Here are some of the elements:
–Meetings will begin and end on time, with consent and discussion agendas planned to maximize time for effective discussion and decision-making.
–A detailed agenda and all documents pertaining to agenda items will be mailed to members sufficiently in advance of the meeting date to allow for thorough study. –It is the responsibility of each member to familiarize themselves with the materials prior to the meeting.
–I will come to the meeting on time and stay the entire time. If I am unable to attend, or must leave before the end of the meeting, I will notify the leader in advance.
–I will use “I” messages when I address the meeting: “I believe;” “I think;” “I want;” etc.
–I will listen respectfully to what others have to say without interrupting. I will not engage in side conversations when another speaker has the floor.
Read it all (hat tip: Bible Belt Blogger)
Well, at least they believe in something.
Are nappy rugs optional?
Such points of etiquate are good to put into clear communication to participants but, specifically, a few confound me.
“–I will use “I†messages when I address the meeting: “I believe;†“I think;†“I want;†etc.”
Some years ago I had the privilege of chairing an executive group of about 10 people. At the very beginning I was advised by some old salts of collegiate experience to have people avoid stating things in a black and white manner and urge people to use the “I” messages. I pondered the wisdom and at the very first board meeting I related something similar to what follows to the board:
Fellow board members, we have been given a heavy and difficult duty that will affect many people far into the future. We are not here for the purpose of finding some collective concepts that would only displease each of us a little. We are here with the task of finding the BEST solutions possible. With that in mind I expect that we would at times speak passionately, we would argue facts and not opinions, and that we, in the end would accomplish the heavy duty that has been laid upon us.
It was the best three years of my life (as far as meeetings go) and I love those board members still today. Amazingly there were few times when we met a severe arguement and were consistantly congenial even then. Most important of all, we met the challenges that were sent to us. And meetings were short!
I can not imagine the waste of time and energy listening to “I think…” in endless verbal dances.
Man makyth manners.
Very well put indeed, DonGander!
Maybe we’d not be in this mess if there were fewer “I [and Me] messages.” Bp Robinson has great difficulty not using those pronouns incessantly; perhaps he read this. The purpose of this covenant is in theory, of course, to preclude anyone from making assertions that they don’t own, and to tamp down bombast. But in fact it quite often has the opposite effect, as suddenly every disagreement becomes personal. (This is the reason parliamentary procedure favors depersonalization when referring to others.) There is great wisdom in the old etiquette of reducing to a bare minimum one’s use of the first person singular pronouns.
In the part of our country in which I was raised, “good manners” and “courtesy” are still the mark of a ‘well bred person.’
And the concept of ‘well bred’ is not necessarily a socio-economic label. The ‘well bred’ person whether he is a garage mechanic, a sawyer, a teacher, a farmer or a bank officer is known by his demeanor. Those who don’t adhere to this basic standard of civil behavior are generally viewed as ‘ill-mannered people’ and quite often suffer consequences for their behavior. And this is quite often a certain level alienation from other members of the community.
That alienation often results in resentment and a reinforcement of uncivil behavior. It’s a viscious generational cycle.
The fact that this diocese has seen the need to establish rules for civil behavior says a whole lot.
[i]The fact that this diocese has seen the need to establish rules for civil behavior says a whole lot. [/i]
What does it say? These rules are nothing different from what you’ll find at any well organized group that has lots of meetings. Do a Google search on “How to conduct a successful and effective meeting” and you’ll find links to similar lists.
The “whole lot” said here is someone took the time to get people organized and prepared for meetings.
You guys will spin anything. What does that say about you?
You’re right, Revamundo, no sense in speculating, although the comments so far – except for yours and the implications of #7 – do not match your complaint since they are about the use of such “I” statements and they did not mention the diocese at all.
But let’s find out….
How many dioceses out there have such resolutions or policies devised by their executive councils/diocesan councils, and for those that know, why was it, i.e. were there certain circumstances or histories of discord, that such policies happened to be devised or requested?
RGEaton
The rules themselves suggest that there’s a good deal of jawing about a great deal of nothing.
Revamundo,
‘Good manners’ are rapidly disappearing from everyday life in our country. In their place has come an assertive ‘me-me-it’s all about me-ness’ which can be seen on the highway, in the supermarket and which is propogated through the entertainment media.
It’s no surprise to me that a need to propogate rules for civil discourse was seen in Lexington.
This new incivility includes the off-hand use of foul and semi-foul language in public places.
