Serving
01/02/12 05:26
I didn’t take a single photograph yesterday. Today’s blog has no pictures. Don’t worry, the pictures will return.
Yesterday was one of those days that happen from time to time in the life of a pastor. I went into the office early to prepare a presentation and then headed off for my 8:30 meeting. That meeting ended in time for me to make a meeting at 10:30, another at 12:45, and additional meetings at 2:00, 3:30, 6:00 and 7:00. The 7 p.m. meeting was a long one and it was after 9 pm when I locked the building. There were short breaks between some of the meetings, but none long enough for me to do much more than gather my materials and wits for the next meeting.
I didn’t go into the ministry out of a love of meetings. On the other hand, it wouldn’t be fair for me to blame anyone but myself for my commitments that mean so many meetings. One of the dynamics of my current stage in life is that I care about many things. I serve a complex congregation with a lot of different organizational needs. I belong to a community with many worthwhile institutions. Two of my meetings yesterday were because of my involvement in the wider community.
There seems to be a bit more conflict, disagreement and dissent in meetings these days. I think it is stirred in part by the angry tone of national politics. We have become used to congress as a place that is nonstop argument. Cooperation is rarely held up as a positive virtue by politicians. The tone of even primary campaigns is focused on attack and tearing down the opposition rather than lifting up the virtues of the candidates for honest comparison.
We seem to be reflecting this tone as we work together to build our community. It may not be true, but it seems like this year I have spent more time listening to complaints and criticisms than usual. As a result I am going to make a few observations. They may be more a product of being tired than of rational thought, but writing them in my blog probably wastes less time than voicing them in meetings.
Bigger isn’t always better. At least three times in the last week I have heard someone describe a healthy institution as “dying.” Their rationale is that since it isn’t getting bigger, it must be dying. That may be true of some things, but it isn’t true of all things. Take the Black Hills Chamber Music Society, for example. Chamber music is by its nature intimate. The society has been drawing audiences of 75 to 125 for its concerts for nearly 50 years. The name chamber music refers to the size of the room. When audiences get too large, the music has to be moved to a concert hall. That isn’t a bad thing, but there are plenty of us who enjoy the intimacy of well-played acoustic music in a smaller venue.
Here is another example. The Black Hills Workshop and Training Center exists to serve persons with disabilities. One of the goals of the organization is to enable persons to live as independently as possible. Job coaching and placement, housing assistance and independent living assistance are among the services offered. Success is not measured by increasing the number of people who are dependent upon the services provided, but rather in enabling people to become independent and free from needing the services. There are a few economies of scale in purchasing supplies and securing funding for projects, but the services offered are best supplied on an individual basis. Creating pressure for the institution to become bigger and bigger leads it away from its core values and mission.
I could go on and on. It seems to me that faithfulness is far more important than growth for growth’s sake. I suspect that one thing that makes growth such a popular goal is that the simplicity of the mathematics. You can measure whether the audience is bigger or smaller than the last event. You can compare budgets to see if this year’s involves more dollars than last year’s. It is much more difficult to measure whether or not an organization is faithful to its mission.
When I serve as a director of a non-profit corporation, my fiduciary responsibility of loyalty requires me to focus on the core mission of that corporation. I read constitutions and by laws of the organizations I serve. They do not include statements like “become the richest,” or “become the biggest.” They usually speak of services provided to others and sometimes speak of the quality of care. Placing quantity over quality might be a successful business plan for Wal-Mart, but it is rarely the goal of a service organization.
That leads me to another observation. Nonprofit corporations do not run like for profit businesses. They don’t run like families, either, but families are often closer to the model than businesses. Volunteers don’t behave like employees. Persons served are not customers. Understanding the unique operations of nonprofit organizations serves directors better than trying to make them run like a for-profit business.
For me, it is all about the mission. I do not serve because I want glory or recognition. I serve because I am called to serve. That means putting others ahead of my own desires and wants. That means putting the health and long-term sustainability of the organization over short-term gains and statistical spikes. That means recognizing that I am a part of something that is bigger than myself. And, often it means working with those with whom I disagree rather than winning over them.
I cannot separate myself from the Christian faith that is at the core of my being. Jesus said, “whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant,” and “for whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”
Instead of being so afraid of dying, those of us whose lives are based in a resurrection faith might do well to consider what it might mean to give up our lives for Jesus sake.
So even thought meeting after meeting can be energy sapping and sometimes it feels like they suck the life right out of me, I’ll probably continue to go to meetings. If it results in deeper service, my temporary discomfort will mean nothing by comparison.
