around providing skills development in facilitation and group process. It was then used for several years afterwards. Additionally, when I first came to St. Marks in 1978 teaching adults was a very exclusive role, reserved for those with demonstrated experience and ability. Who taught classes was a skills based decision. It seems to me that this situation devolved over the years because functional education became a gateway to leadership roles in the parish. In other words, people began to vie for teaching jobs as a form of status and as a means for moving to the next level of authority in the parish. Whatever the case, I see two major deficiencies in teacher training (1) not having professionally designed or instructed classes for teachers on group process, group dynamics and facilitation, and (2) a lack of some type of certification for people teaching.
4. The cultural mismatch of the implied authority structure in functional education and the current expectation of authority figures.
   
   Probably one of the biggest sources of problems with the program is the cultural mismatch between the authority structure of functional education, especially confirmation class, and the expectation of authority relationships in society today. Functional education teaching techniques come out of an era of top-down management, expert consultants, and other analogous forms of hierarchical authority structures. This is not how society works these days. In my job, for example, I work with staff having significantly less experience than me, sometimes by as much as 20 years, yet they expect to be a team member with equal status. We do work this way generally, and when they get in over their heads or lack the knowledge they happily defer to me. Otherwise they want to be a part of the decision-making process. When I run training sessions, the participants are explicitly viewed as partners in the process. I build in opportunities for them to give feedback and then make adjustments to the design to accommodate their emerging needs.
   
   Given this cultural/historical mismatch, there will be inevitable disconnects and conflicts within the functional education classes, especially confirmation class. One may say that the authority structure of functional education is fine and give many reasons for it but the bottom-line is this: few are buying it. It looks old-fashioned, comes off as irrelevant and arrogant, and therefore people are turned off before they can get the message. I would never structure a training seminar with the kind of authority structure inherent in functional education. I would have the kind of rebellion that was seen in the last confirmation class. This needs to be completely re-thought.
   
   A sub-element of the authority structure of functional education that also needs examining are its historical psychoanalytic and psychotherapeutic influences. While functional education has historically been defined as not therapy, it was seen in its formative years as tapping into some of the same "stuff" that psychoanalysis and other forms of depth psychology tapped into. Several of the teachers were professional psychotherapist, e.g., Betty Lawrenz, and many parishioners were actively engaged in their own psychotherapy, EST and other aspects of the human potential movement. It seemed natural at that point in time to borrow concepts from these fields. Consequently, some of the concepts from psychoanalysis and depth psychology were transferred over, especially the concept of resistance.
   
   There is an assumption in psychoanalysis that an analyst's interpretations of a patient's behavior will be resisted by the patient, because the interpretation threatens the patient's defensive structure, which is necessary for maintaining a solid sense of self, however dysfunctional the defenses may be. Breaking down the defensive structure and then re-structuring it in more productive ways, however, is a necessary step in the psychoanalytic process. As the analyst gets closer to the root of the problem, the patient resists more vigorously. Therefore, patient behaviors that thwart the psychoanalyst are frequently viewed as evidence of progress. While this is useful and important in the hands of a skilled therapist, in the hands of inexperienced practitioners it can be used to double-bind patients and preserve the practitioner's own sense of self-esteem in the face of their own professional inadequacies. When I was in training as a psychotherapist, my supervisor often made the distinction between the patient's resistance and their reaction to my incompetence. What can happen with inexperienced practitioners is that they believe themselves proven right if a patient agrees with their interpretation and they can also believe themselves proven right if the patient disagrees with the interpretation, by the fact that they are showing psychological resistance. This of course can create a sense of practitioner infallibility. Sometime the practitioner is just screwing-up.
   
   I frequently hear this kind of reasoning on the part of functional education regulars when people object to aspects of the functional process, especially during confirmation class. I was schooled in this "functional" adaptation of the concept of resistance as a confirmation class teacher and while appropriate at times, it needs a very careful application. A variant of this was clearly expressed by a participant in the Saturday evening session at Shrinemont. She said essentially, that members of the last confirmation class have been told that they have just not gotten it yet and that they will eventually. Put in psychoanalytic terms, the class was being "resistant" and once they have worked through their resistance they will see that their view is wrong and the teachers' view is right. Frankly, this kind of disregard of intelligent and perceptive people's view of their experience is very concerning. There are not many people at St. Marks with the appropriate training, experience and personal insight to make the kind of judgements on the subject of psychological resistance that are routinely made. Additionally, this kind of reasoning is ultimately destructive to the communal fabric of our Christian community where we are peers, not doctors and patients. Let us leave the ferreting out of resistance to those with the proper training and experience. I am sure there is resistance at times - what we do can be psychologically powerful. But there are other ways for teachers and students to deal with and speak of the situation.

