A Paper for the Symposium on

Profiling Adventist Leadership

58th Session of the

General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists

St. Louis, Missouri, USA

July 6, 2005

Ted L. Ramirez

Email: Tramirez@venable.com

Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.

The "NIV" and "New International Version" trademarks are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by International Bible Society. Use of either trademark requires the permission of International Bible Society.

© 2005 Ted L. Ramirez

A Note from the Author

Dear Friend:

The points raised in this paper represent evolving views on the subject matter that your author has been asked to consider. They spring from profound love and gratitude for the historical and biblical ministry and mission of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination and our messages of faith, life and God's ministry of reconciliation. If God has called you to a place of lay or employed leadership at any level, ranging from the local church to global ministries, this paper invites you to a quiet conversation about how and what we do together as leaders, and why we do these things. The points considered in this paper do not exhaust the scope of the issues, nor do they necessarily represent views or official positions of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination, its leadership or the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.

Several persons provided comments, advice and insights on prior drafts of this paper and on previous expressions and presentations of the concepts developed here in new settings. While I am grateful to these several friends, clients and respondents for their generosity of time, attention and opportunity, they are not to blame for any statements that may seem to miss the mark or otherwise bring disturbance to the reader. Despite the most sincere intentions to express these points of view with both clarity and compassion, responsibility for any failure in that regard rests here, with your author.

Thank you for the opportunity to express these observations and aspirations openly with the Church that we love and that provides us with such wonderful opportunities for service.

TLR

23 May 2005

Acting with Responsibility:

Aspirations of a Servant Along Pathways of Governance

I.                   Summary of Themes and Vision Explored

How do we, as leaders, act "with responsibility" in a relentlessly irresponsible world, one in which complex situations fly at us thick and fast each day? What vision do we use to set our reference points for acting "with responsibility," and how do we recognize and respond to irresponsible behavior and actions? Within our Church, how well do we foster a consistent, dependable sense of "responsibility" and keep irresponsible behavior outside the Church? Indeed, can we accomplish this among our leadership of lay and clergy?

Our Seventh-day Adventist Church and its ministries have grown to involve 17 million people in our churches and Sabbath schools, $1.8 billion in annual giving, and 5,600 schools and colleges. Now active in over 200 nations, we have outgrown our previous practices to administer what we do and how we serve. Increasingly, our unity and leadership effectiveness depend less on things or facts we think we "know" or used to know, and more on our willingness to know and trust God in the present tense. We seek and embrace new ways and means to heal our personal and organizational relationships as children of God who live in the "Now." God seeks to move us beyond the disputations of weeks and decades past, toward a wholeness that conveys light and love. "Acting with responsibility" includes thinking, worshipping and serving in new ways with refreshed attitudes. These flow in a cycle of productive thought and activity consisting of three components:

[1]

Our "position descriptions" for what we will do in heaven are clear: we will serve and worship God.[2] While here on earth together, let us practice daily this relationship with God and with one another, fellow servants and worshippers, learning anew how to serve and worship our Creator.

II.                Opening Considerations

Governance represents the fundamental issue in the Great Controversy between God and Satan. Governance hinges on relationships; it involves our personal and collective missions and how we pursue them. This spiritual war[6] has disrupted our joy and relationship with our Creator, and has spawned questions about "God's will." God calls us to restore both the relationship and the joy.[7]

One of the many questions about God's will and His purposes on earth leads us to wonder how the sovereignty of His divine providence relates to human responsibility. What will God do, and what should we do? Each human decision, for or against God, includes several overlapping questions:

·        How shall I relate to the spiritual government of God?

·        How shall I relate to my fellow citizens of God's kingdom?

·        How shall I learn of God's purposes and goals?

·        What is my place and function within this spiritual kingdom?

·        What privileges and responsibilities attend a citizen of God's kingdom?

·        How do matters of spiritual governance affect my earthly, practical duties?

