Dear Leaders of the Gulf Coast Synod,
You heard it at the 2011 Synod Assembly: We are entering into a long-range strategic planning process for our synod. To lead this process we have engaged Keith Magnuson, Principle Owner of Kairos Consulting: www.Kairosandassociates.com.
We are going to begin with the largest listening process this Synod has ever attempted. We would like to hear from as many congregational staff and council as possible.
Kairos will use Russell Crabtree, owner of Holy Cow Consulting (www.holycowconsulting.com). Russ is the author of The Elephant in Boardroom and The Fly in the Ointment, and a leader in innovative survey processes. We're going to engage a broad spectrum of the leadership in congregations across this synod, including every rostered leader and every council member. We've intentionally engaged with Kairos and Holy Cow to insure outside objectivity.
This is an opportunity for you and the leaders in your community to help shape the future of our work together.
Much of this work will be done online. To accomplish this we must broaden our email base. We are asking you as leaders in this synod, to forward us the list of your congregation's council members and contact information so that their voices can be heard, and so that they can view a summary of the results. The participation of your council members is vital for us to get an honest picture of the synod landscape.
Please forward your Congregation Council contact list (names, emails, phone numbers) to Lucia@gulfcoastsynod.org by July 15th. The survey will open online in late July, closing in mid-August.
All Survey participants will have the opportunity to receive a summary report of the findings.
We are dreaming about the future of the Lutheran presence in our neck of the woods. We hope you will open your doors to this dreaming together, and encourage your local leadership to participate fully, as we shape our way together!
God's Blessings,
Bishop Mike Rinehart and Synod Vice-President Evan Moilan
First, let me say that I have no issue what-so-ever in long range planning and visioning. "Without a vision, the people perish." is an often quoted translation of Proverbs 29:18, and to some extent, it is true. Congregations, institutions, businesses, etc. which have a clear vision of what they would like to accomplish tend to thrive--particularly if folks buy into the vision. Oh, there will be some who try to subvert the process of striving toward the vision, but you can't make everyone happy. That's an impossibility. Yet, if there is a goal in mind, folks are more apt to strive toward it. I am encouraged that my synod is looking to formulate a long range vision to work toward.
However, I'm not necessarily thrilled by the process. Listening.
Oh, I know it's one of those assumptions that tends to govern the way the church does business. "Listen to everyone so that everyone gets a chance to have their input. If they feel like they've been listened to, then they will not get upset when we make changes."
I call bull-cr@p!
First of all, seeing what everyone says and then formulating a vision based upon what everyone says is not leadership. It's liking your finger, finding out which direction the wind is blowing, and walking in that same direction. It's figuring out which way the crowd is moving and running to the front. Real leadership, at least in the church doesn't rely upon listening to the crowds--it relies upon listening to God. Real leadership relies upon discernment.
Now, this doesn't mean one doesn't listen to others. Several times in my career, I have been called upon to take various stances on one issue or another. Many times, I have wished I could simply sit tight and do nothing and let things play out. However, every time, I wished for this to happen, I knew beyond the shadow of a doubt bad things would happen. So, I led. I spent time in deep reflection and prayer. Based upon that time of discernment, I defined the situation. I defined my stance. I articulated my beliefs and understandings and thoughts and then painted a vision of what I believed God was calling us toward. Upon doing so, I went to trusted leaders within my congregation: current council members, the current congregation president, former congregation presidents, leaders within the women's organization, etc. I had them read over my stuff. I asked for their input to see if I was off base. Usually they took a couple of days to read, pray, and respond. Then, I "went public" so-to-speak.
Each time, I knew there would be those who would be unhappy with what I had suggested. I knew there would be those who thought I had gone too far or not far enough. But I also opened myself up to critique. Generally, upon thoughts and reflections, folks agreed with where I was trying to lead us in principle. They might not have agreed with all the details, but they understood where we were trying to get in the end. They understood God has a purpose for our congregation, and that purpose is very important. Oftentimes, they are willing to strive toward that purpose with those who believe very different things than they do--if the vision is clear.
Second, I don't believe listening to everyone eases anxiety and helps a church function better. One only need look at the happenings surrounding the ELCA's decision to ordain non-celebate homosexuals. The ELCA "listened" to folks for nearly 20 years regarding the subject. From Barbara Lundblad's purposeful release of sexuality drafts before congregation pastor's had the opportunity to look them over to vote after vote after vote at synod assemblies and national assemblies, no one really wanted to listen over the course of this matter. Those pushing the church toward the resolution never listened to the church telling them "no" time and again. They kept pushing until it passed this last year. And, when folks caused an uproar, the same folks wondered why everyone was angry because they had plenty of time to make their voices known. Hello! They did.
Similarly, I don't believe the "other side" really and truly listened to the pain and frustration experienced by those who loved God and loved Christ and wanted to serve others.
And these are just the emotional issues. Neither side wanted to wrestle with the main issue of "how do we interpret this book we call the Bible? Do we have a method of reading which we consider more authoritative?"
No. Instead, it was the proverbial Abbot and Costello "Who's On First?" routine. Plain language interpreters went up against historical/critical interpreters, and each side thought and claimed the other was idiotic, unlearned, etc., etc.
And what happened: division, anger, frustration, brokenness, churches splitting, funds draining.
Because we wanted to listen to all the voices instead of lead and discern. There was no vision being cast for the larger church, just a bunch of listening; and fighting; and name calling.
Seems like we're trying to head down that road once more. I earnestly hope not. But, I truthfully believe the Synod is entering into an exercise of a waste of time and money.
Lead...
and Listen...
to God.
No comments:
Post a Comment