Additional material - respondent #52

Something that continues to surprise me about recent vocal complaints about Confirmation Class is that newcomers notice right away that St Mark's is a special place/church and they want to belong and they do get to jump in and play significant roles after relatively brief time. BUT there seems to bean unwillingness to examine the source of that specialness and just to assume it's in the air that people try to speak the truth, try to be authentic, are vital and involved and willing to support and share this place with those around them. I firmly believe that the specialness at St. Mark's has its source in confirmation class. Unfortunately, it is difficult to see that connection because confirmation class begins a process or restarts a process that has gotten stalled along the way as each of us grows towards maturity. So during the class and right at its end, it is hard to say "what" was learned or "what" happened of significance. But a seed has been planted and it continues to grow and develop, in terms of each of our living more deeply into our lives.

What is an immediate tangible result of the process is to create community and to show each of us how community and connection develops out of speaking our individual truths. So even the classes that rise up in revolt against the teachers, which has happened from time to time, both in Jim Adams time and now, have had a result a bunch of strangers have become "US" a group that cares about its members and has the courage to confront authority and show "THEM' why "WE" are right. Of course, a developing maturity leads to a meta awareness that "WE" have a lot in common with "THEM" and we begin to be more compassionate and less self righteous, a life long pursuit for all of us. I would like to urge that the Confirmation Class teachers claim some part in the creation of the group identity, as a midwife of course.

What grows out of the unwillingness to acknowledge confirmation class as the source of our vitality and authenticity is a strong tendency to arrive at St. Mark's, stay a little while and then want to begin to change everything on a wholesale basis. And the changes proposed at times seem remarkably in the direction of moving away from our specialness and something that we do very well: functional education, and towards making St Mark's more like any other Episcopal or Protestant church. Since conventional Protestant Episcopal churches are widely available and many of us drive past them every time we go to St. Mark's, I find it hard to understand this desire to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. But I think it is a matter of not acknowledging our source. People walk in and like what they experience and think it just arises from the intelligent, energetic people that are there. I am a lifelong Episcopalian who had the opportunity (and burden) of growing up in a military family, so I have attended a number of churches and few if any provided the life giving authenticity and validation of my life's joys and sorrows that I have finally found at St. Mark's. If I find this church moving away from authenticity and validation of life's pain and growth, I do not think I will continue to want to drive to St. Mark's. I will find a closer church or another spiritual path. I will mourn the loss but be grateful for the growth which I have had at St. Mark's which is of inestimable value.

Having said all that and I mean it, that I will leave if this place turns into just another bunch of churchgoers doing just enough good to salve their consciences and never bothering to examine their lives or to tell the truth, I have some practical observations about how confirmation class worked when I was on a teaching team in 1994 and what I think has not been working as well recently.

1994: The church office collected names, addresses and phone numbers of all new people who filled our visitor cards in the tract rack in church and made new updated lists every 6 months or so. The rector sent out personal letters to everyone on those list inviting them to take confirmation class about a month before the class would begin. The teaching team split the list of names and numbers and personally called everyone to ask if they wanted to sign up for the class. It was hard work but we got a class of 20 or so, which was considered good for a class not including the previous rector on the team. One or two people dropped out of the class due to lack of commitment to St. Mark's or philosophical issues, but most stayed to the end and bonded wonderfully.

Recently: The church office has been understaffed and unable to provide up-to-date lists of current members let alone prospective new members. Needless to say cultivating new members is the life blood of the congregation as well as confirmation class. I don't know if letters have been sent or phone calls made, but I doubt it, as I watched my husband struggle with the canvas with out of date lists and the church office not respond to parishioners who contacted them about pledging. So I don't think it is fair to say that confirmation class no longer attracts people, because I don't think that equivalent effort has been made by the church office, the rector, or the teachers.

