But the two that were on the table for discussion were
- Leadership from the pulpit
- Relational leadership
The way of looking at it makes a lot of sense, and yet the conclusions I have to come to after thinking and considering do not make me all that comfortable. Especially when I contrast myself with the past leadership at St Stoic that I am following.
To be honest, if you were to ask me if I wanted to be seen by the people I love and serve as either smart or kind, I would resist the either/or nature of that question and insist on answering in a both/and sort of way. The truth is that I see value in, and opportunity for, nurture in both preparing and preaching sermons that challenge, uplift, and teach, and in the smaller, quiet one-on-one moments of relating with people. And I recognize that in the context of a place I rightfully call St Stoic, the former often offers more opportunity than the latter. The people I serve very, very seldom seek out moments with their pastor. In fact I do not realize that many of them might be in need of those pastoral moments until I hear about my seeming lack of availability for such from a third party. (If you are in ministry, chances are you have had those "Why didn't you visit Betty Lou in the hospital even though nobody from Betty Lou's family let you know she was there?" encounters. It happens.)
And yet...at the same time many here at St Stoic speak wistfully, longingly of the days when my predecessor showed up unexpectedly in the ICU, seemingly without any notification at all. Or when, in a moment of deep need and sorrow, he was somehow just there, doing and saying exactly what was needed. There are photo albums full of pictures of him in their homes, at family celebrations and clippings of him participating in community events, side-by-side with members. (Of course,when I ask who was carrying around the camera back in the 70s , nobody seems to know how every moment was recorded for posterity. Clearly he was not taking pictures of himself.)
It is painful to watch them in those moments, because I know their longing is real. Equally painful is the feeling that they really do wish my style was different, at least some of them do. But few of them seem to remember that that kind of relating is best achieved when both parties meet half way.
So what say you, my Internets Posse? Are you a Pulpit Leader or a Relational Leader, or like most of us, a leaning hybrid? How does that fit with your flock?
17 comments:
I am such the hybrid. Although, I have not had this experience at Little Church in the Wildewood, I know it to well.
Everything my predecessor did was wonderful at previous church.
I said jokingly, that she could poop in the middle of the fellowship hall and they would eat it and rave.
Anyhow, I do know and udnerstand the feeling.
I am thinking we have to learn, but also have to teach "them" that we are not all alike and do not do things the same.
My predecessor here was a do-it-all pastor and did little to get them into the program orientation mode.
I had to learn to dig my heels in and say, somebody needs to get this done.
If not, I would live at the church all the time and wear too many hats.
Somebody does not always mena me.
But, I am hybrid
Huh, is this trying to set up a Prophetic/Pastoral dichotomy? Seems like most of us need both, unless perhaps we have very particular calls (Pastor of Visitation, for instance, clearly needs to be on the relational end of the scale). I also wonder if there aren't ways to be the latter without sitting all day at the hospital, as some pastors have done. I try to make a concentrated visit be meaningful.
Our predecessors of years past definitely had an advantage toward Ministry of Presence given that hospitals made a point of notifying churches. We're all caught in this passive-aggressive dynamic, particularly with the older generation that may not understand the impact of HIPAA. (Or may understand the power it gives them, which is worse.)
Not a pastor, but I've been on council twice, and observed many pastors with various gifts.
Whether in marriage or in the pastor/congregational relationship: Magical thinking doesn't exist. And when a pastor just shows up, without being notified by a very close family member, that means that somebody is gossiping about the sick person and the pastor is acknowledging the gossip. That may be a harsh way to interpret this situation, but it does need to be acknowledged as one view of reality. Besides, what if the sick person DOESN'T want everybody to know?
Each pastor DOES have different gifts. What gifts is a pastor weak in and what does that pastor do about that? Take classes? Intentionally work on this? Ignore that aspect of ministry? Delegate? I was on council with a pastor who often would volunteer for something that was in his area of weakness, and then nothing would happen. I'd much rather see a pastor acknowledge that something isn't his strength and find someone else to do that work.
The areas that a pastor is strong in probably won't be acknowledged until that pastor leaves, I'm guessing, you know, when that pastor is compared to the next one.
I have a strong belief that when a pastor "does everything" or "is everything," that pastor is well liked, seems to get a lot done, gets a long lasting reputation as a great pastor, but doesn't "equip the saints" to do the ministry themselves. My view on this is based on the still-on-a-pedestal reputation of a pastor who was here in the mid-70's. He was a great pastor and preacher. But his shadow overcame so many pastors since then. The most modest and seemingly ineffectual pastor who came later did more, in my opinion, to build a strong lay leadership base in our church that still exists and has grown. I don't think we could accept a pastor coming in here who would want to take over complete leadership.
This might not be exactly what you were getting at, but these are just some of my experiences.
Once you leave, you will become a beloved pastor. Trust me.
I think there are also two (or more) preferences in congregations. Some folks really want the relationship in times of trouble. Others don't. When my parents died, it never occured to me that my pastor should call on me. In my last call, a parishioner was really upset that I didn't call on him after his father died (though I spent a fair amount of time with his mother). Yes, another I should be a mind reader. (Sometimes it seems like a bad marriage where no one ever tells the other what they want and expect them to know automatically what is needed.)
What matters to my congregation is that I show up when they are in the hospital, etc. Of course, they are going to die (as a congregation).
Blessings on your ministry.
Thanks for sharing this. We are going over so much stuff like this in CPE. It's helpful.
Peace.
I'm a leader???
Damn . . . going to have to go figure out how to do that I suppose.