We have come here to this 58^th General Conference Session as leaders, lay and clergy alike, representing myriad experiences. Some of us are active in the local church; others serve on commissions and boards of the organizations[8] of our global Church. Whether you recognize it or not, if you are attending this discussion in person or by electronic means, you are a leader and God has called you to responsibility. Each of us wrestles with these six personal questions of faith and citizenship. They raise core issues in this series that seeks to profile Adventist Leadership.

The Seventh-day Adventist movement and other communities of faith have placed these questions before the world community. Adventists have grown into a religious denomination approaching 20 million persons, with stewardship over billions of dollars. We serve the peoples of more than 200 nations. Our movement consists of many affiliated bodies and entities, and diverse types of legal and governance relationships among them. Often, Adventists call this global collection of ministries "the Church." It is our Church.[9] It owes its entire mission and allegiance to God.

We seek to follow scripture; therefore, we believe that God has called us, and our Church, to serve the needs of the human family He placed here on earth. We believe also that the distinguishing marks of disciples of God include love for one another[10] and a commitment to "obey God's commandments and remain faithful to Jesus."[11] These experiences of love, obedience and faithfulness lead to lives and acts of grace while we come to comprehend God's completed work at Calvary and His continued artistry in the lives of those who daily invite Him to the canvas of our hearts.

These Biblical landmarks, love for one another and faithfulness to God's commands, reveal to us what we are to do, and who we are to be. Together these guide-stars of "doing" and "being" lead us to ask, "How, then, shall we act?" This Symposium places these questions within the framework of the title to this paper, "Acting with Responsibility." The meaning of the word "responsibility" brings with it sounds of duty and accountability, all terms that we struggle to understand and to fulfill. Biblical "responsibility" also rings in tones of joy and privilege; we are living a pauper's dream, that God has called us to work at His side for the redemption of the planet! Exploring the scope of this responsibility leads us to consider also the authority that an organization grants to empower members and leaders to discharge our responsibilities. How can we build a Church culture that feeds and grows persons who bring joy and excitement to our responsibilities?

We begin, therefore, with the proposition that, in doing and being everything that God has called for us to share in our journey with Him, we must act, we desire to act, with "responsibility." The situations in which we serve and reach decisions as leaders in our churches and institutions may appear joyful and clear or, at other times, may seem clouded with division and uncertainty. Yet, as we participate in these activities of the Church, regardless of the circumstances, God has not abandoned us to uncertainty and fear. He sustains our collaboration with Him and is fully invested, sparing nothing to support our efforts.[12]

This biblical legacy enables us to be bold, to inquire and, as some like to say, "drill down deep" into the implications of these relationships of responsibility that bind us to God and to one another. This journey into relationships frightens or irritates most of us; yet in our exploration of "acting with responsibility," we consider these issues in light of an additional pair of inquiries:

·        To whom and to what are we responsible?

·        For whom and for what are we responsible?

So, with all of these directional inquiries in mind to serve as lamps to guide us, let us step forward to consider together some stories. Then, perhaps we may see some principles and standards emerge to bind us together a little stronger. We may discover views that we share in common, as well as practices of responsibility that convey the love and light Jesus calls us to generate.

Nearly 230 summers have passed since the founding brothers of the American colonies gathered in Philadelphia to declare their independence from the British Empire. That summer marked the beginning of the long and difficult pathway of governance for the United States of America. This government, albeit flawed in history and prophecy, remains a leading earthly model of government and responsibility for complex organizations.[13] We have lost sight of how precarious and long a conversation this has involved, even at its birth. As late as July 1, 1776, three days before the official proclamation of what we know now as the "Declaration of Independence," the votes of the delegations from the colonies had not coalesced behind a decision either way. The very question as to whether the colonies would declare themselves to be "free and independent states" hung in the balance.[14]

On that hot, steamy Monday morning, a lone Pennsylvanian named John Dickerson rose to start the debate on the question of whether the Continental Congress should adopt a Declaration of Independence. He spoke with the passion of a patriot who ultimately found himself on the wrong side of history. He warned the Congress that to lead the colonies into open rebellion against England would be "to brave the storm in a skiff made of paper."

