The Enemy Is Us

This morning (4-5-2020) a CBS Sunday Morning commentator said “I look forward to us being nicer to one another like after 9/11. People opened doors for one another.”  Now, transcending national origin or religion my next-door neighbor might be the enemy as an unknowingly transmitting a deadly agent called COVID-19.

Quoted in an April 3rd article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf said, during a news conference, “Please assume everyone has the virus, including yourself. This next month will be difficult.”  https://www.post-gazette.com/business/healthcare-business/2020/04/03/Brookville-Glove-Manufacturing-protective-face-masks-orders-COVID-19-Jefferson/stories/202004020145?fbclid=IwAR3Rbr17xn8UknStiM8Gqmm-iASSPvkiRf0GyfVeiHTe71slzJDJf6ZBaAo

Rather than assuming everyone to be a friend everyone could be the one who infects us, or we them, with COVID-19. How can such a warning encourage us to being nicer to one another? In relation to 911 we rallied against an external enemy. With COVID-19 the enemy could be anyone: a stranger, a friend, a family member, a random cougher or sneezer. Why would one be willing to open a door for another when the last person who touched the door handle was a carrier?

Now, we are told that even in a conversation the virus molecules can be expelled into the air between people. We were told that the six-foot distancing of physical separation was sufficient. Now we are told that breathing can propel the molecules into the air. (https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/you-may-be-able-spread-coronavirus-just-breathing-new-report-finds#) This is one factor encouraging wearing masks when we are in public spaces.

Social distancing and wearing masks when we are out and about might make us more fearful of one another, just as concealed carry makes us wearier of the stranger on the street. At least, the eyes are still visible even if behind a clear shield. One can learn a lot by watching the eyes of another.

Even when not seeing the whole expressions on one’s face we can get some indication of another’s emotions just by watching their eyes and forehead. It is called reading the micro expressions.(https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/to-read-someones-mind-look-into-their-eyes/) If one is wearing a mask and very dark sunglasses it is much more difficult to read their emotions. In interpersonal contacts “smiling eyes” can mean the person is glad to see us, or merely giving a pleasant greeting.

Smiling eyes cannot tell us if the person is an asymptomatic carrier of not. Governor Wolf’s statement, even in the presence of smiling eyes, might make us even more cautious about one another as possible carriers of a virus which can sicken and even kill us. As Walt Kelly’s Pogo declared, “We have met the enemy and he is us."

Commerce and Church

In the last sixty years, the trend in commerce and the trend of the church in the United States can be tracked on a similar path. From sustainable stores in every community to Amazon. From viable congregations of multiple denominations in every town to thousands of congregations closing annually. In the words of the American troubadour, Bob Dylan, “The times they are a changin'.”

We can trace the changes in our past. It is difficult to predict the changes yet to come. Once thriving business centers in small towns now stand desolate. Even though some still have a post office most do not have a grocery store. Dollar General stores sprout up to fill a need in rural areas. They are mini-WalMarts offering everything from milk to tools. Those who once owned and operated the businesses on Main Street blame the ubiquitous presence of the real WalMarts for killing off their stores.

Larger towns saw the development of malls with national brand “anchor stores.” Malls were once bustling arenas for shopping and cross-cultural engagement. For decades stores like Sears, Macy’s, and J.C. Penney were stable brands. Over the last few years, these behemoths have disappeared from the malls and have gone the way of the mom and pop stores of previous eras. Now, the malls are struggling to survive. What do they do with these massive empty shells? Are they to be turned into casinos and indoor playgrounds? Can they be turned into multi-resident facilities?

Of course, the malls and the once major brand stores blame the rise of Amazon for their demise. One can stay home wearing their PJs and order about anything one can imagine and have it delivered within two days by UPS, Fed-Ex or the USPS. What will be the next innovation in “shopping” which will be the stressor which jeopardizes the future of Amazon?

The above three paragraphs are illustrative of the decline of the situation the Church in Europe and the United States in the last sixty years. Once flourishing congregations in towns, country and cities are mere shadows of their former being. Depending on whose statistics one reads, between 5,000 and 10,000 congregations close annually. Congregations, mid-councils, and denominations search for reasons, methods for “turn-around,” and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars maintaining facilities hoping to one day get butts in the pews and bucks in the offering plates which were once there.

The “church of what’s happening now” down the street appears to be bursting at the seems of their metal buildings with a non-descript front door. Worship is criticized as being more entertainment than with which traditionalists are comfortable. Preachers are accused of delivering sermons which are pablum and re-enforcing of what attendees already believe.

Some “non-traditional” congregations have grown into “mega-congregations” which seat hundreds in theatre style worship areas. Multi-campus congregations gather under the name of the spawning congregation with local worship leaders and sermons live-streamed from the “mothership.” Will these congregations eventually go the way of the once vibrant malls?

We can count on one truth, the future of commerce and church
will be different than it is today.

Language and Culture

(CreoFire.com)

What holds a culture together? What are the elements of cultural cohesion? No doubt there are many items which could be suggested such as language, rituals, shared values, and community/organizational structure. 

