​

And Are We Yet Alive is a classic Methodist hymn, written by Charles Wesley. He wrote it as a gathering song for worship. John Wesley, his brother, incorporated the hymn into the conferences of the Methodist movement. Today, it’s often sung when United Methodist come together for special gatherings.

I once illustrated in a sermon the significance of this hymn in my life. Using sticky notes, I wrote down all the crises and challenges I faced in my life. No matter how great or how small, I wrote down each one. I stuck the sticky notes to my body. I was covered from head to toe in sticky notes! Then I repeated the phrase, “And am I yet alive!” At the time, it was a reminder that, after everything I faced, I was still alive.

All of us experience challenges. The question remains: Why are some people more resilient than others? What does it take to overcome a challenge? I think it has something to do with what we say to ourselves, how we think, and what we do.


What to Say

After I preached that sermon, I changed the way I talked to myself. I started saying things like, “You had faced challenges before and made it through. You will survive this new challenge, just like you have survived everything else.” When I’m stressed, and my mind is revved up, I remind myself, “In a year from now, you won’t remember going through this.” In most cases, that’s true. And when I’m really desperate, my mantra becomes, “This too shall pass.”

What do you tell yourself when faced with a challenge? I ask people this question whenever someone tells me they are facing a challenge. I might also ask, “What helped you get through it? What did you tell yourself?” We all have things we tell ourselves. One exercise to consider is to ask six people you are close to what they tell themselves during difficult times. Make sure to ask family members!


How to Think

How does one “think systems?” It’s easy to get fixated on one person and see them as the “problem.” We assume behavior is confined to the individual, but it’s not. A systems view of behavior shifts the focus off of the individual and onto the relationship system. For Bowen, the family is the main system. He saw the family, not as a collection of individuals, but as an emotional unit. Each person’s behavior connects to the functioning of the system. When there is a change in the way one person behaves, and the whole family shifts its functioning.

Dr. Bowen developed the family diagram as a way to observe and think systems. Using the format of a pedigree chart, Bowen diagrammed the emotional process within the family unit, including the multigenerational family. By approaching the family as a system, Bowen presented a new way to think about behavior within the context of a family.

This approach is also useful for other systems like congregations, workplaces, and communities. It’s easy to diagnose others or self. Seeing a challenge through a system lens broadens the focus of the problem, reduces the intensity, and provides a pathway for a more mature response.


What to Do

Just to review: learning to function at a higher level involves three basic steps. The first step is to calm down the internal stress response using words and phrases that reorientate the brain towards a more factual perception of reality. The second step is to widen one’s focus and not get caught in a narrow view of the problem. The third step is to take action.

After one calms down and observes the interplay of the relationship system, one begins to “see” the part one plays in the problem. And while it would be much easier to blame others or blame self, the facts speak for themselves. Triangles, the transfer of anxiety, the multigenerational process, and other concepts that Bowen outlined all play a role in how the system functions.

There are multiple options for responding to a problem. If one can observe the system at work and see how one contributes to the system, then one can choose to act differently. Taking an action step requires careful planning. It’s important to predict how others in the system will respond to an action step. It's essential not to react or blame when others are reactive and blaming. To be sure, one can get worked up on the inside during this process. So, it’s important to work at staying calmer. Even if others respond intensely, it’s important to stay in good contact and maintain one’s new position. Eventually, others will come around and accept it. And the system will do better.

Whether the challenge comes from the family, the congregation, the workplace, or the community having a coach can make a big difference. This is not about technique. This is about good thinking. And while there are thousands of blogs out there that will tell you what to do, this approach is about an effort to be a better self in relationship to others. There are concepts to guide one along the way that Dr. Bowen developed. Learning these concepts is one way to become the best person you can be.

 
Committees function at different levels.  Higher functioning committees focus on goals, are open to ongoing evaluation, and continually strive to do better.  They are energized by the work they do and regularly celebrate their accomplishments. 
 
Lower functioning committees blame others when they face a challenge.  They waste multiple meetings talking about the same issues without making progress.  They have inadequate motivation and complain about the work they do.
 
For clergy, working with a lower functioning committee is challenging.  One way to change the functional level of a committee is to nominate individuals who function at a higher level.  Ideally, leaders are selected because of their skills, abilities, and experience in a particular area of ministry.  They are also selected for their motivation and a willingness to do the work.  However, in some congregations, the election of leaders is driven by the emotional process of the relationship system and not by the collective mission and vision of the congregation.
 
Good thinking is required to have a successful committee.  And good thinking emerges from good questions.  Good questions flow out of one’s effort to step back, reflect, observe, and discover new things.  The thinking that is generated from good questions disrupts the automatic, reactive responses of the emotional system.   
 
Questions for consideration:
 

1. How invested are you in the work of the committee?
2. Is the work of the committee important to you?
3. What interests you in the work of the committee?
4. How would you describe your commitment to the committee?
5. How aware are you of the reasons each person is on the committee?
6. What strength does each person bring to the committee?
7. What strength do you bring?
8. What do you think are the best ways for the committee to organize itself?
9. What does each person on the committee think are the best ways to organize the committee?
10. What do you think are the most important issues to focus on?
11. What does each person on the committee think are the most important issues to focus on?

