On Leadership

Here is my presentation on leadership that I shared with teachers and leaders at the fall children and youth Bonanza.

A few months ago I attended a dinner at Conrad Grebel where Jack Suderman, the General Secretary of Mennonite Church Canada, spoke on the issue of leadership in the church. I thought that I would hear a lot about the historical and theological identity of Mennonites today. But he began instead with a short story that led to a simple question.

It happened during the time of the tour, but is not directly related to a congregational visit. My wife Irene was accompanying me at the time. We had had a long and very intense 10 days already, and had arranged for a bit of a rest on a Monday morning. We were in a place with a hot-tub, and I thought that a Monday morning would be perfect to rest and get away. After all, who would be around in a hotel on a Monday morning?

It was 10 am., and I was revelling in this wonderful, quiet time, with soft elevator music playing in the background, in a hot-tub, allowing my weary body to relax, and my stimulated mind to process what we had been experiencing.

I had been in the tub for just a few minutes, alone, perfect, just as I had imagined, and in came this 40ish man -in trunks. I noticed that his walk was a bit unsteady. He came over, said hello, and climbed into the tub across from me. I noticed that his eyes were a bit glassy, and his speech a bit slurred, and I realized that even though it was early Monday morning, he had already had sufficient drink to be affected, but not enough to be incoherent.

He told me his name, asked mine and where I was from. Then he talked about himself: where he was from, and about his business. . . . I will confess that I was not feeling very missional that morning, and was not really interested in engaging him in conversation, especially given the state he was in. I really had looked forward to being alone. He went on and on about his restaurant. At some point he noticed my silence. He stopped talking and looked at me as squarely as he was able, and asked the dreaded question, the question that I kind of knew was coming sooner or later, but which I did not really want to answer. He looked at me and asked: “And so, what do you do?” How do I explain quickly what I do, especially given that I was not too interested in talking about it? So I said: “I work in administration.”

He looked at me again, and after a while he said: “Oh…. But I know enough about administration that you have to be administering something, so what do you administer?”

And so Jack concludes the story and opens up the issue of leadership by saying,
“We know that we’re into leader development, but leaders must be leading toward “something.” So what are we leading toward? We know we need leaders, but leaders for what?

In his tour across Canada Jack saw no lack of leadership in the churches. There were plenty of people with energy, gifts and enthusiasm. What he thought was lacking was a vision of what it was to be a leader in the church.

Jack said,
A proverb we often heard in Colombia was that if you don’t know where you’re coming from and you don’t know where you’re going, then any bus will do. My suggestion this evening is that in order to give leadership to the complexities of being a church, within the complexities . . . in our world, not any bus will do. The identity and the vocation for this people-hood of God called the church will need to be clear and there will need to be passionate commitment to that vocation.

Jack continues,
One of the biggest challenges we face is shaping leaders who deeply trust that the [the church’s calling] of people-hood is foundational in God’s hopes for the reconciliation of the world.

Do you believe that your time with the children is world changing? If it is life changing then it is world changing. If we are just trying to kill an hour before lunch there are much easier ways of doing that.

For those serious about the task of leadership Jack says that,
Ultimately the shaping of leadership for our church will need to address the clarity of identity, i.e. who we are as a people of God, and the imagination for our calling, i.e., what do we lead for.

Who are we as a people of God and what is the imagination that shapes our leadership?

I want us to take a moment here and use our imagination to reflect on our identity. Think back, if possible, to your experience in church or with other’s who influenced you at the age that you are now working with. If you are working with pre-schoolers you may need to skip ahead a few years. But be specific. As thoughts or images come up feel free to use the paper in front of you to record them. Close your eyes and let your mind wander.

What grade were you in then? Who were your teachers, at school or Sunday School? What did your classroom look like? What did the church look like then? Even if it is the same church, did it appear different then? Is there anything that happened at that time that is coming to mind? Something a teacher, adult or a classmate said. Take time to describe it.

Was there a picture you drew that sticks out, draw it again now. Or was there something you wrote? Was there a song that you sang or a Bible story or character that stands out?

What are the feelings that come up as you are thinking back? Are you feeling relaxed and safe are you feeling some anxiety?

Finally, who was God then? What was your understanding and image of God?

Jack offers this image of imagination and identity for leadership,

In order to be a strong church, we need to work harder to make sure that leadership gifts are shaped by an imagination that trusts that the Reign of God is already among us. Leaders who trust that Jesus is Lord of this kingdom. Leaders who trust that the preferred strategy of God to redeem and reconcile creation to its intended design is [through] a people-hood, a living sign of the Kingdom.

So what does this mean for us?

I will tell you first what I think it does not mean.

It does not mean having increased anxiety over high expectations on yourself or on those in your class. Anxiety tends to arise from the expectations that we or the church imposes on us. Trusting in God’s reign means trusting that God is at work even and sometimes especially when things do not go as planned. The imagination we want to live in and pass on to our children is to trust in God’s presence in our lives and how to respond appropriately.

Positively, having a strong sense of identity and imagination as leaders can mean a number of things.

