a blog by howard jameson @ gatheringgrace.org

O come, O come, Emmanuel...

...and ransom captive Israel.

Advent is upon us once more. From a dip around the blogs and hearing people speak at things I think Advent is the most popular liturgical season (8 out of 10 liturgically astute people who expressed a preference...) and Advent Sunday is a day when there is only really one sermon starter

Advent is a season of preparation and waiting, but it is not about preparing and waiting for Christmas...

just about sums it up. Its what you go on to say that becomes a bit murky.

I know the stuff about the Second Coming; I've read Hal Lindsay and others. I suppose I dislike the sense of competitive authors (my understanding on what is predicted in the book of Revelation is more accurate than yours, therefore I am more inspired/straight down the line/saved than you) that is visible in the various interpretations, and I cynically want to point out how each interpretation seems to be based on some aspect of the world that America as a country seems to be concerned about at present. Scripture is far more precious than simply a Godly conspiracy theory AND I hate with a loathing the glee with which the catastrophes that will befall others are met.

I've also read and been taught the stuff about Jesus actually being seen returning visibly on the clouds as a late 19th Century construction that can be traced back to Cyrus Scofield and others, without any real reference to what the early Church actually understood by the words "Second Coming", and therefore being not worth the theological time of day.

So I find myself between a rock and a hard place. Without something of an extraordinary cataclysmic event and a real return of Jesus then I struggle to see the point of the Mark readings we had this morning - we are not commanded to watch and wait just on the off chance. But if all we do is watch and wait then it becomes really easy to do nothing of any earthly use demonstrating the truth of the Gospel, and I take this to be the exact opposite of the meddling in the world or in politics trying to do things to bring about "the rapture".

We must avoid the dualism of much of the end of the world is nigh stuff, but I struggle to see how at some point the new Jerusalem can descend to the new Earth if it does not enter into the real physical "bounded by time" universe that we inhabit, and therefore an event that will be there for us to see. The sufferings and heartache are real, and so the rescue has to be real too.

Rejoice! Rejoice! Emmanuel
shall come to thee, O Israel.

Once we were happy...

...once in the garden
then a lie broke the stillness
and our hearts began to harden.

(If God is my Father, Larry Norman)

I have been reading the essay High-Performance Prison in the book...

"Managing Performance to Maximize Results (Results-Driven Manager)" (Harvard Business School Press)

I suppose I am coming at this from two points. The first is that I am happy to accept that the "High-Performance" component of the title refers to my approach to the need to succeed (whatever that means in Ministry) and not necessarily to any discernible result for the bum on the pew. The second has to be that my previous working incarnation was filled with lots of the indicators in the essay that mark somebody out as a candidate for burn-out, or at least the paralysis brought on by approaching work in an unhealthy way.

Some indicators provided in the essay are...

Single-minded
Persevering
Self-reliant
Assiduous
Unremitting
Monomaniacal
Zealous
Indefatigable

Hang on...don't we value these in some of our Clergy?

The essay is a little unsatisfactory in that it doesn't provide any means of escaping this prison, although I suppose it could be argued that the recognition of this being the case is, at least, a start. It does, however, illustrate many of the temptations within ourselves to minister (I know the book isn't directed at ministry but I believe the parallels are worth exploring) from within our own resources and in order to fulfil the needs of the broken-ness of our humanities...but of course we never can, because our selves are insatiable devourers of congratulation and recognition and, like any other addiction, they can never actually get enough.

I am aware of several cases of what the essay refers to as self-handicapping behaviour; the need to provide a scape-goat for failure (substance abuse is the example given in the essay), and the Church press probably has an example most weeks and I assume there are more that don't make the headlines.

And yet this has to be put into the context of those moments in Ministry where the sense of personal fulfilment (being an agent of the living God at work) which make all trials pale into insignificance. So some suggestions...

• What is success? God seems to honour faithfulness rather than fruitfulness
• Those who go to other Churches and want you to know that your Church sucks simply haven't faced up to the fact that their Church sucks too
• The Clergyperson at a meeting who tells you how wonderful things are at the moment is probably seeking the public approval we all crave, but is less restrained about seeking it
• Ultimately the Father-child relationship between my Creator and me has to be alive and vital
• If I go off the rails then that is not the end, but just one more difficulty that the Holy Spirit can work through and with to bring healing
• Go and get a life! Put a worship CD on and dance, or go for a run and get some fresh air
• Sometimes this job is so frustrating and mundane that I have to remind myself it is a vocation
• Sometimes this vocation is so all-consuming that I have to remind myself that it is just a job

I try to work this out as a prayer for all those ministering out of exhaustion rather than joy, compulsion rather than freedom, as prisoners of their own making rather than children made by our Father.

Meetings, meetings, meetings...

I was inspired by the book...

