CCRCs and the Church: A Personal Perspective

I was first introduced to the concept of a continuing care retirement community (CCRC) under the umbrella of an annual conference within The United Methodist Church in the mid 1970s. For the last thirty years, it has been both agony and joy to be a part of this form of extension ministry.

Generally speaking, the model of a CCRC originated to meet community needs. Through this type of housing, services — including independent living and personal/nursing care — are offered to people on a single campus: "one stop shopping." Principal interests include providing safe, sanitary, and secure housing to address needs — physical, psychological, spiritual, social, etc. — for an aging population.

My initial recollection of programs and people within The United Methodist Church came through the former Board of Hospitals and Homes and services provided through the General Church by way of Health and Welfare Ministries. Coupled with this were companion interests through the United Methodist Association of Health and Welfare Ministries and its evolution over the years.

The early 1970s saw unfortunate circumstances developing within the Pacific Southwest Annual Conference through a group of retirement centers known as Pacific Homes. Rampant inflation, caps on personal resources, extended life expectancy due to enhanced medical technology, and other contributing factors resulted in major litigation for which the entire United Methodist denomination paid a price. Bishop Jack M. Tuell (retired) lived through the issues that would set a marked tone for the church's association with agency ministry for years to come. In chapter 16 of his book,From Law to Grace,Bishop Tuell says, "Unfortunately, the message of the Pacific Homes crisis to the whole church was often misconstrued. The message to similar church-related institutions was not "cut off church ties"; it was "clarify church ties and convey them accurately and with integrity to the public." However, the fear factor crept into what was happening in that era, tension begat change, and the methodical separation with ministries that served aging persons within the church commenced.

For the balance of the 1970s and through the 1980s, conversations with United Methodist colleagues principally associated with CCRCs continued to reflect disassociation and fracture. These ministries addressed the needs of aging people in ways that drew widespread acclaim; but unfortunately testimonies to the quality of United Methodist programs were often overshadowed by fears of aging, financial failure, and litigation. Now, twenty to thirty years later, circumstances are even more tragic when one pauses to consider that our society is graying at a galloping rate and secular programs have been unable to earn consumer confidence that is necessary to meet the needs of America's maturing population.

Ironically, beginning with General Conference in 1988, The United Methodist Church adopted a resolution identifying concerns for older people which had a theological basis and inferred that the denomination had a duty to advocate and plan for ways to meet the needs of aging members. Yet, to this day, many will say the views that needed to be operationalized have gone unheeded, and bridges have not been reconstructed with United Methodist-related ministries where relationships could be reestablished to aid in addressing the growing needs of people who will require long-term care, both in and out of the home.

Like their predecessors, today's CCRCs are varied in scope, size, and service, but are highly professionalized and sophisticated in their business capabilities. According to the Reverend Dr. Mearle L. Griffith, President/CEO of the United Methodist Association, there are more than 250 facilities within the Older Adult Ministries (OAM) section of the Association, of which many are CCRCs that function in more than forty states. Based on a New England Centenarian Study that indicates that "centenarians are the fastest growing segment of our society … the second fastest is the age group 85+," it would seem the time is right within the United Methodist community for reestablishing connection with OAMs to rely on their licensed/certified capability and experience for building leading-edge programs to meet the needs of a growing ecumenical senior population.

Beginning on January 1, 2006, at the rate of every 7.7 seconds, another member of the Baby Boom Generation turns 60. This situation places the public at a greater risk for people living beyond their capability and being cared for at home where family networks generally do not exist. Thus, it is logical to predict greater demand will come for services outside the home. Once again, the rationale for relating to faith-based United Methodist ministries seems to make sense, since extension ministry is meant to connect the church with the world.

In a society in need of a renewed connection with Jesus Christ, local United Methodist churches with a connection to a faith-based ministry that can meet needs that cannot be satisfied within the church can offer searching people an additional reason to turn to United Methodism. Experiences afforded me over a lifetime of ministry within a connectional system say the advantages to be gained for revisiting Bishop Tuell's view of not cutting church ties and correcting the mistake could be vital for growth within our denomination, since generations, present and future, place merit in value-added concepts, such as the one suggested.

Life never stands still. Yet, for more than a quarter of a century, little has happened in building relationships with agency ministry (continuing care retirement communities), while people have continued to age. Now with dramatic changes about to take place among generational groupings, for both spiritual and pragmatic reasons, the time is right for renewing talks between historically related church programs that have faithfully continued to serve chronically ill and aged people and the church itself. If you agree with my opinions, please do two things: First, share your thoughts so that more attention can be given to direct replies from readers. Second, seek out and open dialogue with United Methodist-related Older Adult Ministries in your annual conferences and explore the opportunities that may exist for cultivating relationships. A movement of reassociation may begin through grassroots efforts. After all, a flaming fire starts with a spark. I am convinced it is time to get the fire going.

The Rev. Dr. Daniel W. Farley is President/CEO of Glen Wood Park, Inc., d/b/a, Glen Wood Park Retirement Village, 1924 Glenwood Park Rd., Princeton, WV 24740-7969. You may contact him by phone at 304-425-8128, ext. 223 or by email at [email protected].