There is a critical mass in how many participants are needed to make a functional group work, and I would estimate it is about 10 to 12, not including the leaders. I would strongly urge that recruitment for classes be redoubled to get 10 or 12 minimum. And I would urge that the evaluation process for church office, clergy and teaching teams include whether they have made substantial efforts to support/recruit visitors for intro and confirmation class. I don't know the facts but I strongly suspect that most people who complete confirmation class pledge and pledge more compared to those who walk in the door and need a long time to get involved. I think our life as a parish depends on getting the confirmation class recruitment process back in gear in a significant way.

Having said that, there will always be some people who resist taking confirmation class for years, I would argue that says much more about them than it does about confirmation class. Some people have a fear of commitment, a fear of organized religion, a fear of revealing themselves, a fear of the unknown. Confirmation class becomes a Rorschach blot for these people to project their fears and uncertainties. And that is fine as long as they and we avoid a blame game that it is the class's fault that they have hang ups about taking the class. There are plenty and growing opportunities to be involved at St. Mark's that do not require confirmation class.

Some people also complain that confirmation class is exclusive and that we need to welcome one and all who walk in the door regardless. I read a very interesting fact in Gary Wills' new biography of St. Augustine about the role of the baptism class required of all adult converts in the era of Augustine. It was very rigorous and didn't even permit the class members to bathe for the 40 days prior to baptism at Easter!!. And remember that unbaptized were not even allowed in the main church building until their baptism which took place in a free standing baptistery structure next door. After going through that experience, one knew one had made a commitment and that it really mattered in one's life and that one really belonged now. This same book has some wonderful quotes from St. Augustine on the teaching of catechumens which are fascinating and suggest a process akin to confirmation class was going on. While confirmation class is exclusive in one sense, it is totally open to anyone who chooses to make a commitment of time, energy and money. What in life is of life saving value that does not require a commitment of time, energy and money? Things that come too easily are easily discarded and devalued in our minds.

There may also be a generational issue about confirmation class, in that many 20 somethings were raised without any religion at all, and now appear to crave "normal" and normative religion. In addition, people in their twenties are often still in the unit 1 stage of blissful optimism about the endless possibilities that seem to stretch before them, or perhaps clinging to the notion that that is the way life is supposed to be even if their own experience is in conflict with that ideal image. Perhaps one needs to have lived a little more life to see the things that befall each of us, even if we are smart, educated, have a good job, marry the right person, etc. Like we get sick, we lose a job, we get cheated, our partner lets us down or dumps us. What kind of a God and what kind of a religion can help us make sense of all this, is a question that doesn't make much sense until you have landed in some bad times. Maybe we should require a prerequisite of 10 years post college, though many would object!! I had the opportunity to substitute teach a gateway class for newer members some of whom have objected to confirmation class and I saw newly marrieds with babies all deny that it was difficult to raise a newborn or that it had changed their lives or strained their relationship. I was incredulous as my experience was it was an landmark change in my life. I saw to my dismay at least one marriage falter soon after. Anyway I saw close-up how people can deny the truth of obvious difficulty in their lives and how their lives can still fall apart despite all efforts at denial. It did not impress me as a desirable norm for a community I want to belong to. And I have to acknowledge that there was one person in my confirmation class who was in denial about her life experiences after marriage and divorce, neither of which she ever mentioned, so it happened back then too, but maybe not as much.

From respondent #84

In the early days -- the 40's and 50's -- the issues which most concerned folks were death and dying. This was the era of World War II, Korea, the Bomb, etc. In addition, the subjects of death and dying were not openly discussed but were deeply felt anxieties.

This was the ear in which Charles Penniman developed his ideas which formed the basis of Functional Education. His sensitivity to the issues of that time were clearly reflected in his categories -- in fact, in all his work.

It seems to me the focus has shifted somewhat in today's world. Of course death and dying are underlying concerns. Today, however, they are discussed openly; books and articles proliferate. There are many books on the subject even for young children. It is no longer an un-mentionable.

However, some new issues seem to me to be prevalent today: fear of terrorism and violence; loneliness and isolation; technology which moves so fast that for many it seems impossible to understand, thus engendering fear and anxiety. Yes, death is part of all this, but I believe we are all affected. And young parents are especially vulnerable to these concerns.

Therefore, I suggest that many of these issues need to be considered.

Return to Questionnaire