While I struggle with how to make sense of this, it seems the key lies in submission. Following the Spirit is often an excuse for laziness or inaction. We sit back, fail to do what God is calling us do. All the while, we insist we are waiting on the Spirit. In the other extreme, we lay our plans and work the system; nothing will distract us from our goal. In truth, we are not submitting to God; we are submitting to our plans.

Reading from Common Prayer: A Liturgy for Ordinary Radicals this week, I was blown away by this quote from from Jesuit Jean-Pierre de Caussade (18th Century).

The great and firm foundation of the spiritual life is the offering of ourselves to God and being subject to his will in all things. We must completely forget ourselves, so that we regard ourselves as an object which has been sold and over which we no longer have any rights. We find all our joy in fulfilling God’s pleasure — his happiness, his glory and the fact that he is our great and only delight. Once we have this foundation, all we need to do is spend our lives rejoicing that God is God and being so wholly abandoned to his will that we are quite indifferent as to what we do and equally indifferent as to what use he makes of our activities. ¹

Submission and pursuit at the same time. We are called to actively submit to God’s activity in our life. We will continue to live in this tension between fortitude and flexibility. I would be interested in how you understand this tension.

This morning, I was reading Genesis 24:1-27. This is the story of Abraham’s servant being commissioned to find Isaac’s wife. The servant is doubtful that he will succeed; yet after agreeing on provisions, he agrees to the task.

(Genesis 24:9 NIV) So the servant put his hand under the thigh of his master Abraham and swore an oath to him concerning this matter.

While it might seem awkward placing our hand under our master’s thigh, this is how they did it in those days . Anyway, he packs his bags and heads off to Abraham’s homeland. As I read the story, I was struck by the servant’s dependance on God’s leading. He doesn’t devise a strategic plan for finding Isaac’s wife; he doesn’t gather a team to plan his trip. He simply heads off trusting God to provide.

(Genesis 24:12 NIV) Then he prayed, “O LORD, God of my master Abraham, give me success today, and show kindness to my master Abraham.

He understands that he cannot succeed on his own. He continues to ask God for guidance.

(Genesis 24:13–14 NIV) 13) See, I am standing beside this spring, and the daughters of the townspeople are coming out to draw water. 14) May it be that when I say to a girl, ‘Please let down your jar that I may have a drink,’ and she says, ‘Drink, and I’ll water your camels too’ — let her be the one you have chosen for your servant Isaac. By this I will know that you have shown kindness to my master.”

He pleads for direction, for God’s will to be accomplished in this deal. He knows his task is difficult. He will need to convince the future wife to leave her homeland, her family. He understands the drawbacks for the chosen girl. As you continue to read the story, the young girl fulfills the servant’s request to God. In v. 21, we find the posture of the servant; this is what it means to discern.

(Genesis 24:21 NIV) Without saying a word, the man watched her closely to learn whether or not the LORD had made his journey successful.

I love that phrase “the man watched . . . closely to learn”. What a great definition of discerning. This is what it means to discern God’s movement in the world. I fear that we are often so busy working the plan that we fail to “watch closely to learn.” The rest is history. There are a few more twists and turns along the way, but ultimately this is the girl for Isaac. In the end, the servant worships.

(Genesis 24:26–27 NIV) 26) Then the man bowed down and worshiped the LORD, 27) saying, “Praise be to the LORD, the God of my master Abraham, who has not abandoned his kindness and faithfulness to my master. As for me, the LORD has led me on the journey to the house of my master’s relatives.”

May we be a discerning people who “watch closely to learn” what God is doing in our midst. May we be suspicious of orderly plans that leave God’s movements out of the equation. May we, like Abraham’s servant, understand our dependance on God.

Shared Team Dynamic

I was relieved that we had created a strategy for every team member to share in the presentation of the story. Each leader was responsible to share a particular area of the decision. This was well-planned; each person know his/her job. When I was incapable of leading, it was not a big deal; the show went on (for lack of a better term). I am convinced that decisions are best communicated when various people participate in the story. Each leader brings a different angle, a different perspective. This strengthens the story.

Need for a Leader

At the same time, when an unhappy church member threw the team a curve ball, the mood quickly soured. It seems that my presence may have been helpful in this particular situation. The member cited the church constitution and questioned the validity of the leadership council making this decision. The leaders were not prepared for such a critique. The negative comment prompted others to criticize on other unrelated items. While my being sick was unavoidable, the leader’s presence is preferred in the communication stage. I may have been able to bring the conversation back to a positive tone (or not . . .).

Shifting Culture

At the end of the day, the church affirmed the decision to move forward with the the Leadership Council’s plan. Many expressed appreciation for the hard work of church leaders. While discerning is messy, unpredictable, I am sure that the discernment process gave the leaders the needed structure to adequately discern. They were able to present their story with confidence. First Baptist Muncie still functions on unhealthy levels; but we are making progress. We still have to learn healthy ways to ask questions and express concerns. We need to shift from expressing opinions to collectively discerning. We have to learn appropriate ways to call out inappropriate actions. As leaders, we are in the business of changing culture. It will not happen overnight. I hope that I do not miss another meeting because I am worshiping at the ceramic throne. But if I do, I am confident that the Holy Spirit will still move among the people of God.