There seems to be no question for a need for civility in our modern society. But I stand to rail against this type of “control” put in place in meetings. Telling folks (and making them agree in order to participate) how they can talk (what words they must use) and whether they can comment on (or repeat) what someone else has said is what was used in Communist China in the 1940s in the beginning to control protest and later to control thought. The next step is easily an agreement (forced) to speak only about matters on the agenda and then only as to how they relate to local matters. And then, conversation can be restricted to certain subjects, with other subjects being off the table. Note in these rules, also, how side conversations are forbidden and private conversations among less than the whole group are then to be relayed to the whole group. This is conversation control. If one has a minority point of view, side conversations or private conversations are the way to determine if your minority point of view has any support. But if these are forbidden or must be reported to the whole group after they occur, then any disagreement with the powers that be can be quashed very early before it can gain any traction. This “Courtesy Covenant” is one of the most dangerous things I’ve seen in a long time, and if it becomes common within our church (which I do expect), you’ll know why … to control the conversation and thought processes of the clergy and pewsitters, so no rebellion can foment or arise. This is not something to be taken lightly.
One more thing … note, at the end, they reserve the right to call to the attention of everyone at the meeting this “Courtesy Covenant.” Now we are talking about the Diocesan Executive Council here. There is no thought here of calling everyone into prayer, if there is a need to step back for a minute (which is what we do at our church meetings, when things get a little rough and tumble – and it always works). This group agrees to call anyone to task by citing attention to the pre-existing covenant, not by asking the Lord for help and guidance. This sounds like man’s solution to man’s problems without any reliance on the Lord. Very sad.
Greetings –
I personally applaud the Diocese of Lexington for adopting these “norms” and encourage all groups to do the same, whether they be committees, executive councils, religious education – whatever. Such norms level the playing field and get all participants on the same page as well as elicit commitment to the norms. Way to go, Lexington! Rather than picking, I encourage commenters to see this as a positive move. There’s no magic in this, and it’s not a unique statement nor judgment on issues within the TEC. All well-run organizations do this.
Blessings –
BJ Spanos, Professional Communications Consultant
BJ Spanos, Ink – http://www.bjspanos.com
In the FWIW Dept. – I first ran across the term “I message” in a course called Parent Effectiveness Training (PET). An “I message” is intended to be part of a conflict resolution approach and considered to be a more desirable alternative to a “You message” as in, “You always…” or “You are a jerk.” The purpose is to encourage someone to be direct and take responsibility for their own feelings and thoughts instead of going at it in a passively aggressive manner. So, instead of “You make me so mad,” the suggested alternative would be, “I am angry at you.” The pitfall, as has been pointed out above, is when it affords to opportunity to just blather endlessly about me, myself and I.
Folks, we are talking about people involved in Christian ministry here, people presumed to educated and literate, who are charged by their diocese to be prayerful while discerning the way forward.
The is (or should be) a presumption that educated adults in the room, should at least be able to string cogent thoughts and words into a string, that others listening to can understand. This presumption also accepts that the others in the room ought to be able to respond in an equally cogent manner.
My read on this article is that either:
1) The members of these groups in Lexington do not qualify as reasoned, educated adults, but more closely resemble children on the playground, or
2) These people DO qualify as reasoned, educated adults, but that this is an attempt to specifically quash dialogue in the meetings by forcing it into narrow channels more easilly controlling the ability of the participants to discuss issues freely.
If the former, then the rules wont amount to much and they really ought to replace the children with adults.
If the latter, then it’s over in DioLexington and thought/word control has come into force, designed to squash open and free discussion.
I agree with much of what has been said. Our vestry once adopted a similar rule that we would not respond to what some people in our congregation are saying that (fill in the blanks). We avoid wasting a lot of time on non issues. If the vestry person believe we should discuss it, then a personal opinion was in order.
BJ,
Good to have an Orthodox voice here. Also, reading through your life work, you have had a stellar career so far in assisting people to communicate and communicate clearly. Bravo. This one quote of yours really caught my eye, though, given our TECusa issues:
Effective communications must be compelling and well thought out so they are easily understood, do not conflict with earlier communications, are accurate and present a professional image consistent with the firm’s strategic, business and marketing goals.
I want to suggest that you send your resume to our Presiding Bishop. She (and her office) could really use your help.
But back to Lexington —
You might have been able to share the concept of Christian communication privately within the organizations that you have served over the years, but I doubt if you’ve been able to do that publicly. Still, your own obvious personal ability and skill in facilitating – presumably with a Christian foundation of how that should work – will make and have made your groups hum along. I would consider that ability an “area of ministry” (as per 1 Corinthians 12:4-6) wherein a spiritual gifts “works”. Perhaps it is the honed gift of hospitality. But back to the Christian setting, where everybody is supposed to be cognizant of the same foundation of Christian communication (as in the fruit of the Spirit) we shouldn’t have to tie up ourselves with such “norms” (which DonGander and Billy implied above can eventually become nothing but concrete shoes).
