Padre Complex

The history books tell us that the world of communications was changed with the invention of printing presses. The original method of printing was block printing, pressing sheets of paper onto individually carved wooden blocks. Block printing is believed to have originated in Asia. The oldest printed work is believed to be a Buddhist poem which was recently unearthed in Korea. In Europe, block printing was used to print Bibles. Because of the difficulties in carving every letter on every page, and one block being used per page it was extremely time consuming to print different books. Often books were condensed into pictures and a few words.

Church work was transformed by Gutenberg’s printing press. Prior to the invention of the printing press there were few Bibles and fewer people who could read. So the only way you heard the scripture as a common person was to go to Church. Even then the worship service was led in Latin – which few understood.

In our lifetime we have seen the development of the typewriter and then the computer and its use for desktop publishing. I confess I never wrote a paper using a typewriter – but I hear it was done. Even right now I am typing, correcting, cutting and pasting this article for the newsletter on my laptop in Chicago and will email it to Sheila at the church in Brazoria who will then print it in the newsletter which will go out through snail mail and email.¹

The internet has revolutionized a lot of things. People can now email each other, post pictures of grandchildren, and even make phone calls over the internet around the world for pennies. There has been a revolution of information on the web. Now kids keep their diaries online called weblogs, and teens meet friends and talk about school on social networking sites like myspace.com.

For most young adults – the internet is a first stop for research – whether it is looking for the nearest pizza place – or finding classmates from when they were in elementary school. The phone book, the library and other print versions of information are back ups for young adults. They prefer the fluid and dynamic nature of the web.

All of this is to say that FUMC, Brazoria, TX has taken the first step of reaching out to young adults by establishing a presence on the web. Our website can be found at www.brazoriafumc.org. On the website you can find the location of the church, times of the services and descriptions of the ministries of the church. We also have electronic versions of the newsletter and eventually the bulletins as they are made available. And of course if you see something lacking don’t hesitate to mention it – the site can be changed by Sheila and is easily done at no cost.

Granted Jesus didn’t have a website – but he did have a passion for people. He was willing to go to where the people were so that they could hear about the Gospel. May it be so for us here at FUMC-Brazoria.

1. This text is also this month’s column for the newsletter [back]

My wife calls it the ‘Jay Leno’ attempt.

She often feels that if I have skimped on my sermon preparation leading up to Sunday morning then I am more likely to go for the easy laugh in the sermon. We both joke that at moments when I crack a real groaner in the sermon I should follow it up by saying “I’m here till annual conference” (you know the traditional ‘thanks - you’ve been great - I’m here at the airport Ramada until Thursday’).

I would agree with her that I lean on humor to much when I am under the gun and haven’t done the hard work of sermon preparation. But I would also say that some humor, some story with a turned ending allows for the congregation to enter into the sermon and allows the anxiety of the moment to pass.

Jim Ashbrook writes in Minding the Soul¹

In addition to simple interest and empathic understanding, stories are an effective way of shifting the emotional climate from threat to curiosity and then to growth. Besides slowing down the relentless observational drive of the left hemisphere, a story keeps the person intrigued with what is coming. Stories activate the imaginative-pattern making processess of the right hemisphere and the relaxation response of the parasympathetic nervous system. They connect directly with the limbic process of our taking in new experiences and integrating that with ongoing meaning.

Some stories are paradigmatic, which means that they contain the predicament with which we struggle as human beings. They allow us to be in the story and to reflect on the story without becoming entangled in the life-story it reflects. In other words, in telling a story we are saying something about what is going on between us and the client. This emotional/meaning-making communication affects the climate of our collaboration.

Jim was originally writing about pastoral counseling and the role that storytelling has to do with settling a client into a less defensive mode. He stresses the ways in which stories allow others to participate in the story and even begin problem solving their own issues through a good narrative.

I find that jokes — especially jokes that illustrate or focus on religion to be good salves for sermons. Some preachers pray themselves into the proclamation of the word, and others try and give a version of liner notes in the bulletin that re-orient the listener to the context of the sermon. My preferred method is storytelling and humorous storytelling in particular.

Sure - not every joke or story is appropriate for worship. But there are more appropriate stories than you would expect. Occasionally if used unintentionally the joke operates as un-needed filler. But in the right moment, the right humorous story can set a congregation at ease, suppress their fight or flight reflex and allow them to experience the grace of God.

