The gentleman I mentioned in my previous post called me to apologize this morning. So we were able to get things settled and moving forward.
I also spent three hours with a non-member, but regular attending couple, who took me up on my offer to continue the discussion from the meeting. They raised some concerns based on some of what they heard (I was able to clarify and reassure them on those points), and we ended up talking about a few other things, as well. They left very much comfortable that their pastor hadn't jumped off the heretical end of the wagon, and that nothing has been decided. Everything is in the idea phase.
A good morning, I'd say!
24 April 2006
23 April 2006
To act or not to act, that is the question
I like to think of myself as a fairly easy-going guy. The reality is I can get worked up, especially when established processes or procedures aren't followed, or at least generally adhered to. I'm not THAT anal! :)
Anyway, today we held our quarterly business meeting. The senior pastor and the other two elders were absent. Four deacons were present (one moderated).
The time came for my report, and I got through it without deviating too much from my notes (which proves I'm not anal), and we got to the Q&A time. My report was in three sections: what we've done, what we're working on, and what we plan to start working on. During the second and third section I mentioned we're developing a worship ministry to create opportunities for more people to serve. Part of this plan is to create a Programming Team to come around the senior pastor, who currently plans the services all by himself, to complement him in this planning process.
Such a team will allow us to include more elements in services: more "hooks,' if you will for people to engage in worship of God.
One individual, who has said in more than one conversation that he doesn't want to see any changes: he likes the services the way they are--made it very clear through body language that he didn't like what he was hearing.
Aside from the whole "Worship isn't about you. It's not for you anyway" argument, there rteally was nothing I could say that would ease his concern. I admit I don't want to do that, because he has a very wrong idea about worship.
Anyway, he decided to invole parlimentary procedure and "called the question." Now, although we follow Robert's Rules of Order, we view them more as "guidelines." But this individual pointedly added his motion was "not debatable." Given we actually ask for a motion to convene a meeting (not required), this specific stickler seemed an obvious ploy to cut me off.
To be fair, I did tend to get long-winded in my responses to questions. But as a pastor, I wanted to be forthright and share what was on my heart (I feel very passionate about worship), and thought that short, cryptic answers would appear evasive or conniving. Especially since the senior pastor was away.
This individual, I'm sure, would never have pulled this stunt with the senior pastor. But I find myself debating whether to confront him about his rudeness and disrespect (and whether that will be perceived as a power play), or to let it slide (and rick credibility as a leader of the church).
I'm consulting the church leaders who were present, as well as colleagues. But it's a weird place to be. The pastor's wife said there will always be this kind of people. I don't disagree. But I do wonder what is the best way to deal with such people!
Anyway, today we held our quarterly business meeting. The senior pastor and the other two elders were absent. Four deacons were present (one moderated).
The time came for my report, and I got through it without deviating too much from my notes (which proves I'm not anal), and we got to the Q&A time. My report was in three sections: what we've done, what we're working on, and what we plan to start working on. During the second and third section I mentioned we're developing a worship ministry to create opportunities for more people to serve. Part of this plan is to create a Programming Team to come around the senior pastor, who currently plans the services all by himself, to complement him in this planning process.
Such a team will allow us to include more elements in services: more "hooks,' if you will for people to engage in worship of God.
One individual, who has said in more than one conversation that he doesn't want to see any changes: he likes the services the way they are--made it very clear through body language that he didn't like what he was hearing.
Aside from the whole "Worship isn't about you. It's not for you anyway" argument, there rteally was nothing I could say that would ease his concern. I admit I don't want to do that, because he has a very wrong idea about worship.
Anyway, he decided to invole parlimentary procedure and "called the question." Now, although we follow Robert's Rules of Order, we view them more as "guidelines." But this individual pointedly added his motion was "not debatable." Given we actually ask for a motion to convene a meeting (not required), this specific stickler seemed an obvious ploy to cut me off.
To be fair, I did tend to get long-winded in my responses to questions. But as a pastor, I wanted to be forthright and share what was on my heart (I feel very passionate about worship), and thought that short, cryptic answers would appear evasive or conniving. Especially since the senior pastor was away.
This individual, I'm sure, would never have pulled this stunt with the senior pastor. But I find myself debating whether to confront him about his rudeness and disrespect (and whether that will be perceived as a power play), or to let it slide (and rick credibility as a leader of the church).
I'm consulting the church leaders who were present, as well as colleagues. But it's a weird place to be. The pastor's wife said there will always be this kind of people. I don't disagree. But I do wonder what is the best way to deal with such people!
18 April 2006
Easter is over, on toward summer!
I hadn't realized how long it's been since I last posted, but preparations for Palm Sunday and Easter took so much of my time, I'm just now getting a chance to breathe again. A little.
We saw 283 people between two services Easter morning...apparently an all-time high for the church (which celebrates its 30th year in September). Then there were the 40 or so folks who braved the chilly, damp morning air for the sunrise service at Moore Dam (on the reservoir). All in all, it was a great day.
The senior pastor left yesterday for three weeks: visiting his mother and dying father in Arizona; then on to Tennessee for a family reunion or get-together or some such thing for his wife's family. This leaves me holding down the fort for the next almost three weeks, including two Sundays!
This Sunday we will focus on Mission/Ministry, and the team that recently went to Honduras will report. Then we'll highlight opportunities this spring and summer for people to engage in. Next Sunday is communion Sunday and the Sunday before National Day of Prayer (May 4). My first communion service.
It's already been an exciting few days.
We saw 283 people between two services Easter morning...apparently an all-time high for the church (which celebrates its 30th year in September). Then there were the 40 or so folks who braved the chilly, damp morning air for the sunrise service at Moore Dam (on the reservoir). All in all, it was a great day.
The senior pastor left yesterday for three weeks: visiting his mother and dying father in Arizona; then on to Tennessee for a family reunion or get-together or some such thing for his wife's family. This leaves me holding down the fort for the next almost three weeks, including two Sundays!
This Sunday we will focus on Mission/Ministry, and the team that recently went to Honduras will report. Then we'll highlight opportunities this spring and summer for people to engage in. Next Sunday is communion Sunday and the Sunday before National Day of Prayer (May 4). My first communion service.
It's already been an exciting few days.
03 April 2006
About hardware, not software...
It's nice to have basic tools for ministry. This post concerns itself with a piece of hardware which I have not had permanentl installed in my office until last week: a phone!
Before, we used a portable to give me phone access. The base remained in the office, and I took the portable handset into my office. When a call came in that was for me, the admin would "page" the handset, signaling me to pick up the call.
Problem was that construction of the building caused so much static I couldn't stay at my desk during the call. This made it hard to take notes or look something up.
We installed a phone system which gives me a phone in my office, three in/out lines, voice mail and the like. Now I just need to arrange for a server network so I can gain internat access from my office PC.
I know, I know. I'm never happy! :)
Before, we used a portable to give me phone access. The base remained in the office, and I took the portable handset into my office. When a call came in that was for me, the admin would "page" the handset, signaling me to pick up the call.
Problem was that construction of the building caused so much static I couldn't stay at my desk during the call. This made it hard to take notes or look something up.
We installed a phone system which gives me a phone in my office, three in/out lines, voice mail and the like. Now I just need to arrange for a server network so I can gain internat access from my office PC.
I know, I know. I'm never happy! :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)