Convergence of Thoughts

So, several things have got me started again.
First, the Leadership Team at my school read a fascinating (and easy-reading) book on business theory: The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, by Patrick Lencioni. Second, I heard one of the most genuinely heart-felt sermons from Lakesha at the end of her internship, and read a blog about the same day's events by our 'regular' pastor, Jan. Third, I attended a staff workshop today on the 'four patterns of thought.'

Jan blogged about exorcising demons. I have come to believe that our biggest demon at Fairlington Presbyterian Church is also the first dysfunction of a team: absence of trust. Specifically, trust that each others' intentions are good and that we can be honest and open in front of 'the team.' This demon is being fed by our approach to the first 'pattern of thought:' identity. Specifically, 'what is FPC and what is it not?'

We have two somewhat distinct groups within our church community, with widely diverging views on this question. Some of us (myself included) are trying to find the common ground. I see the value in the old ways, having been raised successfully in them (thanks, Mom and Dad). I also see the desperate need for change as I observe those around me who were not successfully raised in those ways. I think I am not alone in this - far from it. Many of us are starting to see and feel the convergence between old and new.
But there are entrenched groups on both sides, who do not yet see the value of other positions. Some seem to view all things old as automatically inferior to the 'new way.' Others seem to regard all things new as unnecessary encroachments on the traditions that have fed them for so long. It is difficult to determine at first glance whether either group is truly motivated by the Holy Spirit, or merely by their pre-established worldview. Thus, the absence of trust that so plainly manifested itself this summer.

For the uninitiated: at some point this summer, a sign on church property was permanently disfigured. By whom? Don't know (and don't want to). This was, as Lakesha put it, deeply disturbing. However, there is more to the story. The vandalism consisted of adding the word "Church" to a sign that had been printed, "Welcome to Fairlington Presbyterian." This was part of a larger pattern in which the word 'church' disappeared from signage, bulletins, and other places where we declare our identity. Now, the web-savvy among us are well aware that we had an extensive dialogue about the various meanings and uses of the word "church" this summer. Personally, I disagreed with removing all reference to our community, worship service, and facility as a "church." However, I was in on the dialogue so I understood that the motives behind it were far from sinister. But this points to the fatal flaw in the dialogue: it was held mostly online (see: "all things new are autmatically better"), so a significant number of people were excluded by default. In hindsight, this is equally disturbing.

Now, it would seem that a silly thing like whether we include the word "Church" on our signs and in our bulletins shouldn't provoke so much angst. Certainly, I agree with the comment made elsewhere: I don't want to worship words. I want to worship God. So why all the fuss? Because this word cuts to the core of some people's identity. There are faithful people in our midst who genuinely feel that their identity within the group was changed without their consent. They came 'to church' only to find that, suddenly, it wasn't a 'church' anymore. That last sentence may sound silly in print (it certainly feels silly typing it), but it's real. Keep in mind - the word church wasn't just removed in connection to the building. It was removed, period.

So how do we exorcise this demon? It is only through thoughtful and prayerful dialog that we will overcome our absence of trust. All need to be heard, honestly and openly, with none judged unfairly. Decisions need to be made and explained carefully to build more trust, little by little. This is how we must forge our new identity together, not through the hasty subtraction and addition of words. It will frustrate type-A's like myself but we will persevere. I think we will be surprised at how easily people can accept decisions with which they don't agree, if that decision is made in the best of the democratic tradition our denominational heritage has to offer.

Most of all, through this whole process we need to be less hasty to question others' motives. This particular demon lies within all of us. We have been watching the speck in our brothers' eye, without seeing the plank within our own.