"Death by Meeting: A Leadership Fable...About Solving the Most Painful Problem in Business" (Patrick M. Lencioni)

...sufficiently to try to manage one recent meeting in a different way. It was a PCC meeting (if you're an Anglican then you'll know what I mean - for others its an elected group of people who hold a corporate responsibility for things, but aren't necessarily individually leaders or "elders") and we had made a decision to try to be a bit more strategic at alternate meetings. In the end I produced a paper outlining a paragraph and a couple of questions on nine subjects about which I thought I was beginning to get boring. Each member was allowed two votes for the topics they wanted to spend a solid 25 minutes discussing there and then, and the most popular two got talked about. Part of the deal was that I would not contribute (unless directly asked a question for clarification) but I would actively chair that part of the meeting to ensure that everybody expressed an opinion, and that any hint of conflict or stress was addressed in such a way that we could get to the bottom of it. None of the issues I had listed were in themselves particularly controversial, but sometimes there are surprising reasons for this sort of stuff.

In the end we discussed two related topics; welcome and nurture. I certainly felt I made progress because it gave me a real opportunity to listen to what people are saying. This listening process is vital because it becomes clear very quickly that the simple point one makes from the front is often misunderstood, coloured by the use of a word or idea that had been expressed differently in the past. A good example of this was my repeated invitations for anybody wishing to be prayed for after a service to remain quietly in the sanctuary area, surely a simple enough invitation and yet with very little take up - but then somebody asked a very direct question in another context and it was clear that the holding back was due to the need for me to explain again and in more detail what I am inviting people to take part in.

It is also really useful to be able to hear (without having to challenge) views because this can then be the framework for how to develop my own thinking in such a way as to be more comprehensible. A good example would be the suggestion during the discussion on welcoming where we quite quickly got down a track of having a Welcoming Team on a rota. This is not in itself a BAD suggestion, but formalises in a not necessarily helpful way something which should be within the spirit of a congregation - so I shuddered at the thought of having another "Team", but at least I have an idea of where to start.

It was also helpful to have a framework within which people could express their views without having to have them drawn out, which can look like an individual is being "got at". I felt the atmosphere was pretty relaxed and constructive.

One issue concerning meetings is how the Priest relates to a meeting such as this PCC one. We try to swap the chairing of the meeting round a bit, because there can be times when I chair, report and jot down actions all in the same few moments - that is a recipe for disaster! I may as well just get on with the job and cancel the meetings. It is, I think, almost impossible to chair a meeting properly at the same time as being the person about whom the discussion centres, or upon whom resulting actions will be placed. I don't need to gather 14 people in for a couple of hours just to feel bad about stuff suck on my to-do list - I can do that for myself at home, thank you very much.

I think I need to try another trick next time (and certainly when we are in business mode) which I think will have to be a run through of the actions that have been agreed at the meeting and then try to spread those out further. This isn't just to protect me, but when under pressure it is too easy to ask somebody who you know will say "yes" to take on something which is equally as bad. It is this review of the actions which is part of the GTD process and which is the weakest link in my capturing of information. Goodbye!

The dilemma of graciousness

A couple of times in the last week something has been said or done in situations that have made me feel hurt or undervalued. I have then had a bit of a wrestle with myself in order to respond in a gracious manner. It wasn't meant to sound like it had (or whatever), and so the way of grace - responding in the way Jesus would have - is the right way.

The dilemma is that I would like my graciousness to be recognised, which means that I have to let somebody know how much I had been offended so that they can appreciate the degree to which I was gracious in the response. But by doing that my response ceases to be gracious.

Oh dear. I really do still have a long way to go...

I don't understand genetics...

Sometimes our children do something which we see as a reflection of ourselves, and we can be either proud or cross depending on whether we like that thing about ourselves. At other times we see them do something which seems to have sprung from the genes of the next generation back...

And then at other times they do things of bewildering brilliance which don't seem to have come from anybody!

More on being rubbish

I don't really think I'm rubbish, by the way (you're allowed to disagree or stop reading if your B.P. is steadily passing 139/89), except when measured against the 1950 Clergyperson Standard Unit. The 1950 C.S.U. may be a figment of somebody's imagination, but it has created the stereotype of a person who (in no particular order)...

• is devoted to his flock of 450 residents within the Parish boundary
• bundles around in a cassock most of the day
• can recall everybody's ailments and is interested enough to always ask about them
• agrees with everything people say to them
• generally approves of the lifestyle of his flock, and preaches against the dangers of some goings on in the world outside
• hopes to keep his nose clean so that he will one day be made a Canon of the Cathedral
• writes monographs on butterflies or knows the intricacies of the steam train timetable
• tolerates doing very few things particularly well because he thinks he should be the jack of all trades
• starts any address to children with the lines "Do you know, when I was at school they thought that atoms were like the currants in a spotted dick..." (or similar analogy)

I think it was Eugene Peterson who coined the phrase about the expectation on the Minister as somebody who

sprinkles Holy Water on other people's good intentions.

