So a pastoral search committee was appointed -- 5 guys (all Ss) and me (an N). (More on S/N here.) We met with 6 candidates either in person or on the phone and it was absolutely fascinating the differing reactions we had. Though in general we had similar responses to candidates, there were occasions when I wanted to stop and say, "Wait. Were you and I in the same meeting just now?" It became very clear to me that the differences in our perceptions regarding the candidates fell right along S/N lines. While I would be reading between the lines and getting an overall sense of how our future as a church would look with such-and-such candidate, the guys would all be listening to very specific details in what the candidate said. They were also much more likely to consider what I think of was resume-details -- how much experience does this person have, where has he worked before, etc.
The day finally came to sit down and figure out who we, as a committee, wanted to pursue, and who we felt wouldn't be a good fit. It was a very tense meeting and one in which these differences became utterly apparent. While I had read between the lines and decided that one candidate was an excellent match, they had looked at the specifics and seen that he was a no go. And on the flip side, several of them were very gung-ho for a fella who, when I pictured where he'd take the church, in my opinion would have had a great honeymoon with us and then the relational issues would begin.
As we sat around the coffee table giving our pro's and con's for various candidates, we could have shouted, argued, fussed and fumed about our positions. It could have torn us apart as a committee and it could have prolonged our search and perhaps led us to call someone who would be a very poor match for our congregation. But instead, it became very clear that despite our strong stances on candidates, we were committed to agreeing.
None of us articulated this at the time, and I don't know that we even thought it through while in the midst of it, but our actions were clear. As strongly as we felt, we all knew that this was not worth risking disunity over.
As well as the meeting went, it was still incredibly hard and when I came home afterwards I risked waking my kids up just because I needed the hugs.
We had several meetings after that point, some with our culled through set of candidates and some without, and we eventually unanimously and wholeheartedly agreed on a guy who, I feel strongly was Providentially appointed to join us (and he, his family, and his current church even agree on this). He'll be arriving in September as our full time pastor.
Looking back, what is remarkable is not that we found a guy in only 7 months, nor that he's as excited about coming as we are about having him. What utterly amazes me is that the folks in that search committee, despite strong differences of opinion, with every reason to distrust, chose rather to believe that we are a body -- the body of Christ. We recognize that the harmony and growth of that body depends upon us each, on an individual level, just as the health of a physical body depends upon the working together and growth of the individual cells. We will grow together or we will wither apart.
Through this time of trial, we have chosen to grow together.
Awesome story!
ReplyDeleteThat's really not easy to find the right one who'll speak the Word of God!
ReplyDeleteTeamwork means getting the new, higher quality, which couldn't be imaginable if you'll act alone.
ReplyDeleteReally amazing story, showing God's Desire for people to work together for one Great Purpose!
that may be, but that never turned out to be our issue. we talked with 6 fantastic candidates. every single one of them was really a neat guy, had interesting things to say, and seemed to be thoughtful and intelligent. that was good because it meant we had some choice candidates to consider, but it was also hard because you couldn't just cross someone off the list right away with a "well, he's WAY off. he won't do."
ReplyDeletei believe it came down to, in large part, personality and experience.
personality was important because we wanted someone who would work with us rather than against us. this is a topic that really deserves a post of its own (and on which a book has recently been published -- perhaps i'll try to get my hands on it before i write the post). there was one candidate that i would have loved to have called, and everyone else liked him, but not only did he lack experience, i could tell in his personality that even when he agreed with the rest of the leadership, just the way they approach issues and try to resolve them would cause conflict. if we were larger, that might be ok because it would push us in much the same way we were pushed in this search committee. but when you're as small a congregation as we are, it's not something we could afford to do.
ah. here's the book: What is Your Church's Personality: Discovering and Developing the MInistry Style of Your Church. It's based on the premise that if you were to give a church a personality test (answering those personality questions based on how the church overall makes decisions, reacts to things, etc.) then you can pretty much fit every church into one of the 16 myers-briggs categories. based on that, you can see what the church's ministry strengths and weaknesses are.
ReplyDelete