Dickerson recognized that the consensus of opinion and the growing tide of history lay against him. He knew how unpopular he had become, a delegate from the very colony that hosted the Continental Congress that summer. Nevertheless, his love and passion to act with responsibility brought him to his feet, to deliver the leading discourse against the Declaration.

History records that, as Dickerson took his seat after the speech, the room fell silent but for the summer rain that tapped against the windows. The next oration by John Adams galvanized the Congress toward independence, but there remained the problem of actually taking and winning the votes of each colony's caucus necessary to settle the issue and adopt the Declaration.

We will return to Dickerson and the fullness of his heroism later in this paper; but for now we pause to note that men and women of responsibility may find themselves at opposing points of important questions. The responsible and thoughtful expression of disagreement in certain situations may rise to the highest aspirations of acting with responsibility. Conversely, one may sink to the lowest levels of irresponsible action by agreement that is passive or ill-founded. We may disagree for years on key issues. When we return to the Dickerson story and as we progress through this paper, we may see more of how we move forward, together, even when we disagree. Why do we do this in the Church? Why do we continue to serve together and wrestle through conflict and division? We do so because of the promises and opportunities of God, and His invitation to step into history with Him in the greatest story ever told.

III.             God's Promises and Invitation to Service

Can we imagine Bible texts any more heart-breaking than those we find in Matthew 7, beginning at verse 21?[17] In this passage, Christ describes the anguish of people who were certain they acted with responsibility. They prophesied in the name of Jesus. They drove out demons and performed not just miracles, but "many miracles." By any objective standard, the persons in this passage have outperformed us all in terms of good deeds and transactions. Yet the Lord responds, "I never knew you."

Contrast Matthew 25, however, where Jesus welcomes into the kingdom people who can't even remember the good deeds they performed, asking, "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?"[18] We yearn to understand better what differentiates the lost group from the saved. Both handled responsibility. The promise and the invitation to service did not converge for the first group, and the saved group could not remember just how it acted upon the invitation toward the promise. The first group performed great deeds as transactions. The people in that group even knew Jesus; unfortunately, Jesus did not know them. The second group performed deeds perhaps less dramatic but did so in the context of relationships.

For Jesus to "know" you requires that you and He have entered into a relationship whereby He can know you. In that relationship, He introduces you to other people He knows. He invites you to relate to them. One point of this illustration makes traditional religious circles, including this author, extremely nervous: It's not what you do that counts so much as how (or the spirit with which) you do it. "Acting with responsibility" involves behavior and attitudes that are more relational than transactional; it emphasizes attitude over mere accomplishments.[19]

Our Church holds responsibilities in the global mission of redemption. God has promised His strength and has invited us to serve with Him and the angels in this mission. After some 140 years as an organization, Adventists should know who we are and what He has promised. God entrusted our spiritual ancestors with a mission to declare His good news of reconciliation and the universal amnesty for sinners.[20] In His call to Abraham, whom Adventists for over a century have considered our earthly "father of the faithful,"[21] God emphasized His global mission to "all peoples on earth."[22]

Paul assures us that, "it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose."[23] In His parable of the workers in the vineyard, Christ spoke of the open, constant invitation to join God in service opportunities throughout the harvest, early or late, veterans and rookies alike. He delights in all contributions to the cause and takes generous joy in conferring blessings and rewards.[24]

These invitations to collaborate with heavenly agencies toward the redemption of the human family energize our responsibility and assure our fulfillment. God issues His invitation accompanied by sure promises of abundant spiritual power and grace to respond to His opportunities. He does not concern Himself with our weakness, which He rejoices in converting to strength when we acknowledge our need.[25] When here on earth, God personally lived and delivered the message that heaven has chosen to empower us, His human collaborators. He expects and enables us to make the necessary difference in service to the world, now, until Jesus returns to physically restore the earth and His people. We are to "ask the Father," and know that God walks with us always, here today, "even to the end of the age."[26]

We recognize, however, that in the experience of human leadership, blessings of satisfaction and reward do not always manifest themselves immediately. Much of our growth in God's heavenly school occurs gradually and over time. Our service and interaction together often become long conversations over days or even years. They include mistakes and disappointments alongside joy and celebration. These long conversations may pause at the death of one of the participants, without evident resolution.