 
My favorite example of a high functioning committee is from a movie.
 
“Of Gods and Men is a 2010 French drama film directed by Xavier Beauvois, starring Lambert Wilson and Michael Lonsdale. Its original French language title is Des hommes et des dieux, which means "Of Men and of Gods" and refers to a verse from the Bible shown at the beginning of the film. It centers on the monastery of Tibhirine, where nine Trappist monks lived in harmony with the largely Muslim population of Algeria, until seven of them were kidnapped and assassinated in 1996 during the Algerian Civil War.” (Wikipedia Movie Page)
 
The monks must discern whether to stay in Tibhirine.  Do they continue to care for the people living there and risk being killed, or flee for their own safety?  Their process for discernment is compelling.  The monks meet once a week at a table.  Each monk is given time to articulate their thoughts about staying or leaving.  At first, there is disagreement.  The meeting ends and the monks return to their daily and weekly routines (which are mostly done in silence).  This is their individual time to think, reflect, observe, and discover.  The following week they gather again at the table and again articulate their thoughts about staying or leaving.  And again, they return to their daily and weekly routines.  This process continues for several weeks.  There is time to discuss and time to think.  Ultimately, after several weeks, the decision is made to stay.  
 
This pattern of engagement and solitude provided a structure to reduce the automatic reactivity from fear and anxiety.  Too often, when it comes to making important decisions, some committee members are more vocal while others remain silent.  Inviting each person to articulate their thinking about an issue is essential.  So is spending time apart to reflect, think, observe, and discover. 
 
The committees in your congregation are probably not working on life and death decisions, although, at times, it may feel like it.  Doing important work, what Dr. Murray Bowen called differentiation of self, is one way to overcome fear and do what’s in the best interest of the mission and vision of the congregation.

The purpose of Thinking Congregations is to explore the connections between Bowen Family Systems Theory and congregational life.  My effort to be curious, objective, and engaging can result in an adventurous journey that takes me to new places.  This week is no exception. 
 
I dedicate this blog to a new idea.  I’m interested to see if this idea resonates with your experience.  I’ll be asking for your input at the end.  I hope you’ll respond either in the comment section or on social media.  #thinkingcongregations
 
How long does it take on average for clergy to be effective in a new congregation?  What does effectiveness mean?  Good question.  I’ll save that for another blog.  But, for now, I’ll define it as the ability to lead change through the relationship system of a congregation.  I’m not the first person to think about the dynamics of relationship systems on one’s effort to create change.
 
Rabbi Ed Friedman, in his book Generation to Generation, stated clergy were effective after their first six months.  It takes half a year for clergy to be engrafted into the emotional system of the congregation.  I disagree with Ed on this point and will explain why in a moment.  Some have compared the first year to a game of poker.  During the first year, you build up relationship chips which can be cashed in to create changes.  You are limited to one or two things, depending on how big the change is.  So, choose wisely!  This idea of social capital, which I also disagree with, is what Robert Putnam talked about in his book Bowling Alone.
 
Effective change can begin after four years.  Changes can be made in the first four years.  However, long-lasting, systemic change can only come when a leader has participated in the emotional process of a congregation for four years.  I base this idea solely on observation.  What I have observed are changes in the ways I relate to the congregation, and the ways the congregation relates to me.  Each time I begin my fourth year in a new congregation, I notice that I am more confident in my ability to relate to each person in the congregation.  Why is this?  I’m not certain, but it’s possible that by year four I know something about each person in the congregation which is enough to have a working knowledge of the triangles in the congregation and the family triangles of each person in the congregation. 
 
It’s also my observation that individuals in the congregation relate to me differently going into year four.  I’m aware of more cooperation, more openness in communication, and more common goals and directions.  Notably, I find that those who (when I first arrived) were eager to talk to me each week are less eager by the fourth year, and those who were less likely to initiate a conversation with me during the first four years are now willing to chat at a moment’s notice. 
 
One explanation I’ve come up with relates to nominations and the process of inviting individuals to serve in leadership positions.  Perhaps it takes four years for the people who were nominated under the previous pastor to rotate out and for a majority of leaders to begin serving at the invitation of the current pastor.  In other words, by year four, those who are in leadership positions have said, “yes” to the current pastor.
 
There is room here for research.  The hypothesis I’m present is that there are changes that occur in the relationship system of a congregation after three to four years that create the context for more effective change going into year four or five.  How can this idea be observed, measured, and verified?  I don’t have an answer.   However, the word I use to describe my experience is bumpy.  The first four years are bumpy.  Some congregations are bumpier than others.  However, it’s always there to some degree.  And while the bumpiness does not vanish after four years, my observation is that it significantly decreases by year three or four (sometimes year five).  I’ve run my own experiment on this idea, but I can only offer stories and anecdotal evidence based on what I’ve observed.
 