However, as I think a lot of people realise, we are too far gone for that style of ministry to really hold water any more. It is remembered with a certain rose-tinted fondness by older Priests and Parishioners alike. I was grateful to Caroline for her perceptive comment on my previous post on these lines, and as we draw towards Advent, for me a time suitable for lamenting what is wrong in the world, then perhaps we ought to lament that money and vocations can no longer sustain such a style of ministry.

I suspect that some of the momentum behind the desire for the good old days was that seeing the Vicar go about his business in the Parish was a reassuring sight - it meant that care with a community was taking place, although I believe that there would be a slight sense of relief that this care was being made visible by somebody else. Likewise the Priest tip-toeing into Church to see to Morning Prayer or the Boiler were reassuring because Church continues...again by somebody else - and more than that by a professional.

I met a couple recently in one of my villages and they expressed great surprise. They had met me before in another of my villages; they were in the pub for a meal and I think I was discussing some business over a 6X with a Churchwarden or two. For them the presence of the Vicar in the pub in the village was a sign of a thriving community. They were even more surprised to learn that I had travelled further to get to the pub than they had. So the presence of the Priest is also wrapped up in the whole image of a community, and it is important for Clergy to remember that the village into which we have been parachuted in order to try to establish an outpost of the Kingdom of Heaven, is also the place that the residents have paid a packet in order to live.

I am slightly alarmed by some recent comments relating to communal cohesion. Even in quite numerically small villages we are losing the sense of knowing and being known by everybody. There are a few people who are held up as examples of people who know everybody in the village, but I do sometimes have to challenge this assertion because I see people who know their particular peer group, but very few bridging generation, social or other boundaries. Perhaps, therefore, the presence of the Priest absolves those who feel guilt at not being involved in or engaged with their neighbours because they are far too busy doing other things (social or business, it doesn't matter which).

With hindsight, so the common wisdom goes, we can see that the 1950 C.S.U. style of ministry brought some good things, but also a whole pile of baggage, most notably the disablement of any other vocation other than Priest, and those functions which had to be filled within a Church were important but peripheral; it was good that somebody organised the flower rota, but that wasn't going to change the world of itself. I think this created a safe structure within which (most) people knew their place and therefore were able to function reasonably smoothly.

This new scenario of reducing Clergy numbers encouraging emerging vocations may well be a counsel of despair (as Tom Wright hints in the linked video clip), but it is the only reality within which we can currently inhabit.

Slightly cheesy Churchy moment...

Looking for something or Sunday I found a site offering ringtones of Taize chants - Wait for the Lord anyone?

If its Taize does that mean you are supposed to let it ring...and ring...and ring...

If you recall Reggie Perrin's mental image of a hippo every time his wife's mother is mentioned then that might explain why I get these recurring images of a...sorry, but in order not to offend any ladies reading who may be a) Methodist, b) violin players and c) don't shave their legs - the rest of this post is censored.

Why I am rubbish

I was part of an interesting discussion recently with a very nice man - a much older, wiser and more experienced Priest.

We talked about the changing role of the Priest, brought on by many different reasons. Once upon a time a Priest was at the geographical, social and pastoral heart of a community, but not now. Equally the Priest could bumble along "jack of all trades", but not now. There are things I have to do that I am not very good at, that comes with the territory, but there is too much to do for me to waste effort doing things others are better at.

The reason I put a rather self-accusatory title to this post is because, by the traditional measure of the faithful Clergyperson, I am pretty bad. The area where I suppose I feel I am the least of Priests is that of visiting. I do visit people, don't get me wrong, I just don't have the space to do the systematic, large scale pastoral visits of my predecessors.

I am not hard-wired for that part of the job for a start. Every time I do a hospital visit I find the ward and then the patient and I walk up to them and ask "How are you?". They're I'll you idiot - that's why they are in hospital!!

But there is a deeper issue here. I fully accept there are times and places where only a Clergy visit is appropriate. I think of my dear friend Norma, and time spent with her when she was in Intensive Care, but the expectation that I can drop everything to be at any bedside is a heavy burden. I know that sooner or later I will have NOT visited and it will be too late. The family will be angry and I will feel guilty. However by devoting energy to one aspect of pastoral care I would divert energy from a task I regard to be more vital; the recovery of that other ailing patient - the Church. I don't make great claims that I am doing that any better, just that mission and developing the ministries of others might look like something I can leave until later, and it is harder because I can visit a person in hospital, say, and then leave in the smug knowledge that my conscience is clear...

I got a very encouraging email from somebody concerned at the downbeat tone of many posts, but this is not meant to sound like that. The call upon my generation of Church leaders is different from the previous one's, and whilst there may be ongoing pain in the transition it is for this that I willingly responsed to the call I received. It is this which actually excites me and which, when it goes right, satisfies me most fully as a child of God trying to see the Kingdom in the world around me.

A pretty decent breakfast

Home-made porridge with maple syrup and a pot of fresh coffee...

"Obviously you're not a golfer..."

So says the Dude...

...so I was fairly quick to decline an invitation (kind and well meant, no doubt) to make up a regular Clergy grouping on the links (or whatever they play on round here).