Despite these tests of patience, disciples of responsibility and commitment to God function in the present. Responsibility balances patience with persistence, and a long-term commitment with short-term recognition of the urgency of needs before us. God does not intend for His promises and opportunities to be squandered along our journey while we bicker over the roadmaps and plans. One leading scholar of organizations describes effective managers as persons who "have a bias for action."[27] The Psalmist agrees:

Blessed is the man
who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked
or stand in the way of sinners
or sit in the seat of mockers.

But his delight is in the law of the LORD,
and on his law he meditates day and night.

He is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which yields its fruit in season
and whose leaf does not wither.
Whatever he does prospers.[28]

IV.              Opportunities, Resources and Human Limitations

Scripture and human history bring us many illustrations of individuals seeking to know and fulfill their responsibilities. Each hero, from Adam and Joseph, to Mary the mother of Jesus, and His apostles, weighed their opportunities and resources, then confronted their limitations to serve God with integrity.

In the leadership case study of Elijah, we find the full range from joy to desperation in this process. On Mt. Carmel, he recognized the opportunity and claimed God's resources for victory against Baal and the corrupt government of Ahab and Jezebel. In the next scene, however, we see him run for his life from his defeated enemies. We tend to judge him harshly for this and we might ask in the context of our discussion here, when Elijah fled to that cave was he acting responsibly?

Elijah reached a state of physical, emotional and spiritual exhaustion. We wonder, if he had held his vision that these were the enemies of God, and that the battle was between Evil and God, might he have stayed in the reality that these events were God's battles first and last?[31] Was it a matter of "Elijah versus the prophets of Baal" or, rather, "Baal versus God?" We continue to stumble in this area of our personal and corporate relationships with God. We arrogate unto ourselves entirely too much pride and credit for our "successes" and too little responsibility for missed opportunities. This pathway surely leads to downward spiraling disappointments with God and ourselves. We thereby effectively disconnect ourselves from the Power Source and become legalists, while never imagining ourselves to be so. The moment we delude ourselves into thinking that we have done what we need to do and that we "deserve" success, we separate ourselves from grace and land squarely in the sinister bog of legalism.

How should we react when we see opportunity grow dim and we reach the limits of the resources we see? Are there times and ways in which today's leader can safely confront his or her human limitations in some "cave-like" setting, in solitude with God, rather than in the relentless publicity of the technology age? Do we recognize our responsibility to do and say what we should to support the physical needs of our leaders, pastors and teachers? Do we enable their participation in retreats and sabbaticals, or do we squander our precious investment in their ministries by strip-mining them and their gifts? Then, when some of them inevitably break down under the load, do we react with healing, or do we add to their discouragement and "solve" the problem by arranging for their resignations and reassignments?

This process of choosing to seize opportunities and resources, and to rise above human limitations, can feel very lonely. The experience may resolve itself for gain or loss through tangible activity such as prayer and an encouraging consultation with God and fellow workers. In other cases, however, the battle between human limits and those "good works that God [has] prepared in advance for us to do"[32] come down to, what may seem at the time, instinctual events that we can't explain. Our next story illustrates some of these more nuanced dimensions that lie at the core of "acting with responsibility."

