JCM 1289

http://www.umc.org/decisions/59650/eyJyZXN1bHRfcGFnZSI6IlwvZGVjaXNpb25zXC9zZWFyY2gtcmVzdWx0cyIsInJhbmdlLWZyb206ZGVjaXNpb25fZGF0ZSI6IjEwXC8yNVwvMjAxNCJ9

This matter is deferred to the April, 2015 docket of the Council.

JCM 1290

http://www.umc.org/decisions/59651/eyJyZXN1bHRfcGFnZSI6IlwvZGVjaXNpb25zXC9zZWFyY2gtcmVzdWx0cyIsInJhbmdlLWZyb206ZGVjaXNpb25fZGF0ZSI6IjEwXC8yNVwvMjAxNCJ9

This matter is deferred to the April, 2015 docket of the Council.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS ON THE 2014 FALL SESSION

The amazing scope of concerns from elections to property to judicial events to merging conferences to same sex issue resolutions to international concerns is mind boggling.  But this Council seems to be handling it quite well.  

The session included a great deal of discussion of what is moot and hypothetical.  Seven of the decisions deal with them.  They are something I have been fretting over for years because they seemed to always be asserted in cases where pastors were being mistreated by their leaders.  Thanks to this session’s efforts, most of my questions have been answered so I am ready to offer a revision of Appendix A for the Council’s  consideration. 

This session showed respect for precedent and continues to show the difference in resolutions which call for violating the Discipline (prescriptive) and those suggesting to change the Discipline and the Church’s behaviors (aspirational).  Not everyone seems to be willing to recognize that difference but at least the Council is consistent.

This session reveals how we as a denomination are becoming more open to our international nature by having significant decisions on everything from impact on election of delegates to General Conference to working justice across continental boundaries.  We have always been an international church so we are not just now becoming internationalized.  We are learning how to be less paternalistic and more in equal community with one another.  The Council is helping bridge that gap.

Though I have been critical of details in a number of the decisions, my main concern this time is that, in the Council’s haste to do as much as it can in its limited amount of time, it might want to consider assigning someone they trust to review each decision in order to provide two functions: consistency, and “quality control.”  

It is not uncommon that the Council actiually says two different things about the same issue in different decisions done during the same session.  For example, clarity of Paragraph 413 differs between JCDs 1275 and 1287.

With respect to “quality control,” one of the strengths of this Council has been its grace in respecting the parties of the cases before them and being patient enough also to educate so their decisions help parties and interested readers to understand the grounds for the decisions.  

In my commentaries, I referred four or five times to impatience and disrespect that I perceived in decisions this time around.  Both impatience and disrespect (and abruptness) are symptoms of exhaustion more than anything else, though I do think some people are just that way.  Someone needs to help the Council spot those moments or those whole decisions that contain a negative tone and “clean them up.”  That does not mean there would be a change in the law.  It would just mean a better manifestation of the grace with which I associate this Council.  An individual good at such editting (perhaps the one who did JCD 1285?) would be one means.  Another is that the whole body of the Council use self-discipline in each working committee as well as  in whole Council sessions.  Whatever device or procedure is chosen, it will be helping make God’s grace more clear in what the Council does.

As a postscript, let me add this:  The track record of complaints against bishops continues to be dismissal unless the accusation of sexual misconduct was the complaint.  Misuse of funds, undermining the ministry of pastors, violations of the Discipline with respect to personnel and fair process actions all tend to disappear, even those related to the highest profile controversy of same sex issues.  If the Council intends to be objective and not be the “bishops’ best friend,” this session has not aided holding bishops accountable.  On questions of law in some cases, the Council called out the bishop for inappropriate understandings of church law.  But that is as far as accountability has been going.  

The Council has occasionally been creative within church law in order to right some wrongs (JCDs 1131, 1156, and 1244 to name some).  I hope it will be so in future cases where bishops face complaints of doing harm and appear to be allowed at lower judicial levels to just “walk.”