Assuming that everyone walks through the door of worship ready to accept that grace experience is to miss some of the psychological (and pastoral) implications of preaching. Not everyone is settled. Not everyone is ready to move from threat to curiosity and then on to growth. As preachers and pastors we look forward to that moment - even hope for that moment. Instead of sitting on our hands waiting for that moment to arrive - why not crack an appropriate joke and see if it shows up when invited.²

1. Ashbrook, James B. Minding the Soul: Pastoral Counseling as Remembering Fortress Press: Minneapolis, 1996 p.88 [back]
2. It would only be fair to note that I am reading Jim Ashbrook for a class on the History and Theory of Pastoral Counseling. [back]

You would agree that sending a white, suburban-raised, young postmodern to a rural, farming community as their pastor is a ‘cross-cultural’ experience for both pastor and parish?

I laugh now - but before I moved to Brazoria we were in need of getting a new car. I was driving a Ford f-150 pick up truck and knew that eventually it would not hold (safely) my wife and daughter. But when I was appointed to a rural church (Brazoria) I put on hold my interest in selling the truck. Why? Because I knew in a rural church a truck would be better credibility as a pastor than my acceptance to the Doctor of Ministry program. And I was right.

So what makes for a good rural pastor? Surely a good rural pastor is more than a guy with a used pick up truck.

In my tradition we affirm an open system — where with thoughtful reflection anyone could be sent anywhere depending upon needs of the church and gifts of the pastor. But surely all pastors are not created equal. Some are tenderhearted, some are risk takers. Some are outgoing, some are inwardly focused. We may have an open system — but we have a very specialized set of pastors.

Is it better for a rural pastor to be extroverted or introverted? Or would you think that a particular kind of pastor should seek out a particular kind of context for ministry?

The research of Eysenck and Eysenck shows through their personality scales that religiosity and personality are related. They describe extroverts as follows¹

The typical extravert is sociable, likes parties, has many friends, needs to have people to talk to, and does not like reading or studying by himself. He craves excitement, takes chances, often sticks his neck out, acts on the spur of the moment, and is generally an impulsive individual. He is fond of practical jokes, always has a ready answer, and generally likes change; he is carefree, easy-going, optimistic, and likes to “laugh and be merry.” He prefers to keep moving and doing things, tends to be aggressive and lose his temper quickly; altogether his feelings are not kept under tight control, and he is not always a reliable person.

And they describe introverts as²

The typical introvert is a quiet, retiring sort of person, introspective, fond of books rather than people; he is reserved and distant except to intimate friends. He tends to plan ahead, “looks before he leaps” and distrusts the impulse of the moment. He does not like excitement, takes matters of everyday life with proper seriousness, and likes a well-ordered mode of life. He keeps his feelings under close control, seldom behaves in an aggressive manner, and does not lose his temper easily. He is reliable, somewhat pessimistic, and places great value on ethical standards.

In their conclusion, Leslie J. Francis and Christopher J. F. Rutledge state the following³

If it is church policy to prefer the appointment of introvert clergy to rural parishes, there may be implications for the pattern of ministry promoted by such clergy in these parishes. Introvert clergy may be better equipped to nurture and to sustain a smaller number of relationships in greater depth than to spread their pastoral skills over a number of rural parishes. Introverted clergy may be more comfortable sustaining the congregation than impacting the wider local community. Introverted clergy may be more comfortable exercising a personal ministry than deploying and resourcing local ministry teams.

If it is church policy to prefer the appointment of socially conformist clergy to rural parishes, there may be implications for the pattern of ministry promoted by such clergy in their parishes. Socially confirming clergy are less likely to want to take a radical approach in their ministry. They may be more likely to be patient with tradition and to be willing to conform to established expectations. Socially conforming clergy may be more likely to sustain the traditions of rural ministry than to pioneer and to promote new ways of being the Anglican Church in the countryside.

The third conclusion to emerge from these data is that in the present study, although not in the two earlier studies reported by Francis and Lanks- hear (1998) and Francis and Littler (2001), rural clergy record lower scores on the psychoticism scale. Low scorers on the psychoticism scale are tenderminded rather than toughminded individuals. Tenderminded individuals find it less easy to take tough decisions and are more susceptible to hurt in their dealings with others.

