A Deeply Disturbing Conversation about the Mission Statement
Recently I had a chat with a guy I know, love and deeply respect who is a CGGC pastor. In my opinion, he is one of the sharpest knives in the CGGC drawer, perhaps the sharpest of all. He’s been in ministry for many years and his ministries have always produced the best fruit.
I said to him, “You were on the General Conference Ad Council when it approved the Mission Statement, right?”
He said, “No.”
Surprised, I said, “You were on Ad Council last term, from 07 to 10, right?”
He said, “Uh huh.”
“Hmmm. According to Ed in the Church Advocate, the Mission Statement was approved in September 08.”
“Well, I don’t remember it.”
-----------------
Now Gang,
I don’t know what to think. But, I have tons of macro-questions.
What does it say about concern for mission in the CGGC that this guy—truly one of our best and brightest—could have been on Ad Council and, barely two years after approving the Mission Statement, not remember that he was on the Ad Council that approved it?
What does it say about the role of truth in our body that this could happen?
What does it say about the CGGC macro leadership culture—not the individual leaders themselves—that something as bizarre as a bright guy being part of the approval of a first Mission Statement in our nearly 180 year history (at the time) and remembering it with no greater clarity than which shirt he had on on that day?
What does it say about our leadership meetings: Conferences, Commission meetings, Ad Council meetings, which are so dominated by shepherd values, that this could happen?
Does the CGGC, as an aggregate whole, even care about mission? Truth?
Does anyone but me think that this conversation points to disturbing realities about who we are and what our future holds?
What does the reality that this conversation actually took place show us that we need to repent of?
posted by bill Sloat at 8:09 AM
2 Comments:
Just sounds to me like maybe the guy you're talking about either wasn't that passionate and engaged with articulating the CGGC mission. If that's the case, he might have thought the conversation was just about putting a nice little banner over the door, not about shaping actual thinking and directions.
Fran,
That's the first thing that occurred to me. And, if this guy was a shepherd, I'd have no doubt that that's what happened. But, he's very obviously wired in his calling as an apostle and is very mission oriented in his own ministry.
Because of that, I suspect that there is more to the story and that he holds a profound level of cynicism about the CGGC as a body and that, in his heart, he has no respect for us as a body and for the macro leadership culture. (In fact, he spoke very lightly and cynically about his membership on the Council and the role he has been assigned on it.)
What disturbs me is that, knowing who's was on Ad Council when it adopted the Mission Statement and how the Lord has gifted them for their calling, I didn't expect CGGC mission to mean much to most of those people because they are commissioned by the Lord to be shepherds, stewards of relationship in the Body, not of mission. But, I hoped that there might be a remnant in leadership taking seriously the reality that our Body must be connected to mission in some way. And, if my friend, with whom I had this conversation, doesn't even remember being a part of the adoption of the Mission Statement, my guess is that few, if any, have awareness of a CGGC mission and fewer still are willing to make it a hill they'd die on.
That concerns me for our future.
Post a Comment
<< Home