Obviously, such norms and even Rules of Order are placed into being to help provide order and parameters, but also because even Christians meeting together can’t always seem to behave properly. Sinners that we are. So we still need to recognize the foundation, and then make use of the Spirit-gifted facilitator (who will know how to make use of a moment of prayer as an aid and not a weapon, which I have also seen done in larger meetings).
My hope and prayer for every group in the church is that they can refrain from laying upon themselves the burden of these potentially binding communication norms. At the same time it is my greater hope and prayer for every group and assembly in the church that such a gifted facilitator such as yourself would appear, led by the Spirit and encouraged and recognized by leadership.
Blessings to you.
RGEaton
Many thanks for your kind words Fr. Eaton. My husband and I are sharing this process with our mission parish – St. Christopher Hellenic Orthodox Church in Peachtree City, Georgia. So far, our efforts have been well received, as our parish is looking at this as way not to hamper or restrict spiritual growth, but as a tool to help us work together better as a team to His glory. It is my fondest wish that those in the Christian setting have no need of these types of norms, but as you note we all are sinners and further many people have no idea how to particpate in, run, nor have ever experienced a well-run meeting; hence, I believe there is place for norms and other communication aids to facilitate effective communication and meetings. I look on them as helpful guidelines and tools, not chains that bind. When they become chains, then the group using them needs to re-evalute the norms as well as prayerfully look to themselves in their application of them. As noted, norms are tools, nothing else.
By the way, I learned a great deal about the creating and application of norms from my years as an EFM mentor and student – prior to becoming an Orthodox Christian. While the text used in the EFM program may be not always be theologically sound, the guidance for how to conduct a group is marvelous as is its theological reflection process.
I am happy to assist any organization learn to how communicate better, based on a Christian foundation. If I can ever be of assistance, please contact me.
Blessings –
BJ Spanos
It seems to me that:
– if everyone present is acting and communicating out of brotherly love
– if eveyone is remembering that they are to move within the will of God
– if everyone operates from a perspective of Christian charity
….then these rules would be unnecesary.
As a vestry member myself, I would hope and pray that my fellow vestry members and I strive to do just that. Being humans, I am sure we have allf ailed at times, but I have been on the vestry less than one year, and so far, I cannot recall a single “inappropriate” comment or a single episode of ineffective or offensive communication.
#14. Thanks Mr. Spanos. I can’t help but wonder if these norms had come from one of the Nigerian congregations if they would have been praised to heaven as God’s will.
#21. Don’t know. You’re welcome.
BJ (BTW – I’m a Mrs. not a Mr. – no worries, happens all the time as does folks assuming that Spanos is a Hispanic name rather than Greek.)
Hello, BJ Spanos! I hope you are well. Aren’t you glad to be out of the TEC mess in KY?
Greetings, Alice –
While I am glad to be away from the day-to-day turmoil, I am grateful to TEC as it set me on the path to becoming an Orthodox Christian. I was brought up in the Presbyterian / Methodist traditions, but always loved the liturgy. My best friend is Roman Catholic, and I used to attend Mass with her occassionally when we were teenagers. When I married, I became an Episcopalian and loved it. Over the years as the basic doctrine of the church began to shift and my spiritual life developed, I also noticed that I was restless and desired to be a part of a faith tradition that required more of me and was more rigorous. Orthodoxy is just such a tradition – it beautifully asks me to worship with my whole body, mind and soul – and its traditions and theology are stable, not open to the whims of the day. Yes, it is rigorous as there are many more services to attend and frequent periods of fasting. But for me, it is where I belong, and the reasons I came to Orthodoxy are so much more than the problems within the Anglican Communion. I pray fervently that TEC will turn back from its heretical ways, but if not, that there can be some sort of peaceful settlement. I commend the orthodox Episcopalians for standing their ground, but pray they do not become mired in the argument for the sake of argument and forget why they are standing firm. I worry because some commenters seem stuck in that space and pray that they can let their frustration and anger dissapate and be replaced with forgiveness and peace. Finally, I pray that the orthodox Anglican / Episcopalian leaders will lead and not just talk so that they can lead their flocks to a fuller life of joyful worship, service and praise.
Blessings –
BJ
I am now Orthodox also, BJ, and have no regrets. I feel as if I have come home and my prayer life has dramatically deepened now that I am attached to the roots of our Faith. I continue to pray for my friends in TEC and those in transition under Global South Bishops. God is reshaping Anglicanism and maybe there will be opportunity to again discuss a closer relationship between the Orthodox Church and The Anglican Communion.
I’m glad that we are both in Orthodoxy, dear sister in Christ!