If it is church policy to prefer the appointment of tenderminded clergy to rural parishes, there may be implications for the pattern of ministry promoted by such clergy in their parishes. Tenderminded individuals may make better pastors but poorer managers. Tenderminded individuals may experience particular difficulty in managing strong minded local opposition to change in areas like the forms of liturgy, the times of services, and the modification of church buildings.

I find all of this very interesting. My denomination promotes an ideal of an open itinerancy . My understanding of this is that when Bill Hinson retired from First United Methodist Church of Houston (one of the top ten churches in the US) that I, being a member of his annual conference, could be considered by the cabinet to fill that appointment. The cabinet is required to thoughtfully consider putting someone there based on gifts and graces - not just by salary. Of course the choice of the cabinet and the Bishop (and the PPRC committee of First) was the Rev. Dr. Steve Wende from San Antonio. Someone of great gifts and similar salary.

It is hard for me to think that I had an equal chance of going there — as well as all my other colleagues — the words of the open itinerancy are that appointments are made with the “consideration of gifts, graces of those appointed to the needs, characteristics, and opportunities of congregations and institutions, and to program and missional strategy of conferences without regard to race, ethnic origin, sex or color, consistent with the commitment of an open itinerancy. “⁴ Open itinerancy for most pastors is interpreted as a possibility of making it big. But for the Book of Discipline it is interpreted as a possibility that we will not be gender or racially exclusive.

The above research suggests that there may be another dynamic in appointment making. This would be the dynamic of ‘personality as a self-selection for ministry context’. The research also suggests some cosiderations if this dynamic exists.

Who knows what makes for a good rural pastor? But knowing that introverts might be drawn unconciously to rural churches and extroverts to non-rural placements might help the cabinets and Bishops who make appointments to better consider what a church really needs. Does the particular church need someone tenderhearted, quiet and who likes books or someone who is sociable, a risk taker, and fond of practical jokes. Though clergy might unconciously self-select a ministry context the cabinet could conciously select what a church needs - regardless of context, personality or tradition.

All of it makes me thankful that the Holy Spirit helps out in the appointment-making process.

1. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1991). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Scales. London: Hodder and Stoughton, p4 [back]
2. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1991). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Scales. London: Hodder and Stoughton, p4 [back]
3. Francis, L.J. & C.J.F. Rutledge, “Personality and Preference for Rural Ministry: Replication and Reconsideration” in Pastoral Psychology, Vol. 53, No. 1, September 2004 [back]
4. 1980 Book of Discipline, p. 252 [back]

I am reading for classes that start in a week or so. The first class is on ‘research design and methodology.’ In the midst of the dry reading on research, sample size, statistics, confounding variables, and experimenter bias, etc. I am wondering how to phrase a research question about clergy attrition and selfcare.

Susan writes:

I did some number crunching last week. None of the women in our judicatory born after 1965 (usually the dividing line for Gen-X) with more than 10 years of experience are still in ministry in a local congregation in Texas. Only one still remains in any kind of ministry in Texas (specifically campus ministry). I wrote up my number crunching as a report and presented it to a couple of people who needed to see it.

I am in the same conference as Susan. I had become sensitized to the disappearance of my colleagues. One year they are there — the next they are either gone, or on leave, or pulled up on disciplinary charges. No words, no goodbye - just gone.

Lovett Weems writes:

Are Young Elders Disappearing?
There has been a dramatic drop in the number and percentage of United Methodist elders under the age of 35 in the last twenty years. The number of elders under 35 declined from 3,219 in 1985 to 850 in 2005. Young elders as a percentage of all elders dropped from 15.05% in 1985 to only 4.69% in 2005. For example, the annual conference with the highest percentage of young elders today has 10%, still five percent below where the whole denomination was just twenty years ago. This report documents the declining number of United Methodist elders under age thirty-five over the past twenty years.

Younger Clergy Leadership Needed to Reach Emerging Generations
The leadership base of declining organizations gets smaller and smaller, and they fail to attract quality young leaders. So just at the time when the organization needs its best leaders in greatest numbers, the base of new and quality leadership tends to be smallest. The issue of enlisting younger quality clergy must be seen side by side with the quality and vitality of the church itself. The church’s overall health is the most important factor determining who comes into ordained ministry. Organizations tend to get the leadership they deserve, not the leadership they need. Any questions or concerns about the quality of leadership must be directed at the church itself – why the church in this particular era allows so many to ignore the call of God.