Rev ref+ I am sitting at eye Dr's office waiting for WG, and it is your comment that made me laugh out loud so that others looked up from their 18-mo-old Reader's Digest!
Hybrid here. I'm fortunate that none of the past ministers were at LCotC long enough to become sainted as your predecessor has been. I cannot imagine how much that must hurt.
I constantly get the "why didn't you visit" crap despite informing the congregation in a gazillion different ways that I cannot read minds and that if they want a visit, the church needs to be informed.
~bangs head on wall~
Clearly none of us is paid enough to deal with this crap. (wait, did I say/type that out loud? Sorry, inside thought....as you were. :))
Yeah, it's hard to see it as either/or. One of the things I've learned in my current position is how much pastoral care takes place in "other settings" eg when someone drops by the office for some business reason and we just chat a bit or after bible study, etc. But it has definitely something that has evolved over time.
The whole "why didn't you visit so and so" when you didn't know so and so was sick is so frustrating!
What they/you said. I absolutely refuse to embrace either of these to the exclusion of the others.
(Love the part about "who was taking those pictures, anyway? HMMMM???")
I know that nothing raises a pastor's cred more than simply leaving. I'm not really too worried about being liked and/or adored. Really.
I'm more concerned with being able to identify patterns within the system so that I can be more effective in the leadership style that I think I lean more towards. I hope that by understanding how they arrived at certain preferences/expectations, I can be adaptive to certain situations in a way that serves us all.
Plus there's about to be a hole in my desk from where I'm pounding my head behind closed doors. I'm reaching out to those who I hope can help me with some insight.
Thanks, all, for chiming in!
Hybrid here. I'm with you Cheese, I don't like to think in either/or.
It's all contextual for me and I adapt my style to suit the situation.
I wonder if as women started getting into the ministry that relational leadership made it's debut in the church setting. Something to ponder.
LYMI
Great issue, Cheesehead, and I'll throw my two cents in as a soon-to-be-employed clergywoman and long-tim3 senior lay leader.
I'm a hybrid as well.
I did a phone job interview Saturday morning, and one of my responses to their questions about my leadership style raised their eyebrows a little bit. "So is your leadership strength working with groups or one-on-one?" Like it's either-or. When I explained that developing relationships with individuals in specific groups would give me insights as to how that group worked (I used Altar Guild as an example), they all went "whoa!" like it had never occurred to them before. And when I said that I usually try to build consensus but can be the decider-in-chief when it is occasionally necessary, I think their minds were going "does not compute."
This really gets the the problem of lay leadership trying to apply business-world leadership paradigms to the church. Two different kinds of institutions, two different aims. It's a problem that is exacerbated by the organizations that posit themselves as professional consultants to clergy and to congregations. They use the business model, and although there are elements that translate, many do not. We are not profit-making shareholder-driven organizations (with a few exceptions), and we should celebrate that.
And I'm with some of the others who said that you will be the beloved one to whom the present one cannot compare when you are gone. Theyv'e got to have somebody to blame when problems occur, as they inevitably do, and whoever is clergy in charge usually gets tagged.
definitely pulpit leadership here....because that one shows up regularly, weekly (or oftener) and everybody knows exactly when and where and -- God willing -- how long. I am still unconvinced that the program-model of church is compatible with the gospel. That may mean only I'm not comfortable with it.
I do well with one-on-one and pastoral leadership -- when given the chance. And then they all hold up their hands in holy disbelief...because they assume that competence in one area (like the pulpit) must mean incompetence in every other.
and as one about to retire/leave/be transformed into a constellation in the heavens...I hear you friends, I hear you.
Cheese,
Some thoughts. Maybe worth waht you paid for them.
You recently posted that your predecessor actually lived in the homes of various members instead of his own place. That might be once way he wound up in all of the pictures. For some of those folks he was literally part of the family. And that may have been another way he was more in the gossip loop. If he was eating a lot of meals in the homes of those folks he certainly would know lots of stuff.
Do the families that kept him have more fond memeories of him than those that did not? Any lingering jealousy?
Was the community around St Stoic more tight-knit back in the day. Was it a less complcated place as far as keeping up with people. Was there one hopsital where he could sit and drink coffee in the dining room? One or 2 cafes where he could eat lunch sveral times a week and catch up with the regulards about what was going on? One high school. One little league etc.
You have mentioned that St Stoic was once part of a multi-church parish with several pastors. Was he as beloved in the other congregations? The other pastors with whom he worked?
A hunch. I'll bet he spent very little time in worship/sermon prep. From your blog it is clear that you spend a great deal of time on those things.
One other thing about hiow it a differnt world. Speaking from experince back in the day when things that are now day surgery, like gall bladder surgery, involved about a week+ stay in the hospital you got to know a lot of stuff about folks and their family during all those visits. That is a big change. In 1983 I might have spent around 10 hrs in pastoral visitation before and after gallbladder surgery plus any time sitting with family during a long surgery. In 2009 I'll bet it's more like a phone call the day before the surgery and a phone call the day after the surgery.
i would say i tend more toward relational... but when other styles are called for and i'm firm, holy guacamole... they look at me like, "geeze she's small but holy crap she does know what she's doing!" *hee hee* i love to throw 'em curve balls...
As a postulant approaching the start of seminary, thank you for this discussion and these comments. My presenting priest recently challenged me to begin seeing myself as a parish priest rather than as a specialized chaplain because I 'do relationships'. I consider him a gifted preacher & teacher who needs help in relations, but he is 'on spot' during pastoral calls. Definitely something to reflect upon during formation.
Post a Comment