The next step is to return to the church council with the information collected from the congregational meeting. I will keep you up to date on the implementation of this decision. The communication stage continues; it carries on until everyone stops asking questions.

At the same time, we are implementing the discernment process (outside of the thesis) with a major church decision regarding changing our Sunday morning schedule. While this may seem like a minor decision to some, in an established church an adequate process can make the difference between much confusion and unity.

Going through the process a second time has revealed the power of a defined process. The process pressed us to spend sufficient time and energy on the decision to alter our Sunday morning schedule. Without giving too much detail, I would like to summarize the work of our leadership team. We met yesterday evening in our third meeting since November 7. Allow me to describe each meeting; this may give you a sense of how the process works.

November 7 (Explore/Listen)

In our initial meeting, we explored various options for altering our Sunday morning schedule. These options included everything from moving to one combined service to canceling Sunday school. We eventually ruled out some of the more extreme actions. However, everything was on the table during this stage. By the conclusion of this meeting we had reached 3 potential options: 1) Do nothing 2) move our early service earlier and late service later 3) implement a flip flop schedule that includes two worship hours and two Sunday school hours.

The second task of this initial meeting was to develop a listening strategy. The strategy would include listening to outsiders, congregational participation, and seeking the Holy Spirit. We developed a three-week listening strategy. Everyone had an assignment and began to work the listening strategy. Over the next 3 weeks, we conducted an all-church survey, spent time in Sunday school classes discussing possibilities, spent time in worship corporately praying about the decision, made phone calls to the other churches regarding their schedules, spoke to students in the area about their Sunday morning schedules, and more.

December 5 (Examine/Decide)

We met a second time on December 5 to examine and synthesize what we learned. This was an amazing experience. We all came into the room with different ideas; we left the room in unity. In this two-hour block of time, we explored what we heard. People shared from their experience of prayer and discernment. Everyone agreed that some change was necessary. We explored the two options informed by the activities of the listening strategy. It seemed as if the Holy Spirit was speaking in our midst. The more we discussed, the more a flip-flop schedule seem to make sense. By the end of the meeting, everyone agreed on a direction. We did not have all specifics worked out; we would meet again on January 9 to discuss the specifics. We also scheduled in all church gathering for January 22 to present the model.

January 9 (Communication)

The fourth stage of the discernment process is communication. It is not enough to decide; we must tell the story of the process in order to confirm our discerning. While a schedule change does not require affirmation from the congregation (a church vote), the leaders felt it necessary to communicate and give the congregation a chance to endorse the decision. We now have a developed plan to communicate the decision. It involves each person on the Council sharing an element of the process with the congregation. We will find out how it goes on January 22. We plan to share and take a consensus vote on this date (I need to share with you about how this works. This will be a subject for a future blog post). I will keep you updated on the progress.

The Benefit of a Process

Is this process of discernment helpful? Will the process aid unity at First Baptist Church Muncie? My sense is that it will. We are learning how to discern as a congregation. We are learning to ask for God’s will rather than lobby for our own preference. I am hopeful that the Spirit will move through our continual discerning as a congregation.

Andrew Chervev from Northwestern University wrote an article entitled Choosing Versus Rejecting: the Impact of Goal Task Compatibility on Decision Confidence. While the title is a mouthful, the results are interesting. In his research he discovered that promotion-focused individuals tend to be more confident while prevention-focused individuals do not. He describes, “the data reported in a series of three experiments show that promotion focused individuals tend to be more confident in their decisions in the context of the selection rather than a rejection task, whereas prevention-focused individuals this effect is reversed.” ¹

What does he mean by this? What is a promotion-focused individual as compared to a prevention-focused individual? I have to admit, I don’t really like these terms. Promotion-focused sounds self-centered, institutional. What he means by a promotion-focused individual is one that is positive thinking, looking ahead, task and goal oriented. In turn, a prevention-focused individual is one who is trying to prevent something bad from happening. They are not necessarily forward thinking, they are just trying to put out fires.

So what does this have to do with the church? What does it have to do with decision-making? While Chervev’s research is from a psychosocial viewpoint (it does not take into account spiritual dimensions of decision-making), his conclusion should be considered. It seems that promotion-focused churches would be those that have a sense of mission, churches who are seeking God’s direction, mission-focused, considering God’s work in our world. We have to be careful, in terms of missional thinking, that the promotion-focus is not about ourselves, our institution. Rather, we are focused on promoting God’s mission in the world.

In contrast, prevention-focused churches are those who are simply trying to appease its members. You probably know churches like this. In board meetings, the discussion usually centers around those who are upset. We question how we can fix the problems; little time is given to vision, considering what God is doing in the world.

So if the result of Chervev’s study is true, we will be more confident in our decision-making if we are missional, promotion-focused (promoting God’s mission, not ourselves). If we are simply putting out fires, attempting to appease members, our confidence level will remain low.

I thought this study was applicable to churches and decision-making. I hope you find it interesting.

