Looking Again at Confirmation

August 9, 2000

Report of the Confirmation Class Review to the Co-Directors of Christian Education, St. Mark's Church, Capitol Hill

The following findings and recommendations of the Review Team were prep ared after considering the responses to the parish Confirmation Class survey. This is still a “work in progress.” Further input from parishioners is welcomed!

What the Parish Said:

How is the Confirmation Class working?

• Builds close, personal associations within community.
• Introduces people to St. Mark's functional approach to Christian Education.
• Teaches our values: being authentic, self-revelatory, honest, direct with complaints and praises, etc.
• Stimulates individual spiritual journeys.
• Stresses the value of asking questions over receiving answers ( this is a community where your answers are questioned).
• Gives insight that the disciples' story is our story
• Introduces units (the movement from the despair of Unit 4 to the anticipation of Unit 5 as a faith response, parallels with the Jesus story).
• Encourages efforts toward greater self-awareness.
• Values moving from experience to lore, engaging issue-based concerns, living in the tension, etc. so we are prepared for other functional courses.
• Builds a common language in community

What needs attention?

Methodology

• Too rigid adherence to the manual.
• Stale, repetitive launches; artificial, off-putting ways of getting into the material.
• Too psychological, not sufficiently identifying spiritual, theological elements
• Teachers insufficiently trained in group process -lack listening, planning, plenary leading skills.
• People experience secrecy, hidden agenda; not told objective of sessions.
• No evaluation or feedback on how course worked.
• Class-teacher relationship - too often autocratic, judgmental, adversarial, hierarchical, teachers ignore where class is.

Content

• Purpose of confirmation class is not well communicated - what are we up to?
• Exclusive/exclusionary “way to belong” and to become communicant at St. Mark's.
• Not enough time given to consider reflection at end of class; reflection seems disconnected to group discussion.
• Class misnamed (many St. Mark's members are already confirmed Episcopalians).
• Doesn't provide adequate preparation for confirmation into Episcopal Church.
• Tom and Ann culturally irrelevant (dated existential quandary).
• Idolatry of the process; uses insiders' jargon is off-putting to the uninitiated.

Logistics

• Class costs too much.
• Class is too long and two weekends is a hardship for families with young children.
• No provision for child care.
• Annying, misleading, and coercive recruitment practices.

Recommendations to the Christian Education Co-Directors

How Much Change?

• Can we address the perceived shortcomings without undermining the values of the class? We think so. But changing tradition is always a tricky business.
• We recommend experimenting and evaluating with new approaches in the next class.
• We would like to move from the prescriptive demand (people have to take this class to be communicants) to a descriptive statement (this course is a primary way to belong to this church).

What Changes are Needed?

Methods

1. Rewrite Teachers' Manual
   • Set forth a clear statement of the purposes of the class that can be conveyed to the class.
   • Build into the class design how/when to reveal the process to the class, such as the issue, dimensions, etc.
   • Give the teachers more explanation--the why of the design.
   • Update and vary launches. Avoid overdoing stock role-plays, skits, etc.; try launches found successful in other courses, such as meditation, African Bible study, drawing, plastic arts, etc.
   • Explain how different types of launches can be used effectively depending on where the class is, what the teachers are seeking to achieve.
   • Discuss the evolution of the class teacher-relationship through the units, give hints for being alert to these shifts.
   • Counsel teachers not to use an off-putting, autocratic leadership style.
   • Invite teachers to openly invite discussion of process issues during the class.
2. Teacher training
   • Provide training for teachers in group facilitation.
   • Use teachers with prior experience in teaching functional education.
   • Teach them how to present symbolical, categorical, theological reflections, lore and Bible.
   • Select people who can connect with others, are open, self aware, compassionate, empathic, and skilled in listening.
3. Class-teacher relationship
• Teachers should offer appropriate self-revelation that adds to the class process.
• Teachers should tell the class why they are teaching this class.
• Be willing to adjust lesson plan and address what's going on with the class when process or unexpected issues arise.
4. Evaluation
   • During the course, ask the class to participate in assessing where it is.
   • Include written evaluations by both teachers and students at the end of the class; hold a “where are you now” session with the class some months after the class.
   • Find a way to assure that new learnings/ constructive criticisms are considered by the Christian Education l Leadership and incorporated in future classes, as appropriate.