The scene opens at ten-thirty one night of bitter cold. Her sixteen-hour day at last showed promise of drawing to a close. As Laura walked the quarter mile from the bus stop to her apartment, hopes of warmth and rest battled the shadows of sleep deprivation. She felt satisfied with progress at work on projects that day, so a sense of accomplishment contributed to her tired joy. It felt so good now, as she walked to just a few dozen feet from the elevator that would carry her home.

And then it happened. Into the peace of the moment so richly deserved, there entered the sight of the dreaded cigarette smoker. Practicing his solitary habit in the cold, right in front of the entrance, that smoker would force our tired friend to an instant choice between civility and healthful living.

Later, she reflected on the irony of how her attitudes have evolved. Growing up in a large city, Laura then was mesmerized by the cigarette and the sweet fumes it produced. Candy ones, pretend ones, used ones--all these captured a child's imagination from the media tactics of the time. Smokers on television, advertising bill boards and magazines all portrayed beautiful people engaged in captivating activities. Back then, before smoke-free airplanes or restaurants, we rode city buses and airplanes, content in the company and aroma of the happy smokers that puffed and shared their joy with everyone. But, with age and the dawning of a clean air society, Laura and most of us no longer tolerate even a hint of smoke.

On this late, frigid night, Laura cringed at the thought of the soon coming odors of smoke wafting in the air. Yet, as tired as she was, she ruled out the option to walk an alternative route to her door. To do so would convey an obvious message of rejection and disgust. You see, Laura is a Christian who has determined to seek the face of God each day, to worship Him, to be and to do what He asks.

She chose, rather, to take in a breath as deep as she could muster, far enough before reaching the smoker so he might not discern her preparation. As she passed him, she held her breath. She looked up at her neighbor and smiled politely, using much of her inhaled air to say, "Good evening." The smoker did not respond, but looked the other way and started to take another drag on his cigarette. "Great," she thought, "I've made it. Just another ten feet to the door, and the smoker is safely behind me. Even better, I can now resume normal breathing!"

Laura walked up to the entrance and punched the code into the security key pad to open the door, 8-6-6-3. Laura took simple pleasure in using this code because, several months ago, she had lost the plastic card that activated the security pad. Since then, these useful little numbers had granted easy access into her building, sparing her another trip to the office and a fee to replace her card. Those numbers produced the wonderful digital letters on the screen that read, "ACCESS GRANTED - PLEASE ENTER NOW." But tonight, Laura's numbers produced the discouraging message: "ACCESS DENIED - PLEASE ENTER VALID CODE NOW." Her disappointment grew to irritation as two more tries produced the same denial. Removing her thick glove for one more try, she came to the disturbing thought, "What if building management had changed the code and she missed the letter?" Into her seventeenth hour of work day, alone in the night but for the smoker, Laura began to consider her meager alternatives. There she stood, with no card and no code that worked. She sensed within herself the early signs of creeping, unfocused anger at her seemingly helpless predicament.

Just then, the scent of cigarette reached Laura's nose. She saw a form move from her right. A hand with a security card moved to the pad and activated the words she longed to see, "ACCESS GRANTED." She glanced to the face of her rescuer, muttered a "Thank you so much." He acknowledged her thanks with a nod of the head and a "You're quite welcome!" Laura then entered the building, moved to the elevator as the smoker walked on down another hall, and she returned to her plans of warmth and rest.

While doing so, Laura pondered the preceding minutes. She felt moved to assess and sort the scene as it evolved, her options for action and decisions. Above all, she paused to consider how she acted. Laura had acted with responsibility, and had experienced an object lesson rarely so clear and succinct. How often do we notice instant confirmation that something we did not enjoy doing was, nevertheless, the right thing to do?

In Laura's story, we see nuances of responsibility. To what and to whom, for what and for whom are we responsible? Who is our "neighbor?" As Adventists, we discard certain elements of rationale that scripture has ruled out for use by the Christian and embrace the one biblical imperative:

·        We are not responsible solely for or to ourselves.

·        We are not responsible solely to our preferences and traditions.