Re: Our disagreements

To my fellow mostly United Methodist definitely Christian and more-or-less conservative friends,

I love you with all my heart because you have always been friends, you have always lived by your consciences, and you have always been loving compassionate people.  In one way or another, you have contributed to making everyone’s life better whether through teaching, health care serving, music, intellectual stimulation, or competence at your job.  You are among the saints that I have known over my eighty years and I cherish your friendship.  I see nothing that will actually change that, at least in the long run.  

The short run, well, there are some bumps in the road.  I earnestly pray that those bumps will be seen for what they are, temporary differences of opinion over things we have not yet resolved between us but which I hope in time we can.

There is so much going on in the world that there is no way we can agree on everything.  Like you, my walk has included some disturbing experiences and some influences that I am not always aware of.  So even though we probably agree on 95 percent of what is going on, that five percent can be “stimulating.”  Or aggravating.  Or sad.  But I hope we do not lose sight of the fact that we are otherwise in such close agreement that most people would not notice any difference between us.

In truth, you and I are moderates, in the middle, open to more things than most people are, and willing to test the spirits of those things that unnerve us.  Our curiosity and our integrity cause us to be willing to question and disagree with things that don’t “fit” into life as we know it.  And we react when our integrity and intentions are called into question.

One aspect of our culture is that so much of it is viewed through the lens of bifurcation.  Things are viewed as good or bad, black or white, right or wrong, for us or against us, on our side or on the other side, Saints fans or Packer fans (or Bear fans etc.).  And unless we really think it through, we are susceptible to simplifying things by calling them one or the other.  And, we tend to be “down on what we are not up on.”

The more we actually know, the more we see the grays, the plaids, the exceptions, the extenuating circumstances, the nuances.  

But there are so many more things (issues, alternatives, possibilities, styles, etc.) now that we have no longer got time to know enough about them to go beyond being for or against them.  

Do you realize how vulnerable we both are, sometimes more than we realize, to the loudest voices in our ears, to the simplest explanations we are given, to the ones who want to manipulate our thinking and to distract us from thinking things through all the way?  

We are trusting souls, you and I.  Not entirely, because we have been around long enough to have been foolish about something because we trusted someone we should not have.  But basically, we would rather trust than test everything, partly because there is too much to check and partly because we live by hope.

And that is both our weakness and our strength.  It can be our strength because it will finally keep us from flying apart as friends, as those who agree on nearly everything, as those holding the central core of love and compassion in an age where those qualities have been distorted and misused for political, financial, or egotistical reasons.  But the weakness is that we may trust the very ones trying to manipulate us.  

That leaves us with that five percent about which we disagree.  There’s a lot of wisdom in simply agreeing to disagree.  That gets hard when either or both of us go off on rants about what we are so sure is true but somehow we miss the connector that gets us to thinking and hearing what the rant is about and why the ranting is going on in the first place.

If it weren’t for the core of love and compassion that we hold, there would be less hope for us.  What defines that love and compassion is Jesus’s life and teachings, death and resurrection.  

So when we face sorting out who we should elect, which party to vote for, we have something to use to compare with what candidates and parties actually have done.  That’s what needs our attention.

Promises?  Not so much.  Platforms?  Maybe.  Source of financial backing?  Hmmm, maybe that’s something to look at.  Political ads?  Now that’s something to really be careful about. Political posters?  Same as with the ads.

Political posters are all over Facebook.  Sayings of famous people, images meant to touch our emotions, clever simplifications, juxtapositions of ideas, they all have an impact.  And I have happily “shared” the ones I thought were true.  (I have not “shared” everything because even though they appeared to support my own opinions, I felt they were not quite true, not upholding my core beliefs in love and compassion.)

I have appreciated those who challenged my choices and my opinions.  I have usually enjoyed challenging back because in dialogue we have the possibility of resolving the differences, maybe even finding we are both wrong about something and find a better resolution than either of us had before.  After all, as human beings, we sometimes put our foot in our mouths without realizing it. 