(Psa 119:105 NIV) Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path.

While God provides direction, it is often more like a handheld oil lamp, less like a high-powered flood light. We don’t always see the next question around the corner. This truth can be frustrating, it feels like we are spinning our wheels at times. Following God is not easy, it is not always efficient, it does not always produce quick results. As an American who loves efficiency, this is hard. It seems other cultures find this dynamic easier. Middle Eastern, African, and Asian cultures value community over breakneck speed. We have more to learn in this realm.

I was recently listening to a leadership podcast from a church. While many of the principles were of value, I found the podcast description telling. It was described as,

a conversation designed to help leaders go further, faster

Do we really want to get there faster? The American answer is yes! Isn’t further and faster better? Don’t we want to get as much done as possible in the shortest amount of time? Yes, leaders should desire to go further and deeper into God’s calling; but I am not sure that faster is better. In fact, we often find that God’s timing does not match ours. Sometimes slowing down is the appropriate action. Discerning God’s calling is a process that never ends. Slow down and take your time. You will always be moving; don’t get in such a hurry.

The goal of this stage was to synthesize our listening; it was a time to reflect on what God was revealing to us. I could go into detail describing the ins and outs of our conversation together. However, I will spare you the details. I do, however, want to share with you the end result of our being together. The tone of this meeting was entirely different from our first meeting together. By the time we finished this meeting, there was an incredible unity in the room. How did this happen? What was different about this meeting?

One of the realities of our meeting together is the presence of the Spirit of God. Theologically, we understand that God’s Spirit is with us. Few would disagree that God works as we gather in His name; yet, we seldom expect this to happen. We rarely leave space and time for God to speak. Our tight agendas and thirst for efficiency often quench the Spirit of God. As we came into the meeting on Monday night, my nervousness was because I did not have a clear plan. At the same time, the openness of our time together actually allowed for the Spirit to work.

Another dynamic was the three-week period of listening. While I was nervous because we did not have a plan, we actually were well prepared for this meeting. We spent three weeks praying, reflecting, asking God to lead us in our decision-making. Why were we surprised when God moved among us? This dynamic reveals how broken our decision-making has been in the past. We would typically offer a token prayer, asking God to lead us; at the same time, our decision was mostly from our own ingenuity.

We still have much to learn in our listening to God. However, we are making progress. To finalize this process, we developed a plan to carry out the decision. Because this particular decision has many facets to it, there is more work to be done. Yet, the team was able to determine a direction to pursue; a decision was reached.

I will keep you updated as I progress in my writing. The next step involves the leadership team taking the initial survey again. Once these surveys are complete, I will analyze the data and form conclusions. In the meantime, I’ll continue to come to this decision-making process as a learner, realizing that God often surprises us.

The tendency is to meet, talk through an issue, and decide. Most of the time, this happens in one or two meetings. The discernment process that has been developed by the MSG at First Baptist requires much more. Because we took the time to develop a listening strategy, much more energy will be put into this decision. We spent time praying in worship on Sunday; an all church survey was distributed this week. Team members are doing appropriate research in our community and among other churches. We will spend twenty-four hours praying for God’s direction; some will fast during this period. All of these actions will affect how we approach the decision.

It is no longer about personal preference, we have a sense that God is going to speak into this decision. The system of decision-making is changing the way that people behave. I am looking forward to observing more as we progress.

The plan developed was a comprehensive finite period of listening. It includes a survey of the congregation, planned worship experiences around the decision, a twenty-four hour prayer vigil, and research (including community, budget, and denominational research). We will pause our preferences and open our ears.

The period of time for this particular decision is three weeks. Some decisions may require longer periods of time. I will keep you updated as we move through this process.

Enter stage one: Explore.

The purpose of this stage is to bring clarity to the question. Is this something that we need to decide? Are there particular time restraints for this decision? What options do we have?

By the end of the evening, we concluded that this is a necessary decision. One leader commented, “We have never really had this conversation. Before each area would choose staff. There has never been a overall evaluation of our staffing needs.” The decision of staffing is something that we needed to address. There are many options, really too many. People kept proposing solutions, almost as if they wanted to convince others that their idea was viable. I found myself having to pull them back to the exploring stage. Other times, they jumped ahead to develop a strategy for listening. “We need to talk to ______?” or “How do we know if ______?” After an hour or so, we finally decided that it would be best to meet again next week to create a strategy for listening.

A few observations:

The group had a hard time staying on track. They kept jumping to solutions, or asking questions about particulars. It was hard for them to simply brainstorm options.

Also, by the end of our time together, the options were far wider than I had imagined. We had identified many items that needed to be explored; most of these items had not occurred to me before. On the one hand, I was more confused than ever. On the other hand, I felt that we had made progress; we had uncovered options and issues that we had not considered before our time together.

Finally, I am sure that time for reflection is a necessary part of the process. People were quick to rush to conclusions. Yet, taking time to allow the Spirit to speak is a necessary part of any discernment process. My hope is that we will experience the power of waiting, processing all that we learn.

I am hopeful that this process will produce a unified decision; I am eager to develop the listening strategy as the next stage of the process.