I’m interested in your observations.  Have you experienced changes in bumpiness in the congregation that can lead to more effective change after year four?  I had considered setting up an online survey but decided to leave it to you to leave your comments.  So, I invite you to share your observations in the comment section below or on social media.  I look forward to reading your thinking.

The credentialing process to become a United Methodist pastor can take up to six years to complete.  I served on the Board of Ordained Ministry that oversees the credentialing process.  I chaired the board during the last four years of a twelve-year term.  Every spring, the board interviews between 20 and 40 candidates for ordained ministry.
 
Like any credentialing process, some candidates sail through the process, some candidates are delayed or held back, and others are eventually discontinued.  My observation after twelve years is that what makes the difference for candidates is “awareness.”  Some people have more awareness than others.
 
So, what exactly is awareness?  It is the ability to observe things factually, and specifically, to accurately observe relationship systems.  Awareness can be developed and improved.
 
Clergy can get themselves into trouble when they lack a level of awareness.  What distinguishes one level from another is the ability to see how one’s behavior impacts others and how the behavior of others impacts oneself.  It’s the capacity to tell the difference between irresponsible and responsible behavior in self and in others. 
 
For many years, the Board of Ordained Ministry recommended counseling to candidates who seemed “unaware.”  By recommending counseling, the hope was it would develop and improve awareness.  Today, programs that target the development and improvement of awareness have replaced individual psychotherapy.  These programs are also run by licensed therapists.  It is possible for candidates to improve their awareness without attending one of these programs.  It requires an understanding of the different types of awareness. 
 
There are three types of awareness essential for effective leadership.  The first type is internal awareness.  Neurological pathways to the brain monitor and detect one’s internal state.  These systems are designed to help the individual “know” how the body is responding to the world around them.  Biofeedback, meditation, and other instruments and techniques help the individual be aware of one’s internal regulation. 
 
For me, the shoulder muscles provide feedback about my level of stress.  As anxiety in the relationship system goes up, so does the tension in my shoulders.  It has become a cue for me to be aware of how I am reacting to the anxious responses of others.  Some questions to consider: When is it more difficult to pay attention to the body and what it needs?  What are the signals that one is anxious?  What are the steps one can take when stress increases?  These questions do not provide solutions but encourage the development of awareness.
 
The second type of awareness is external.  Two key sensors monitor the world outside of the body: the ears and eyes.  Being aware of everything is impossible.  We are oblivious to most of what the brain sifts through.  It’s an issue of energy conservation.  If the prefrontal cortex processed everything we see and hear, we would quickly run out of energy.   And while we are “aware” of our surroundings, we don’t think much about them.    
 
For example, let’s say I’m in my office, talking to a staff person. I am unaware they are upset with me. Their facial expressions and voice intonation communicate frustration, but I’m distracted by an angry phone call I received moments earlier from someone in the congregation.  My brain energies are not focused on paying attention to the frustrated staff person.  The staff person perceives my response to them as cold, distant, and not engaged.  In response to my disengagement, their frustration rises which results in a big eye roll, tension in their muscles (clenched jaw and tight fists), and a stern intonation in their voice.  This has become a reciprocal process.  The staff person and I are each reacting automatically to the reactive, automatic behavior of the other.  Awareness of the other's response can lead to a disruption of this cycle and provide space for a different, and perhaps better, outcome. 
 
The third type of awareness is systems.  Humans are unique in their ability to be aware of systems.  Thanks to the prefrontal cortex, we can think about our internal state, our external state, and how they are connected.  The ability to see systems has led to the advancement of science.  We can predict the pathway of a hurricane.  We know how to land a spaceship on Mars.  We can “see” beyond individual functioning and observe how relationship systems function.  We still have much to learn, but we are developing the capacity to observe all kinds of systems. 
 
These three types of awareness influence each other.  One cannot have an awareness of systems without an awareness of oneself and others.  It is possible to be hypersensitive to how one is feeling but be unaware of the feelings of others.  It is also possible to be hypersensitive to how others are feeling but be unaware of how one is feeling.  Thinking systems requires an integration of both types of awareness.  One can be aware of self and others but not understand the underlying process that influences the relationship system.
 
Clergy need all three types of awareness to be effective.  To gain awareness, here are some steps to consider:
 
1.  Purchase a journal book.
2.  Set an alarm to go off every 15 minutes.
3.  When the alarm goes off, ask the following question:

• What am I feeling?
• What am I thinking?
• Who did I interact with in the last 15 minutes?
• How did I react to the person(s)?  What did I feel, think, and do?
• How did the other person(s) react to me?  What did they feel, think, and do?
• What insights do I have about relationship systems based on this interaction?

 
When at work, reflect on the work system.  When at home, reflect on the family system.  When at the kids or grandkid’s school event, reflect on the school system, and so on . . .
 
This is not a technique.  It is a way of thinking.  The goal of this effort is to learn to think systems; to be aware that other people are interacting with large systems like the family; to see how the challenges we face in our relationships with others are connected to the relationship systems they and we are connected to; and to see how thinking systems is connected to an awareness of self and others. 
 
A good coach can help a motivated thinker “see” systems and be the best person they can be.