Yesterday was one of those days that happen from time to time in the life of a pastor. I went into the office early to prepare a presentation and then headed off for my 8:30 meeting. That meeting ended in time for me to make a meeting at 10:30, another at 12:45, and additional meetings at 2:00, 3:30, 6:00 and 7:00. The 7 p.m. meeting was a long one and it was after 9 pm when I locked the building. There were short breaks between some of the meetings, but none long enough for me to do much more than gather my materials and wits for the next meeting.
I didn’t go into the ministry out of a love of meetings. On the other hand, it wouldn’t be fair for me to blame anyone but myself for my commitments that mean so many meetings. One of the dynamics of my current stage in life is that I care about many things. I serve a complex congregation with a lot of different organizational needs. I belong to a community with many worthwhile institutions. Two of my meetings yesterday were because of my involvement in the wider community.
There seems to be a bit more conflict, disagreement and dissent in meetings these days. I think it is stirred in part by the angry tone of national politics. We have become used to congress as a place that is nonstop argument. Cooperation is rarely held up as a positive virtue by politicians. The tone of even primary campaigns is focused on attack and tearing down the opposition rather than lifting up the virtues of the candidates for honest comparison.
We seem to be reflecting this tone as we work together to build our community. It may not be true, but it seems like this year I have spent more time listening to complaints and criticisms than usual. As a result I am going to make a few observations. They may be more a product of being tired than of rational thought, but writing them in my blog probably wastes less time than voicing them in meetings.
Bigger isn’t always better. At least three times in the last week I have heard someone describe a healthy institution as “dying.” Their rationale is that since it isn’t getting bigger, it must be dying. That may be true of some things, but it isn’t true of all things. Take the Black Hills Chamber Music Society, for example. Chamber music is by its nature intimate. The society has been drawing audiences of 75 to 125 for its concerts for nearly 50 years. The name chamber music refers to the size of the room. When audiences get too large, the music has to be moved to a concert hall. That isn’t a bad thing, but there are plenty of us who enjoy the intimacy of well-played acoustic music in a smaller venue.
Here is another example. The Black Hills Workshop and Training Center exists to serve persons with disabilities. One of the goals of the organization is to enable persons to live as independently as possible. Job coaching and placement, housing assistance and independent living assistance are among the services offered. Success is not measured by increasing the number of people who are dependent upon the services provided, but rather in enabling people to become independent and free from needing the services. There are a few economies of scale in purchasing supplies and securing funding for projects, but the services offered are best supplied on an individual basis. Creating pressure for the institution to become bigger and bigger leads it away from its core values and mission.
I could go on and on. It seems to me that faithfulness is far more important than growth for growth’s sake. I suspect that one thing that makes growth such a popular goal is that the simplicity of the mathematics. You can measure whether the audience is bigger or smaller than the last event. You can compare budgets to see if this year’s involves more dollars than last year’s. It is much more difficult to measure whether or not an organization is faithful to its mission.
When I serve as a director of a non-profit corporation, my fiduciary responsibility of loyalty requires me to focus on the core mission of that corporation. I read constitutions and by laws of the organizations I serve. They do not include statements like “become the richest,” or “become the biggest.” They usually speak of services provided to others and sometimes speak of the quality of care. Placing quantity over quality might be a successful business plan for Wal-Mart, but it is rarely the goal of a service organization.
That leads me to another observation. Nonprofit corporations do not run like for profit businesses. They don’t run like families, either, but families are often closer to the model than businesses. Volunteers don’t behave like employees. Persons served are not customers. Understanding the unique operations of nonprofit organizations serves directors better than trying to make them run like a for-profit business.
For me, it is all about the mission. I do not serve because I want glory or recognition. I serve because I am called to serve. That means putting others ahead of my own desires and wants. That means putting the health and long-term sustainability of the organization over short-term gains and statistical spikes. That means recognizing that I am a part of something that is bigger than myself. And, often it means working with those with whom I disagree rather than winning over them.
I cannot separate myself from the Christian faith that is at the core of my being. Jesus said, “whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant,” and “for whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”
Instead of being so afraid of dying, those of us whose lives are based in a resurrection faith might do well to consider what it might mean to give up our lives for Jesus sake.
So even thought meeting after meeting can be energy sapping and sometimes it feels like they suck the life right out of me, I’ll probably continue to go to meetings. If it results in deeper service, my temporary discomfort will mean nothing by comparison.