·        We are responsible to God and for His children.

We have been appointed ambassadors of reconciliation to reveal who God is and how He acts.[33] Laura elected not to think only of herself and how her clothes would smell later. She chose not to risk conveying a sense of rejection or disgust to the smoker, a complete stranger to her and unlikely ever to meet her again this side of heaven. In making those quick and almost instinctive decisions, Laura had no time for consultation or extended analysis. She saw the stranger not as a smoker, but as a child of God who deserves respect, civility and acceptance. She overruled the visceral disgust and rejection that Laura senses about smoking, cigarettes, and the whole nasty business and sickness of tobacco. Though exhausted and cold, she noticed the opportunity, drew on resources she did not even identify, and overcame strong human limitations to act with responsibility.

As leaders of our Church, we serve and work together. Whom and what do we see? Do we see ourselves among fellow laborers and a "priesthood"[34] of "holy" believers? Do we sense our dependence upon them, their eternal indispensability, that we are irrevocably connected? Can we envision heaven without them? Are we accountable to them, responsible for them? If so, then how do we act toward them with responsibility and how do we balance this responsibility with our obligations to God and for our Church? When we see a fellow servant or leader acting in ways that seem less than responsible,[35] what ethics do we consider and what responses do we employ?

Unless we rededicate ourselves as leaders to become more like Laura, we will fail to see and hear the people and the opportunities God brings us each day. Our mission is large, and our failure could be larger unless we grow in our sense of the importance of the individual moment and person. We cannot "act with responsibility" if we cannot see and hear the opportunities and use the resources. How often do we pray and ask for new projects and means to accomplish them, but stand blind and deaf to those present before us?

The great Adventist mission, though assured of victory, encounters challenges that grow each day. As with Laura, we may serve in dark and cold situations; we grow weary and confused. In the United States, for example, few among us expected to conduct our mission here in the context of neopaganism; but, can we, the Church, truly claim innocence in this decline? Throughout history, emissaries of the Christian church-at-large have allowed falsehood to corrupt our gospel message from Christ of universal atonement, reconciliation and grace. Can we be surprised to discover that "the world," those of our fellow humans from other cultures and religions that may not acknowledge the love and active presence of God, sometimes choose to do as we do and not as we preach?

All too often God's precious message of hope lies entombed under layers of paragospels: cultural, economic and financial, political and parliamentary. These false religions harm real people. We, the Church, have taught the world more than we realize or wish to admit. The world has awakened nation by nation to modern and then post-modern ways of doing and acting that they have seen used by persons who were supposedly "civilized," "educated," and "religious."

Power, money, influence, dignity, self-preservation: these and other deceptions have affected components of the Church as well as secular organizations. These false values have corrupted the governance expectations and relationships of global peoples. They have seen our secular movies and television shows. They have read our books and magazines. They have watched our communities of faith and some of the meetings we hold to make decisions. These global students have received long lessons of how we govern ourselves, how we behave, and how we act toward one another. What they have learned may not be what we intended to convey. Yet, we now can see what they think we taught them, and what we see may alarm us.

Yes, careful Church watchers have noticed much of what we want them to know about us. They see us giving and healing. They see us preaching and teaching. When human rights fall under attack or disaster strikes, we respond through considerable armies of faith such as our Religious Liberty ministries, ADRA, Global Mission, and Community Services. Crowds flock to hear the powerful preachers, teachers and musicians that have arisen among us. Our 720 health care organizations, serving 11 million outpatients each year, remain the envy of the world. Photos of our ministries to the poor, to children, and to those afflicted with disease speak beautiful stories of grace, conversion and redemption.

These lessons of grace draw converts by the tens of thousands as latter rain falls in torrents in many places. Praise God for His blessings and for those "good works that He has prepared in advance for us to do."[36] Praise Him for the privileges of partnership in service that He extends to us, relentless sinners, redeemed yet weak and so dependent on His Spirit for power to fulfill His hopes and dreams for us.