  

When a language dies or is overtaken by another language, the culture changes or dies. Consider what happened with many First Nation cultures as they were forbidden to speak their mother tongues. Tribal elders remember a time when Indian culture was nearly lost because speaking the language, conducting the dances and putting on the ceremonies was forbidden by authorities. (https://www.heraldandnews.com/special_reports/culture-and-traditions-the-glue-that-holds-our-society-together/article_5c3a041c-5b56-11e1-9530-0019bb2963f4.html) Mandatory American boarding schools forbade native languages to be spoken. Children, alienated from their families, began to lose their languages and their cultures during their stay at these institutions. Unable to perform ceremonies and traditions in native tongues, a slow loss of tradition and identity became inevitable. (https://www.nps.gov/articles/negotiating-identity.htm) 

Language is important, critical, for cultural cohesion and transmission. Across the world, languages are being lost at an alarming rate. Linguists estimate roughly half of the world's 6,000 languages will vanish within 100 years. (http://news.psu.edu/story/141259/2008/02/11/research/probing-question-what-lost-when-language-dies) When a language dies or is overtaken by an imposed other language a worldview is lost. As Connor P. Williams states, ...(L)osing a language means losing knowledge of the world that is at once subtle and comprehensive, unique, and intuitive. It means losing pieces of information, certainly, but it also means reducing the number of perspectives we have for viewing the world. Or, to put it best, it means losing worldviews. Think of a language as a shortcut that obscures some things about human experience and elevates others. (https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/edcentral/multilingualismmatters/) 

Even within subgroups within societies identifying languages are dying. Take the Presbyterian Church as an example. What one calls something carries with it a theological understanding as well as a functional meaning. In the last couple of decades, Presbyterians have not been able to agree on what to call those who function as "pastor." At one time, there were several names in the Book of Order, based on various functions. After some time, the official name for the functional role became "Minister of Word and Sacrament." When the Book of Order was rewritten, the term "teaching elder" was introduced to indicate an equality yet functional difference with "ruling elders." Almost immediately a rebellion arose. Two years ago, the denomination reverted to Minister of Word and Sacrament as the official term. One of the reasons claimed for the reversion was that our members and our ecumenical partners did not know what a "teaching elder" is. 

One of the things I have noticed in my nearly forty-eight years of ordained service in the Presbyterian Church (USA) and its predecessors is we have lost much of what once was our common language. This has seemed true since the 1983 coming together of the former PCUS and UPCUSA denominations. At one-point sessions, presbyteries, synods and the General Assembly were known as "judicatories" which were then called "governing bodies" and now, with the adoption of the rewritten Book of Order, they are referred to as "councils." No longer do we have a common language to describe the various functional areas. For instance, ministerial relations became committees/commissions on ministry, and now each presbytery can choose its own name for the group carrying out these functions. The list of changed and changing terms goes on and on. 

The result of all the changing nomenclature is a loss of a common language supporting a particular ecclesiological culture and a particular theological understanding. Some would applaud the freedom to restructure and give their own names to various functions. On the other hand, it is far more confusing and difficult to identify who is doing what across the denomination. How can we who are elder elders pass on the culture of the denomination if the language is constantly changing? What has been lost, and what has been gained?  

BIRD FEEDER BULLIES

It is a simple pleasure. It is relatively inexpensive. I can do it in the warm comfort of our house while sitting in the chair at my desk. Usually, I see the normal suspects but once in a while, a stranger shows up to keep things interesting. I have been watching the birds coming and going from the feeder I have hanging in the maple tree. Periodically, I have to put on my coat and refill the feeder. Without pushing the metaphor too far, I am a provident agent in this economy of nature. I think I have seen some commonalities between us and our feathered friends. 

I see what I will categorize as four different types of birds. The first category I will call the poor. In this group, I will include the doves which are unable to land on the feeder. Instead, they glean the seeds which have been dropped into the stones beneath the feeder. Usually, there will be two to five doves walking humbly with their heads down hoping to find a morsel here or there. They spook easily and fly away quickly at any perception of threat. 

The second group I will call the working poor. They are the sparrow, finch, titmouse, and others who fly to the feeder and then to a limb to eat the small seed they were able to quickly grab. In less than a minute they fly back to the feeder get another of the small seeds and return to a limb to crack open the seed so they can consume the miniscule nourishment. If they make one trip to the feeder they make 15 or 20 forays. They too are skittish and flash away at any sign of threat. 

The third category I will call the middle class. The primary birds in this group are the cardinals. They are bigger than the working poor and their plumage is generally finer. The cardinals feast on the large black sunflower seeds. They still have to work to hold on to the feeder. They don't fly as far away from the feeder as the working poor. They move to a nearby limb, easily crack open the casing which contained a substantially larger meat for their meal. 

The fourth classification is the bullies. They are the Blue Jays. Usually, a flock of five or six arrive in close proximity. All the other birds are easily intimidated by the larger more aggressive Jays. The gathered Jays chase off everybody else and take turns coming to the feeder. One leaves and another arrives. They are like fighter planes strafing the feeder. Their beaks are larger than all the others and they are not afraid of using it to drive away all the others. They never seem to get their fill. They are gluttonous and belligerent. They have no concern for the poor, the working poor, or the middle class. The only thing is that once in a while they will spill some seeds from the tray for the poor doves to seek out in the crevices between the stones. 

