What Didn't Go Wrong in Beth-el?

| No Comments | No TrackBacks



Author: Kyle Schafer
Date: March 17, 2006

What Didn't Go Wrong in Beth-el?

When one reads Dr. Ronald Stockton's Decent and in Order they may ask, "What went wrong in Beth-el?" With every problem that came about, it almost seems as if the question ought to be, "What didn't go wrong in Beth-el?" As soon as the Selection Committee was, "elated" (Stockton 26), with Hugh Mapp's résumé, the die had been cast. What is somewhat disturbing is that warning signs were there, to tell the Search Committee who Hugh Mapp really was, but after two years of searching, it almost seemed as if the Committee wanted to be done with the search process, and didn't care if they had to overlook a few details, just so they could be finished.



The blame can't lie solely in the lap of one group. Hugh Mapp was the main reason for the devastation in Beth-el. Through his ideas, style, and approach, Mapp was able to turn a utopia into a Fruitopia (Simpsons). Mapp seemed to make mistakes at every turn. So the bringing up of the Selection Committee is to bring up the point that this group could have, so to say, "nipped this problem in the bud." Although, at times, the reaction to Mapp may have gotten a little out of hand, it still does not excuse the actions of the Reverend of his misdeeds.


The problem in Beth-el could be scored (in sports terminology) as Hugh Mapp getting credit for the breakup, with assists from the Selection Committee and some of the people's reactions to some of the insensitive or unprofessional things he did. When it came to the Search Committee, the warning signs were there. Particularly, "Why had he left his first church and why did no one from that place write a letter on his behalf" (Stockton 27)? It was an egregious error not to look into his past, and find out what he had left his last church. If they would have taken this one step, they may have discovered past indiscretions and malfeasance. The Selection Committee really dropped the ball on this one. What's more is that this problem may have been exacerbated by pride, and willingness not to concede blame on oneself. For those who had thought Hugh Mapp was the man for the job, and were elated, it would seem so hard to go against their first (and most lasting) impression of him, in the face of evidence that suggests otherwise.


But the responsibility for the problems at Beth-el lies mostly on the shoulders of Hugh Mapp. It was this man's irresponsibility and lack of good judgment that ultimately led to the collapse of the congregation. This man did things that, frankly, shock and appall the readers. Among the unthinkable acts are using profanity in the pulpit, objecting to a baptism after an out-of-town grandmother had flown in, and engaging in a more than friendly hug with a teenage girl, just to name a few. Furthermore, Mapp would do things that just seemed lazy, "...[Mapp] said all weddings should follow a common format. If he did not have to attend practice sessions, this would cut down on his work load" (Stockton 36). This is one of the basic duties of a minister, and cutting down on his workload appeared to be a lazy move. All of these actions seemed, at the very least, poor decisions. And, to make things worse, Mapp emboldened the problem by surrounding himself with his supporters by placing them all on committees in the church, an act that looked similar to Franklin Roosevelt's Court Packing in the 1930s.


What happened in Beth-el can be described as the perfect storm. Everything happened so perfectly, so that things just fell apart. With Mapp holding a strong base in the church, and that base being in high leadership positions, any controversy directed toward him would create a rift in the congregation. This can, and did, create cliques in the church, and it led to its eventual decimation. A full-scale battle between the two sides had been created, and by the time the Presbytery stepped in, it was too late. Beth-el was going off the rails on a crazy train (Osbourne).


What this brings up is the question of whether or not this was avoidable. Could the problem in Beth-el be solved, while still keeping the congregation? The only place in the process where this problem could have been averted would have been by not picking Hugh in the first place. This is where the Selection Committee's hands are dirty. But, once Mapp had shown up, and tensions only began to rise, they had crossed the Rubicon, and this problem would be fatal to the church. The reason being that the Presbytery was too slow, like a bureaucracy, and could never have solved this problem fast enough. To paraphrase, "That's the way the Communion wafer crumbles."



WORKS CITED:
Osbourne, Ozzie. Crazy Train. Blizzard of Oz. Sony Music Entertainment, 1981.
Stockton, Ronald. Decent and in Order. It was in the Coursepack.
"They Saved Lisa's Brain". Simpsons, The. Gracie Films, FOX Broadcasting, 9 May 1999.

We have studied two works that look at religion from an organizational perspective. One was Decent and in Order, the study of a congregational conflict. The book was conceptualized as an analysis of institutional malfunction. There were several important variables that influenced the outcome of that conflict: polity, personalities, the tension between civil and ecclesiastical law, and various interpretations of Christian teachings. All of these somehow mixed together to produce the outcome we saw. The original working title of this book was What Went Wrong in Beth-el? Answer the question: What went wrong in Beth-el? What produced this disaster? Could it have been avoided?


No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL: http://blogs.indews.com/cgi-bin/bg/mt-tb.cgi/30

Leave a comment