But there are so many such possible moments of disagreement that we can’t keep up.  The subject changes.  The time passes.  But we don’t leave behind the feeling of disagreement that wasn’t set right or wisely settled.

Like little cuts, they leave us more raw than they are worth but the pain adds a little more distance between us . . . if we don’t look back at everything else we agree about.  Then we remember the moments of closeness that really represent our friendship.  And the cuts, the disagreements, fall into perspective.

How clearly I remember the warmth with which the adult Sunday School class greeted us when we came back to Slidell.  That same warmth was there in the choir as well.  I remember eating with you at church dinners or at one or the other of our homes.  Or seeing you at a Mardi Gras parade and feeling really glad to see you.  And sitting with you in church and not feeling alone.  

Those same kinds of feelings are felt when I think of friends from Wisconsin, Texas, Florida, and elsewhere with whom I have been close.  Those feelings stay with me even when I see things from you with which I disagree. And you’d be pleased to know how many things you post with which I agree.  Even on some of the hot button issues.  I disagree right with you with some of my other friends or policy makers or political party 

on some things.  

It’s that central core of love and compassion that we share.  

So forgive me if my opinions ever come across as heavy handed.  I intend no cuts and I am still in the process of learning how to disagree agreeably.  I do not intend to taint the memories we have of when we were together.  I do intend to stay committed to Jesus’s love and compassion because I see you intending to do the same.

Your friend,

Jerry

Holiday Word from AIA

Dear Bishop,

Each year I hunt through various media for something hopeful and positive related to Christmas, especially, or at least to the holidays.

I had no luck until last night watching James Lipton's IN THE ACTOR'S STUDIO on Bravo network.  Two guests said things that I thought were wonderful and would be encouraging as you look at your ministry as bishop.

Sting was asked what his favorite sound was.  He pinched his lips, blew and came out with a very familiar, usually verboten, gentle sound.  Lipton asked him explain why that was his favorite sound.  Sting responded, "When those of great stature stand to receive adulation, they make the same sound the average bloak does.  It is very humanizing."

Jake Jyllenhall shared the following, based on his own experience:  "The way you behave with everybody is more important than the work that you do.  It's essential.  It is everything.  Generosity, kindness, and patience will get you so far!"

May the very humanizing nature of the coming of God in a tiny baby encourage us to keep straight our priorities in ministry.  Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

In the covenant of the clergy,

Jerry

Rev. Jerry Eckert, AIA contact person

OPEN SEMINAR MAY BRING CHANGES

Two bishops, three general church agency representatives, and experienced advocates will be key resource people for training advocates and for opening discussion of changes to personnel and fair process policies in the United Methodist Church.

On November 11-13, 2014, these people will meet in a seminar on advocacy. The seminar is open to pastors and lay people interested in how church personnel law actually works and should work. Sponsored by Associates in Advocacy, this workshop will allow those who sign up to interact in direct and informal ways with the resource people.

“We are all on the same team,” dean of the workshop, Rev. Jerry Eckert, said. “While advocacy is formally adversarial, it does not need to be antagonistic. Every church officer and advocate involved in a hearing or trial is seeking to be fair and work out justice for those involved.”

Those who want to advocate for fellow pastors or laity will have the opportunity to hear from a bishop what she faces when a complaint comes in. They will hear how a trial court presider prepares for a trial and hopes counsels on both sides do. They will hear how staff of the Division on Ordained Ministry work to revise church law to be more effective and fair. They will hear how commissions related to women and race do their advocacy. They will have a chance to question and discuss concerns with these resource people and with experienced members of Associates in Advocacy during the 48 hours of the seminar.

“It is an honor to sponsor such a learning opportunity,” Eckert said. “It is extremely rare where this mix of folks get the chance to be eye-ball to eye-ball with each other. Those who wish to attend will be part of what may be a ground-breaking event.”

There will be one other resource person, a lawyer for one of the insurance companies that specialize in churches. She will update the group on what kinds of law suits are likeliest to come up against the church and what mistakes are being made by church people that lead to those law suits.