We have taught other lessons, however. Our global classroom has seen unfortunate behavior as the students watch and learn, then do as we have done. We have taught them that money, power, titles, and influence play important roles in communities of faith, in the Church. The classroom sees that agendas of faith seem to move better on the wings of political shrewdness and articulate presentations by bright, physically attractive people. These students recognize that elements of "Church royalty" seem to surface from time to time, where less qualified or under-performing people seem to escape accountability because of their personal or family ties to some person of perceived influence. They have learned the implications of the old adage, "It's who you know (not what you know or do) that counts."

What other disturbing lessons have crept into the global classroom of leadership and governance? They include premeditated parliamentary maneuvers, character assassinations, and selective Biblical quotations. We find opportunistic misuse and abuse of the writings or context, and simple power of the lives of Ellen White and other sacrificial pioneers of our Adventist heritage. Those pioneers lived exciting ministries and they saw risk and sacrifice through the eyes of their love for Jesus, who Himself led the way for all of us in His bold, persevering sense of responsibility to the will of the Father. In the genuine Adventist heritage, the unrevised, unsanitized, uncorrupted version, we find a people who will risk who we are and all that we are, Church and all, to pursue our responsibilities in the plan of redemption.

Even the Son sought reassurance and confirmation of this mission, this risk, in Gethsemane as He posed the great question that, even now, wrenches the heart of the reader and the beneficiaries of His suffering, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."[37] For so long as the Great Controversy rages on, nothing meaningful to the cause of God can prosper without sacrifice by us and God's blessing upon that sacrifice. We dare not preserve even the entities of the Church from this principle of risk and sacrifice. Often we mistakenly hang on to some element, tradition or asset of the Church, thinking that we are "acting with responsibility." Only as we place the entire Church on the altar in sacrifice to the living God, can we know that the results of our stewardship will bear fruit and not famine.

V.                 Principles and Evolving Standards[40]

As in most things religious, we make the interpretations of how we should act and serve with responsibility more difficult than they need to be. The Adventist body is one that believes and teaches a number of core principles that include:

·        God so loved the world that He gave His only Son to save it.[41]

·        The people of God are headed to a place where we will serve and worship God.[42]

·        We are saved by grace, and that not from ourselves.[43]

How, then, should a "graced" person act as a husband, wife or parent, as a Church member, and as a citizen of God's kingdom? One would be tempted to assume that a body of believers that holds these truths so dear would find the practice of responsibility and governance almost "second nature" and fairly intuitive. But we have considered already the human limitations inherent in all of this, and so we proceed with the recognition that an occasional return to the exploration of principles and standards, both heavenly and of human governance, enable us to revisit, strengthen and sharpen our capacity to serve.

Furthermore, much of the secular business and organizational community today finds itself locked in a vast discussion over governance and of so-called "best practices." An exhaustive examination of "best practices" lies beyond the reach of this paper. Yet, we recognize that principles and standards of responsibility attract public attention from diverse sources that include governmental agencies, industry associations, professional standards boards, and the news media 24 hours per day. Responsible leaders and "governors"[44] sort through alternative principles, standards and practices to examine "best practices" for similarly situated organizations. They seek formal training in these areas in search of present truth to employ and share throughout the Church. Responsibility demands an unquenchable thirst and curiosity for learning, as well as an ear that listens eagerly for change.

In that sorting process, leaders bear the responsibility to select and employ the "right practices," meaning those practices that are right for that specific organization. A standard or practice that the business community touts as a "best practice" may not be "right practice" for your organization. Governors must perform this evaluation with due respect for the external laws, regulations, standards, and sound traditions that affect the organization and its areas of work. Responsible governors, however, do not use external theories and practices exclusively to resolve and dictate the principles, standards and practices of their organizations. Rather, they test and confirm their organization's system of governance and action, and they examine each recommended practice to understand its ethical, legal and operational reasons, as well as the potential impact of the proposed practice upon the organization and the people who will have to live with it.