1. Having a sense of identity and imagination means having the freedom to follow your curriculum closely and carefully if that helps achieve your goals. But it can also mean taking the theme for your time and adapting your curriculum to something you are more convicted or passionate about. And at times it may be appropriate to do something entirely different during your time together.

I am really bad at following curriculum carefully and so I tend to find out what the theme is and connect the things from the curriculum that I feel comfortable using with things from my own interests or experience.

2. Having a strong sense of identity and imagination calls us to continue to reflect on our own spiritual formation past and present recognizing that it is a lifelong process. We were intensely spiritual as children picking up on both the content and atmosphere of our experiences. I find it interesting that many of the young children had a hard time going into the back classroom because it was scary. Their environment and interactions affect them deeply.

So like we did this evening spend time remembering your own high and lows when you were the age of those you are working with. What are some of the basic issues that you were dealing with at that time? What were some of your joys? What were some of your fears and concerns?

We need to listen carefully to things that are said in our times together. All these things and more that we remember from our childhood are going through their minds as well.

At times it might be helpful to ask what it is you have lost and what have gained in your spiritual walk since that time? What do you wish you knew then? What do you hope to relearn from spending time with them?

How were you being led then, where are you being led now?

Where do you hope to lead?

Do you have a sense of your own unique calling and how you express and nurture your faith? Is there a way that Jan or I or anyone else in the church can help encourage your own spiritual growth?

It is interesting that Jack Suderman keyed in on the terms identity and imagination as central to healthy leadership. I see these two things as also key for children and youth. Our childhood is formed in almost unbounded imagination as “real life” is quickly and easily transformed into strange and fantastic situations. Then as we reach junior high through into high school we begin to distance ourselves from our parents and explore our own unique sense of identity. This is period when it is easy to identify fully with a particular person or group of people. And so through these years we introduce God’s story and how it speaks to us in our joys and in our fears and in our choices and in our relationships. What it looks to live in a spirit of faith, hope and love.

So where are we leading?

I Can See Clearly Now

I have had a prescription for almost a year now and finally got a pair of frames (I hated wearing contacts). I mostly need them for driving and being outside but if you see them on me from the pulpit don't think they are some sort of illustration, they must just help me see that little clock at the back of the sanctuary and get you guys out of there by 11!

Back in the Saddle

Well I am back in the office again and looking forward to all the upcoming fall ministries and opportunities. I am hoping to put up some of the longer term events on the horizon. Well be sure not to miss the Pie and Ice Cream Social and Auction on September 9th (6:30-8ish) so that we can hear all the summer stories. Bring your best pie and biggest appetite!
- David

The Anglican Church of Canada

For those of you who had some passing interest in the General Synod held in Winnipeg for the Anglican Church of Canada I recently came across an account that simplified and clarified what happened regarding the issue of blessing same-sex union. Jack Suderman our General Secretary attended as an ecumenical presence and gleaned this from his account (for his full account read here).

Their Synod is comprised of delegates of three “houses”: the House of the Laity (137 were present), the House of the Clergy (116 were present), and the House of Bishops (40 were present). Any motion/resolution must pass in all three Houses in order to be accepted. Defeat in any House means that a motion is defeated.

One of the more critical procedural issues was fixing the percentage of votes required for passing the resolutions. The original resolutions suggested 60%. There were some who attempted to move this to 67% over two consecutive Synods. That motion failed. Others then moved to change it to 50% plus one. That motion passed. As it turned out, none of the key resolutions gained 60% in all three Houses.

The issue at hand was clearly defined. They were attempting firstly to resolve whether the church has the authority to bless same-sex unions, and secondly where the authority to decide would lie. They dealt with these questions by addressing three key resolutions:
1. Whether the blessing of same-sex union was a doctrinal or simply a pastoral issue. The Theological Commission of the Primate that had studied the matter proposed that it is a doctrinal issue, but that it is not a “core” doctrine of the Anglican Church of Canada. The first resolution asked delegates to agree to this understanding.
2. Whether the blessing of same-sex unions, as a doctrine, is in conflict with (or consistent with) the core doctrine of the Church. The Theological Commission recommended that it was “consistent with” the core doctrine of the Church. This was amended by delegate process to read that it is “not in conflict with” the core doctrine. The second resolution asked delegates to agree to this understanding.
3. The authority to decide whether or not to bless same-sex unions would lie at the level of the diocese. The resolution was seen to be “permissive and not prescriptive,” i.e., that each diocese be given the authority to decide whether the blessing would be permitted or not. The third resolution asked delegates to approve this “local authority – permissive but not prescriptive – option.”

The first resolution passed in all three Houses.
The second resolution also passed in all three Houses (although it was a very narrow margin in the House of Bishops - 21 in favour and 19 opposed).
The third resolution passed by in the Houses of the Laity and Clergy, but was defeated by a narrow margin in the House of Bishops (19 in favour and 21 opposed).

There was confusion after this synod and I finally understand why. The church was not ready to put into practice what it affirmed doctrinally (i.e. that the issue was "not in conflict with the core doctrine" of the Anglican church) or perhaps that it was not as affirming as it appeared.

Anyway, for any of you who may care to know.