Being a seminar, the resource people who are not presenting become engaged in the discussions just as those who come as attendees. Everyone is seated at one round table for presentation and discussion.

The seminar is being held in a motel in the vicinity of Chicago’s Ohare Airport. Space is limited. Those who wish to register should contact Eckert as soon as possible at aj_eckert@hotmail.com. Cost to the ones who register will be their transportation, meals, and lodging. This year, Associates in Advocacy has had help covering all the other expenses for the seminar.

Situational Leadership

Associates in Advocacy

Justice Always,

Reconciliation and Restoration Where Possible

http://www.aiateam.org/

Dear Bishop,

As I’ve said many times, when bishops and I meet informally to talk or in passing, the experience is almost always gracious.  They are attentive to what I say even when it is clear they do not agree with me.  And once in awhile, they surprise me by bringing up something I said in another context and are positive about it.  I practically never get responses to my letters, which I accept because I understand how busy you are.  My letters are meant to get you and your colleagues to thinking and maybe acting more wisely and effectively if and when you agree with me.  It’s planting seeds.

Over the years, I have been trying to help bishops see things from the ground up, not just from the top down.  My letters have been appreciated by some older bishops, though usually out of the hearing of other bishops.  While I have not been as consistent in my writing since I retired, I always try to find something worth sharing.  Sometimes it is a critique and sometimes it is directly positive in nature.  This series is of the latter nature.

Last May, I wrote to you about an attitude I have seen coming from the Council of Bishops for many years, that the main problem our denomination faces is incompetent pastors.  In my practice as an advocate, consulting with pastors who were facing removal from the ministry for incompetence or worse, that was not what I was seeing as the major problem! 

I offered a number of specific suggestions, most of which were legislative, only a few of which were directly or indirectly things that you could do.  In this series of letters, I want to give you something that supplements the good things you are already doing.  I’m excited about how much help it can be because it has already affected how I am operating. 

Here’s how it came to my attention:  My son called to see how we were doing.  After chatting a bit, I turned the question back to him.  “Things have gone pretty well,” he said.  “Our business grew 89% just last year alone.  We haven’t had a bad year as long as I’ve been with this company.”

“In this economy?” I asked.  “How in the world did you all do it?”

“Using situational leadership.”

“Situational leadership?” I asked my son.  “Tell me more.” 

                

The company my son works for showed an 89% increase in business last year, despite the sluggish economy.  When I asked him how they did it, he said it was by effective use of situational leadership styles.  I asked him if there were any good books on the subject.  He said there was one in particular, revised and updated from a book written in the 1980s.  He said it was based on a different understanding of leadership.  I thought I knew what he was talking about.  I then described the following to him:

Back in the 1980s when I first began writing one page “continuing education” letters to bishops, the hot new idea in leadership was the inverted pyramid.  In the standard model, within the church, the laity served the clergy and the clergy served the bishop who sat atop the pyramid. 

As those who were in active ministry at the time recall, in the inverted pyramid scheme, the bishops were to serve their staffs and the staffs were to serve the clergy.  The clergy were to serve the laity, and the laity were to serve the world.

I was impressed how many laity understood “serving the world.”  They expected to be the hands and feet of God, doing good, encouraging the despairing, teaching the young, often serving their communities through people professions (teaching, medicine, social work, etc.) or in politics.  Most laity I knew during my ministry came to church to be sure they understood how best to “love one another” and perfect their caring of those who were challenges.  They were often hurting about not being more effective and wanting reassurance that they were on the right track.

Clergy were being encouraged through pastors’ schools to train the laity for ministry in the world, to “upbuild one another in love,” to help their respective churches to be effective mission stations, to be “hospitals for sinners and not hotels for saints.”  Seminaries emphasized pastoral care as a critical role for clergy. 

                 

The inverted pyramid idea was in the air back in the 1980s and the phrase “servant-leader” became very popular in our system.  Bishops did things like foot-washings at annual conference, speaking of humbly serving the church, and calling themselves “servant leaders.” 