Content

1. Not offering a CC of the type we now offer is not an option.
2. The present CC is not about preparation for confirmation by the Bishop, as most people commonly understand that. The name of the new course (Course I) should be changed to reflect its purposes (such as, Living Faithfully in Community; A Way to Belong; Living Values; An Introduction to Christian Education).
3. The purposes of the class should be clearly and repeatedly stated in our literature and communications to newcomers, such as:
   • Connecting people with a small group as a way of entering the church community.
   • Introducing the functional discipline upon which our community and its educational program are grounded.
   • Discovering St. Mark's as a community that values questions instead of answers.
   • Helping individuals to connect personal experience with the Christian story.
   • Encouraging examination of personal religious values and choices.
   • Moving through the Units as a reflection of life experience that points toward deeper religious understandings and the development of a personal theology.
   • Supporting individuals in pursuing their spiritual journeys.
4. Consonant with these purposes, the course should be organized around the class's movement from curiosity to anticipation, recognizing that what may emerge from the life lived together is the possibility for creating community, a sense of belonging, a desire for commitment and accountability and the ways we at St. Mark's aspire to be with one another in community. And from examining real life choices made in situations class members identify, in light of their professed values, participants may uncover their need for saviors, their identification with the stories and symbols of our tradition, and their own longing for spiritual connection and insight.
5. To assure that the course is “relevant” to the classes' concerns, the teachers should:
   • Identify one or more actual existential circumstances newcomers are caught in today (such as those the congregation identified at Shrine Mont - “atomization,” trust/betrayal, authenticity) as a focus for the class.
   • Early in the class, ask the members to come up with their concerns from which the teachers will write the issues.
   • In class discussions, get off the launch earlier and into exploring “the problem” more quickly.
   • In evening sessions, and throughout the weekend, be forthright, as appropriate to the circumstance, in explaining what is going to happen, is happening, or has happened. For the sake of continuity, at the beginning of a session, remind the class where it left off in the preceding session. 6.
   • Rewrite the Tom and Ann role-play, using this focus as the theme around which Tom and Ann are encountered by the class.
   • Continuing to put the class up against something they can't fix remains an essential part of the unit development movement.
   • Look for more effective ways to help the class (and the leaders) distinguish the role play characters from the teachers that play Tom and Ann.
6. Since the “new” course is not intended as a preparatory course for confirmation, taking that course should no longer be a requirement for an individual to become a confirmed communicant at St. Mark's. Rather, it is hoped that people will be drawn to take the course on its own merits.
7. Develop a new course (Course II), to follow the preceding course, designed to prepare members for confirmation. The value of the preceding functional course, in this regard, may be to provide a lens through which class members may examine the promises and commitments involved in becoming a confirmed communicant.
8. Consistent with the foregoing, modify the "welcome rite" through which new members, et al. are formally received into the community.

Logistics

1. Recruitment/marketing
   • Design pamphlet describing the three entry-level courses: Introduction to Life at St. Mark's, Living Faithfully in Community (or whatever name is selected for Course I), and Preparation for Confirmation (Course II).
   • Provide sign-up cards to be filled out at the Welcome Table.
   • Assure visitation or follow-up calls to card writers
   • Create a newcomers' database.
2. Class duration
   • Class I: We suggest a 10-week course (instead of 14), with only one residential weekend and one all day Saturday session.
   • Class 1-2 (Unit I); Class 3 (Unit II); Weekend Retreat (Unit II - III); Class 4 -5 (Unit III); Class 6-8 (Unit IV); Day Retreat (Unit IV - V); Class 9 (Unit V); Class 10 (Evaluation) (Unit V).
3. Cost
   • Eliminating the second residential weekend and substituting a daylong local retreat would greatly reduce the cost to participants.
   • To encourage newcomers to take the class, the Christian Education program should subsidize the class in recognition of its value to participants and St. Mark's.
4. Relationship of Class II to Class I
   • Class II should follow shortly after the completion to Class I so that there is some continuity in the experience. Although Class I would not be a prerequisite to Class II taking both should be encouraged.
   • Class II would be 3 class following the end of Class I in December.

Paul Abernathy, Bruce Calvin, Carole Blakeslee-Collin, Celia Hahn, Stephanie Nagley, and Heather Powers. Pete Eveleth and Linda Meade, Co-Chairs.

Return to Questionnaire