I Scream, You Scream

Well, we did it, we had our 'debriefing and moving toward reconciliation' day-and-a-half meeting, me and the dozen or so people I work with.

"Sometimes when you come into these things you see the group is so fragmented there's really nothing left, but I don't think that's the case here. There's still enough of a bond...." said one of the facilitators, responding to the first day. But we certainly put a lot of challenges onto the table! There wasn't a lot of screaming, in spite of my headline, but there were a lot of tears and emotion.

The counselors leading the meeting gave us each 30 minutes to tell ‘our story.’ I thought that was a good approach: it allowed each person to talk and permitted some interaction and response without being a free-for-all. It seems kind of funny... we all went through the 'same' events, but given the weird patterns into which our ministry had fallen, we had some fairly radically different perspectives. Personalities really came out; I saw some patterns for dealing with life that rather surprised me. Some of them impressed me; I was disappointed in others. But I feel like I understand each person better and in most cases could empathize; I feel better equipped to see the world from that person's point of view. The process gave us more evidence for understanding why each person might act as they did / do / will.

We were regularly reminded not to use 'we' statements: To say "you/they did that to us," or "We need to do this," but instead "Here's what I feel," and "What would help me is..." It seemed to really help. I know I really wanted people to stop telling me how I was supposed to think, and what I could or couldn't say. Almost all of us were having a hard time getting over internal conflicts we faced, so it was good to put those on the table too.

There were some apologies, though probably not enough. (I for one feel a need to continue searching my heart for who I need to apologize to, and why.) There were some fights – again, maybe not enough (I'm pretty sure there's at least one person I should try to confront). But it was a good start at getting the mess out there. And I hope that will break some of the tension and make the way for some trust to grow.

The second day among other things we talked directly about the tension between leaders and staff members, based on the sense of betrayal each felt at the hands of the other (as well as and even more so at the hands of some other players who were not present). It's a pretty sticky divide. In the corporate culture and values of the organization we have joined there isn't a management/labor divide; there are just teams. Each team has a team leader but it's his or her job to serve, listen to, encourage and 'release' the team. I expect this means that the TL's identify more strongly with their teams than with the other TL's.

I really like that. We used to have a very similar, flat, servant-leader-oriented corporate culture but deliberate efforts had been made to change it. Instead of serving those who were following you, you served the person who supervised you; it was his or her expectations you were concerned about meeting. It will be interesting to see if everyone can adjust their thinking and go back - or trust and receive each other under new rules.

Have you heard the saying that 'each kid [in a family] has different parents'? I think the members of our current group signed on under different rules and enlisted in different missions. So it is not surprising that even though we all express some allegiance to what we signed up for when we joined Caleb Project we don't mean the same things when we say that. It makes this sense of having a 'bond' to one another quite a bit more complicated.

I spoke out in support of a move to recommit ourselves to openness and authenticity. There was talk about writing a group covenant, which I thought was a great idea; many of our research teams have done that. But the idea was perceived as reactionary and threatening by several who felt their behavior had been most questioned in that respect. Hmmm. I'm pretty concerned if people will not allow their behavior to be questioned. How can we move forward if we cannot allow others to question us and hold us accountable? And yet I can see how someone might interpret that direction as destroying trust. What a funny thing. I don't feel safe in an environment where people won't let their behavior be questioned. Someone else will not feel safe in an environment where they are questioned. Of course tone and context play a part, but I think there is still a root contradiction here. It concerns me. But it may not be unsolvable.

At the end, each person had a chance to share what they wanted to ‘bring’ to the group and what they ‘needed’ from the group. I have a hunch that some of what people said they needed are things we cannot give them. But again, it’s good to have the expectations out in the open. In one of the interviews I did while writing 'Through Her Eyes,' my friend 'Isabelle' talked about how if you aren’t getting something you think you need, and you know God commits himself to meet your needs, it could be that you don't need that thing like you think you did. I think about that a lot.

All of this got me thinking more about the question of trust. The word came up frequently during these sessions. I think I, for one, have been operating under an assumption that I should be able to trust the people I work with and for - meaning I guess that they should behave in what I consider trustworthy ways. I think we should be open, listening, and responsive. We should prepare; we should follow through. We should place a high value on accurate communication. So when someone plays their cards close to their chest, doesn't listen and make adjustments based on consensus, or is regularly inaccurate, I tend to think: they can't be trusted; I don't respect them. Does it have to be that way? Or would it be better to adjust my thinking about this?

So in getting ready to go into the second day of our meetings I gave a bit of time to examining the concept of trust. What does the Bible tell us about trust? What do I mean when I talk about trust? What is it I'm asking for? How can I respond if I cannot have what I ask?

What is trust? My dictionary defines trust as total confidence in the integrity, ability, and good character of another; to depend: rely; to be confident: hope; to believe; to depend on confidently. Well, that's asking a lot, isn't it? It sounds like a lot more than 'something that all nice Christian people should be prepared to give everybody.' We shouldn't! People are way too complicated to give or expect that kind of 'total confidence.' Heck, I would not want to ask anybody to put their total confidence in me: I would not respect them if they did. It would be so foolish!

What does the Bible say about trust? In just thinking through the scriptures just briefly (I think I will study this more deeply in days to come) - I am not sure there is a lot of evidence that we as believers have a responsibility to place our trust in one another. What do you think? Of course there are some commands a lot more difficult to carry out, like 'honor one another as better than yourselves.' But there's a lot more talk about trusting in God than trusting people. I don't think I'm going to assume I need to give a whole-hearted trust to the people around me because I believe it's incumbent on me, then. I don't. Nor am I going to give unconditional trust to people out of some expectation that I feel like I have to be a trusting person. I don't think that either; there are things more important. Not that I'm going to walk around nursing suspicions, but it's OK - more than OK - to have healthy doubts and reservations. To think. To question. To speak up.

No, I think I need to give up feeling like I have an obligation to be unconditionally loyal or trusting. Not that I ever DO trust people in that kind of way, but I do feel guilty, sometimes, for not doing so and there are certainly others who would tell me that's what I'm supposed to do, that they need me to give them my trust and respect. But I'm not going to take on that expectation. Instead, here's what I'm going to do with that 'need' to trust and to follow someone trustworthy. I will trust God. He can deliver.

And, I will strive to be 'willing to trust' people - eyes wide open. I don't think that's being cynical, it's being mature. I will not 'expect the best of everybody,' but I will 'give others the benefit of the doubt.' Seems like there is a big difference. In fact, willingness to question and to push people to be accountable, pursued in the right spirit, may be a very healthy response and lesson to learn from the breakdown of our ministry.

Still, one thing I'd hope and pray for is that trust is something that would grow up in our office, be restored, come in time to characterize our relationships with one another a lot of the time. It's a process, isn't it? And like faith, or love, trust isn't "all or nothing."

All in all I would say this debriefing was very helpful. I feel good about my contribution to it as well as what I discovered about others. My ability to articulate things in a way others could relate to and receive without taking offense seemed to really be 'on' this week. I'm grateful too for the skilled facilitators who were able to take us into the fray with such grace and wisdom.

There's still a lot of work to do, in terms of reconciliation - not just with the people who were in that room but many who were not. Pray for us! As Psalm 133 says, how beautiful [and rare?] it is when brothers dwell together in unity. God's blessing is there; and abundant life. Like dew on the mountain in the morning. Or oil running down Aaron's beard into his collar! (Ew, some pictures don't translate as well as others, do they?)