Unfortunately, that was as far as it went.  Superintendents and conferences officers reported to the bishops.  Pastors reported to conference officers (mainly superintendents).  And laity were expected to pay for it all.  Despite the enthusiasm for the new model exhibited among the laity and most clergy, the pyramid never fully inverted in the UMC despite the new terminology.

The “servant-leader” is still alive in our words to this day, especially with Pope Francis bringing a breath of fresh air to the highest level of leadership in the church. 

My son listened patiently to my narrative.  I asked him if there was any chance for the Church given this history.  He asked if I had seen a recent Sprint ad on TV.  A few weeks ago, Sprint ran an unusual ad.  It showed scenes from the daily tasks of Sprint workers.  It had an interesting “voice-over” that went something like this:

“There are some people who call me their boss.  They come to work every day even when it is a hardship for them.  These people serve our customers.  In the constantly changing environment in which they work, they are creative.  They give themselves to provide our products and services in ways that are effective.  They are the face of our company.  While they still call me their boss, they are wrong.

“Really, I work for them.”

My son said, “If they understand that, it’s a beginning.”

“Tell me about the book from the 1980s,” I said.

He said it was like reading an extended parable.  “Straight forward,” he said.  “Takes about an hour to read it.  Probably another hour to take notes as you go.  It pulls together all the good leadership ideas from over the years. The main point is that good leaders use different techniques with different workers and even change their techniques with those same workers as the workers become more capable.” 

My son then asked me, “Haven’t you been complaining about bishops and superintendents being empowered to bring complaints against pastors?” 

“Yes.” I responded.  “That became church law in 1980 and morale has become terrible in many conferences ever since.”

“The book has a good name for that kind of leadership,” he said.  “’Seagull management.’ That’s where ‘seagull managers are never around until you make a mistake.  Then they fly in, make a lot of noise, dump on everybody, and then fly out.’ That’s about the only negative thing in the book.  There are a lot of really good things, great quotes, excellent illustrations,” he said.

“Anything about incompetence?” I asked. 

“Some very good stuff,” he said.  “The book does not presume everyone is competent.  Nor does it presume that good leadership can help everyone attain competence.  But the baseline for leaders is how they view those having difficulty succeeding.  There’s a great quote near the end of the book.  ‘Everyone is a potential high performer.  Some people need a little help along the way.’”

I said, “This approach helped your company increase business 89% last year?”

 

I asked my son to say more about the issue of incompetence.

He said, “Good leadership uses all four basic skills: establishing direction, coaching, supporting, and delegating.  Incompetence is to be expected in the newest workers, and especially once the worker learns enough to realize how hard the job is and loses enthusiasm.  Rather than coming down hard on the worker, the good leader becomes a coach.  When the unexpected happens and the more competent and experienced show signs of incompetence, there is probably is a health problem and the leader has to be alert for dynamics that may or may not be work-related.”

“And this approach increased your business 89% just in one year?” I asked again.

“Absolutely,” he said.  “Since we instituted the situational leadership approach, we have not had a bad year.  It took a few years for us to perform as well as we did last year.” 

“That sounds so counter-intuitive to the way our church’s leadership tends to operate,” I said.

“It is counter to the CEO mentality in most companies.  That’s why the Sprint ad was so unusual,” he responded.  “There’s been a discontent with both autocratic styles of leadership and with the laisse faire styles among leaders in all kinds of businesses and institutions. Situational leadership offers an excellent combining of alternatives that have been floating around and connects them to a sensible approach.  The book is LEADERSHIP AND THE ONE MINUTE MANAGER.  Ken Blanchard, Patricia Zigarmi and Drea Zigarmi are the co-authors.”

I said, “Isn’t Ken Blanchard the one who handles the ‘Lead Like Jesus’ program?”

“Gives you the feeling that maybe his book might be a help to the church,” my son said.  “It sure helped us achieve 89% growth last year.”

In the covenant of the clergy,

                 Jerry

Rev Jerry Eckert, AIA contact person

                                  Do unto others as you would have them do unto you