Sshhh...don't tell anyone...
But I kind of miss rural America and rural ministry.
North Dakota was a good year, and I think I'm realizing more and more how much I liked it, and what I liked about it, as I have more time to reflect. While I was there I was incredibly isolated, and I definitely didn't like that part. There wasn't really anyone there that wasn't a parishioner, anyone that I would call "friend." By the time I left, I had started to bond with some of the ladies - outsiders themselves who had married into the community. But nobody just to meet for coffee and talk about my day, or say, "Hey, I found this new recipe I'm going to try tonight - want to come over and have dinner with me?"
But there were lots of good things, too. I really stretched myself, learned a lot, tried new things (failed at some, but learned how I would do them better), found things that are important and not important to me, realized lots about myself, met some incredible people, had some pretty nifty experiences (combining corn and planting beans), saw so much "God-stuff", and just generally had an all-around good time. I could maybe get used to that.
I'm thinking about this tonight because I'm on my mandated "cross-cultural experience" that I have successfully put off until now. We're in southwestern MN and western IA learning about rural culture, doing lots of cool things with cool people, and just generally having a "gay old time".*
*(And I mean that in a strictly "old version of V&E" way. :)
Showing posts with label community. Show all posts
Showing posts with label community. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
CPE, Redux
I spent the last few days at a synod leadership conference/retreat, which was, shall I say...well, I don't even have a good word to describe it.
On the one hand, it was really nice. I got to meet lots of new people, other pastors in my area, spend some quality time with my supervisor and other interns that I know from school, etc...
But the content of the conference had been billed ahead of time as being about how to connect with people and be a more effective leader in your congregation. Awesome. Or, not. It turned out to be CPE 2.0. Right down to the words and charts and graphs and the "understanding your feelings" and "developing an awareness of how you impact the system." It was so fake and so froo-froo that I found it difficult to even listen respectfully. I just got done with 11 weeks of this, I took the few bits of useful information from it, and I literally just signed off on the final evaluation this afternoon and I freaking want to be done with it. I spent lots of time texting my CPE colleagues, my pastor at home, and my mom. I made mental to-do lists. I drank coffee. I worked hard at not fidgeting, not biting my nails, not rolling my eyes, etc...
The other reason I struggled was that this was ostensibly a gathering of religious leaders, and the man presenting the material (four 75-90 minute sessions) claimed to be a Lutheran pastor. And yet, I saw very little indication that he had any more sincere, identifiably orthodox Christian theology than my CPE Supervisor. (At one point he talked about he and his wife leading pilgrimages to India and Nepal. I'm unaware of any major Christian sites in India and Nepal that would make them good locations for a pilgrimage. Maybe I'm missing something, though.)
Anyhow, one of the sessions this morning was focused on understanding the trajectory of group development and cohesion, and how we go from "pseudo-community," where basically everyone pretends to get along and suppresses their true feelings, to "chaos," where there is lots of conflict because everyone is starting to feel free to express how they really feel, to um...something where people start to decide how to get along despite their differences, to "community," where people actually do get along. One of the pastors in the room mentioned that his congregation seems to be in the "chaos" stage right now, and that part of the problem is that there are people who no longer believe that they can get along. He has people who have fundamental philosophical/doctrinal differences with the group, and are questioning whether those can - or even should - be overcome for the sake of community building. This man's question to the presenter was whether it is possible or even desirable that all groups eventually move out of the chaos phase, even if they have to sacrifice doctrine to do so. The presenter's response was, "Well, it's very sad that they are choosing not to be a part of the community and work through the chaos. No one should ever have to give up their personal doctrinal commitments, we just have to learn how to live together despite our differences." The pastor was very frustrated because this didn't answer his question, although, given that the presenter comes heavily endorsed by the ELCA and is headed out to colleges and seminaries in the coming months to ply this information to the unsuspecting young'uns, it should have given him all he needed to know. (Maybe it did, I don't know, I didn't talk with him after.)
On the one hand, it was really nice. I got to meet lots of new people, other pastors in my area, spend some quality time with my supervisor and other interns that I know from school, etc...
But the content of the conference had been billed ahead of time as being about how to connect with people and be a more effective leader in your congregation. Awesome. Or, not. It turned out to be CPE 2.0. Right down to the words and charts and graphs and the "understanding your feelings" and "developing an awareness of how you impact the system." It was so fake and so froo-froo that I found it difficult to even listen respectfully. I just got done with 11 weeks of this, I took the few bits of useful information from it, and I literally just signed off on the final evaluation this afternoon and I freaking want to be done with it. I spent lots of time texting my CPE colleagues, my pastor at home, and my mom. I made mental to-do lists. I drank coffee. I worked hard at not fidgeting, not biting my nails, not rolling my eyes, etc...
The other reason I struggled was that this was ostensibly a gathering of religious leaders, and the man presenting the material (four 75-90 minute sessions) claimed to be a Lutheran pastor. And yet, I saw very little indication that he had any more sincere, identifiably orthodox Christian theology than my CPE Supervisor. (At one point he talked about he and his wife leading pilgrimages to India and Nepal. I'm unaware of any major Christian sites in India and Nepal that would make them good locations for a pilgrimage. Maybe I'm missing something, though.)
Anyhow, one of the sessions this morning was focused on understanding the trajectory of group development and cohesion, and how we go from "pseudo-community," where basically everyone pretends to get along and suppresses their true feelings, to "chaos," where there is lots of conflict because everyone is starting to feel free to express how they really feel, to um...something where people start to decide how to get along despite their differences, to "community," where people actually do get along. One of the pastors in the room mentioned that his congregation seems to be in the "chaos" stage right now, and that part of the problem is that there are people who no longer believe that they can get along. He has people who have fundamental philosophical/doctrinal differences with the group, and are questioning whether those can - or even should - be overcome for the sake of community building. This man's question to the presenter was whether it is possible or even desirable that all groups eventually move out of the chaos phase, even if they have to sacrifice doctrine to do so. The presenter's response was, "Well, it's very sad that they are choosing not to be a part of the community and work through the chaos. No one should ever have to give up their personal doctrinal commitments, we just have to learn how to live together despite our differences." The pastor was very frustrated because this didn't answer his question, although, given that the presenter comes heavily endorsed by the ELCA and is headed out to colleges and seminaries in the coming months to ply this information to the unsuspecting young'uns, it should have given him all he needed to know. (Maybe it did, I don't know, I didn't talk with him after.)