Now the challenge is how to phrase a research question that looks at why and how young clergy — clergy who have ten years of their lives invested in becoming an elder in the United Methodist Church — just walk away from ministry. Was it lack of support? Was it lack of comparable pay? No one gets a master’s degree, uproots their family, takes on debt, and lives in a parsonage — only to up and decide one day — it ain’t for me.

My conference is very interested in recruitment. But as the old adage goes — you can’t invite them in the front door if they are able to sneak out the back door. We can put tons of money, time and resources into recruiting the best and the brightest — but without thoughtful, theological, practical reflection on why they leave we are still left holding the bag.

The latest colleague of mine to leave ministry - did so to pursue a law degree. My assumption is that he’ll come back to the minsitry after the degree. We certainly need lawyer-ministers - in the same way that we need counselor-ministers. He didn’t say goodbye — maybe that means he isn’t gone — yet.

Our annual conference uses parliamentary procedures to govern its work. We make motions, resolutions, amendments, amendments to amendments and vote with the lifted hand.

This year’s annual conference included the usual reports of institutions, boards, agencies and committees. It also included a set of resolutions to change the structure of the conference, establish a definition of congregational excellence, and to make some political statements about war, homosexuality, clean air and universal health coverage.

Because we use ‘Robert’s Rules of Order’ the experience can be slow and painful. At one point we adopted a ‘Sexual Ethics Policy’ and before it was accepted an attempt at amending it was made. The amendment would have required the Bishop to apoint a pastoral care giver for an accused pastor in the process of being investigated for a judicial complaint. But then someone — well intentioned — suggested an amendment to the amendment making the requirement into a request. So we voted on the amendment to the amendment, and then voted on the amendment, and finally approved the policy — without either the amended amendment, nor the unamended amendment.

All this brings up a great discussion about how decisions should be made.

During the Hurricane Katrina/Rita response our ministerial alliance here in the West of the Brazos area met together to meet the need of those evacuees who were living in the few hotels in our area. The Assemblies of God pastor was the first to work with the group and had the responsibility of assessing their needs. Instead of waffling and taking a long time trying to meet extraordinary requests from each individual he asked the evacuees to send one person from their family with the needs and he would work with them to make sure they were cared for. He called this meeting with the decision makers.

I run meetings at my church with a consensus making approach. When difficult decisions come up we resist the need to vote and allow the majority to rule. I feel strongly that assuming that 51% speak for the whole church is limiting and at times downright violent. We usually define consensus in a way so that everyone can publicly support whatever decision is made. Those who are reluctant to act on the change but can see the benefit usually take the oath - or commitment to publicly support it - recognizing that they don’t feel able to actively participate.

David Venzke writes in The Lutheran:

Robert’s Rules imposes what is essentially a confrontational style of decision-making on our organizations: A motion is put forward; discussion ensues, both pro and con; amendments to the original motion can be made, discussed and voted on; and in the end a simple for/against vote is taken. The majority-those with enough votes-”wins,” and the minority “loses.”

Given that model, it’s not surprising that we debate one another so aggressively and need the equivalent of the Marquess of Queensberry rules to maintain internal order, to prevent down-and-dirty fisticuffs: No biting, no kicking, no hitting below the belt, no wrestling, no hugging, and any boxer who falls through weakness (or otherwise) must get up unassisted.

I believe as the church we have the ability to be decisionmakers. I also believe that Robert’s Rules of Order does violence to the community before we can develop our communal stance or opinions. Consensus decision making is narrative preserving. Consensus decision making allows for a period of dialogue, and a process of buying in to the decision. To offer a resolution, or motion independent of a period of dialogue and absent from a process of buying in to the decision is not consensus decisionmaking.

If all politics is local — could we agree that a local body — even if it stretches some 58 counties and includes an average attendance of 109K people - should work hard to craft a statement that is indigenous to our comunity, and reflects all of our voices, instead of trying to collect 51% of votes we should be seeking to be the Body of Christ.

And sometimes that body that represents the Body needs to rest with the reality that we don’t all agree along strict categories. But we all seek to see others come to saving faith in Jesus Christ. We should first start with common ground and work out from their together.