There is a fifth category but they are rarely seen. That would be the occasional hawk looking for a quick capture from among all the others. When the hawk shows up, even the Jays take flight. They are massive compared to all the others. Their crooked beak is perfect for ripping their prey to shreds. The seeds in the feeder are not their concern. They are the super-powers in our back year. All they have to do is screech from a nearby top of a tree, or more aggressively perch on the fence 10 yards from the feeder and all other flee in fear. 

Am I projecting what is see in our local and national politics upon the birds? It is possible. Like many others watching what is going on in our state and national capitols, it is hard not to see a similarity. Since the hawks rarely show up, I see a lot of the bullies, the Jays, in nature and in our political environment. The Jays are only out for themselves. If they could construct an economic structure I am sure it would involve a "trickle down" aspect and would claim the whole feeder as their own. 

LEVEL UP

(eLearningMind.com)

A familiar saying is, "You cannot see the forest for the trees." That is one way of saying one is too close to a problem to be able to see a possible solution, or a different means of operating. Organizational theorists encourage top level leaders to maintain a 30,000-foot perspective rather than being lost in the weeds. Maintaining a 30,000-foot perspective is difficult for pastors and other church leaders. In fact, it is difficult for leaders of any organization. I believe one of the reasons Jesus periodically withdrew from others was to regain a higher perspective on his ministry.

The immediate past president of the board of the International Coach Federation (Leda Turai Petrauskiene, MCC) points out the difference between being a local leader and a leader of an international organization. 

For many years, I served on a chapter board. Based on my personal experience and my conversations with chapter boards and ICF Members, I observed that from the local point of view, the perspective is always more homogeneous. From the boardroom, the picture tends to look more complex, because we have to take into account many factors, such as the different size and the various length of existence of chapters; different legal, economic and political factors; language issues; etc. Juggling with these numerous factors, things can never be perfect, and it is not easy to find solutions, which feel equally fair for everyone, which satisfy equally everyone’s needs and which are at the same time objective, defendable and of rigorous professional standards. Therefore, the importance of listening to each other and taking multiple perspectives in order to see the picture in its fullest cannot be overemphasized. 

(http://coachfederation.org/blog/index.php/9425/?inf_contact_key=94017387f45ca83a244b1095911ff28088fb17d01e49d6ea8d3bedeb36e5fa2e)

If we spend our whole life in one community or congregation our perspective on "normal" becomes limited to that particular order of things. Regardless of where I have lived, I have known people who had never gone to the closest big city, nor worshipped in another congregation. Life looks so very simple from inside the cocoon of the local community or congregation. If required to step away from that which is most familiar the world can feel chaotic, complex and disorienting. It is difficult to function in the new environment.

I had such an experience in my younger years. From first grade through high school I went to the same school, and for a while, the whole school was housed in one multilevel building. My graduation class had 82 members. My first experience of higher education was a freshman year at Ohio State University with 15,000 members of that freshman class. I had been a fairly large fish in the small pond of my high school but was as small as a newly born guppy in the Ohio State University environment. I was totally overwhelmed and at the end of the year was invited not to return for my sophomore year.

Such is the experience of many people from smaller membership congregations who are chosen to serve in the more inclusive councils of the church. There are more people, more complex issues, even issues which were never dealt with or mentioned in their home congregation. Frequently they become disoriented and overwhelmed. A colleague wonders if we are asking folks to function at a higher level of Maslow's hierarchy than they are equipped to function. Another colleague speaks in game theory language of assisting people to "level up."

There is a way to help people make the transition, to level up, to gain a larger perspective. It is not forcing them to climb and dive off the 10-meter diving  board. The view can be overwhelming from that height if one has never been there before. Neither is it to insist they stand at the poolside and attempt to describe what can only be seen from the 10-meter board. The ideal would be to increase the height and asking them to describe how they feel and what they see at each successive level.

According to the Urban Dictionary "leveling up" is defined as, When a player of a video game has earned enough experience points to acquire a new level in a skill or skills. Often is accompanied by the ability to wield new weaponry, access new places, or begin new assignments.

Early in my ministry, I served on the Council committee which dealt with pastor/ congregation conflicts and strategic planning. The staff member for that committee frequently took me with him. At first, I merely observed. On the way home, we would debrief the meeting. He was helping me articulate my observations and what lessons I was gaining from the observation. After a while, he began giving me part of the meeting to lead. Again, on the way home, we would debrief the meeting. After some time of leveling up, the staff member put me in lead for the whole meeting with him as the observer. The debriefing of the meeting happened on the way home. Finally, he would send me out with another member of the committee. The methodology was that he worked with me to "level up," and I then worked with others to "level up" them. 

Pastors and other church leaders, who are new to their position or when facing new issues, can "level up" with effective coaching. Those newly chosen to participate in the more inclusive councils would find their service less overwhelming with coaching in their first months or year of service.