The elements of responsibility in governance of the Church incorporate matters of privilege and responsibility, both parts of an inseparable continuum of leadership and governance. The opportunity to participate as a responsible governor in leadership for the Church includes several personal privileges and responsibilities to implement and oversee several key functions that range from (i) leadership oversight, governance and vision, to (ii) supervision, control and daily operations. In all these, governors embrace the simultaneous realities of holding others accountable while recognizing our accountability to others.[45]

"Governance" and "management" are not mutually exclusive. Yet, leaders, committees and boards must engage in sufficient conversations to improve the clarity of our expectations. We must improve our understanding of these words we use and what we expect of one another. We must not assume those things that are fundamental to responsibility. This issue rarely receives adequate attention. In many cases, the leadership of an organization deludes itself into false hope and assurance that its mission and operations carry higher priority and more importance than extended and repeated visits to the long conversation of governance. We dare not expect to enjoy continuous, uninterrupted contributions of money, loyalty and personal time invested from stakeholders without an organizational culture in which these conversations about how we govern and manage our organizations become a cherished, not merely tolerated or perfunctory, component of the relationships.

In assessing the standards and objectives of Church governance in a healthy organization, responsible governors consider at least these questions that frame the remainder of this Part and the next:

·        What should governance be?

·        What are the obligations of those of us who have received the call to serve in governance?

Organizational boards and committees face many challenging tasks, but ensuring the viability and ethical integrity of the organization ranks among the most crucial.[46] Ultimately, governors bear responsibility for protecting the organization from threats posed by some governments and other public and nongovernmental opponents. Responsible governors promote a safe and ethical working environment, and ensure that the organization's leaders have access to competent internal support and external consultants and advisors. Governors bear responsibility to grow and maintain the organization's mission, resources and quality. Leaders cannot and should not carry these responsibilities by themselves. All the governors of the organization share this burden.

The area of conflicts of interest in boards and committees presents some of the most complex challenges. Virtually no organization, committee or board can be free from conflict of interest. The sheer size of the number of governors the Church needs to lead its organizations implies that some of us will serve in one capacity while we carry other interests outside that particular organization. At times these outside interests may conflict with the purposes of the organization. Responsible governors will err to the side of over-disclosing in the event they perceive, or receive counsel, that they hold an interest that conflicts with the exclusive needs of the organization.

Leaders must excel in the management of these conflicts. The mismanagement and overreaction to a conflict of interest may inflict more damage on the organization, its leaders and governors than the conflict itself. Conversely, merely shrugging off a conflict of interest by a leader or governor will compromise the integrity and transparency of the organization, and may cripple its credibility and decision process. In addition to a policy of disclosure, the process of constructive management of conflicts includes several necessary components, such as (i) measurement of the magnitude of the conflict, (ii) avoidance of surprise either to the organization or the conflicted governor, and (iii) recorded abstentions and recusals of the conflicted governor from certain deliberations. With such systematized approaches, an organization can optimize the contributions of talented and committed governors who, as the result of multiple assignments, may hold various yet manageable conflicts of interest.

The most crucial area of fundamental responsibility involves the choice and awareness by the governing body of its specific nature and function, and what it desires these to become. In pursuit of organizational transparency and effectiveness, the governing body must develop and maintain systems and process. The process itself includes aspects of regular reassessment and potential alterations and improvements. Is the board or committee responsible to govern and chart the trajectory of the organization, or will it function more as an advisory body or task force? What "terms of reference" will best promote its chosen role and function? Several options and points that the board or committee must evaluate and determine as it charts its purpose, function and composition include:

·        Is it a governing board or committee?

·        Is it an advisory board or committee?

·        Is it a working or "workgroup" board or committee?

·        Is it a task force?

·        How do these alternative forms and functions vary?

·        What is the optimal member size and composition? (recommendations and implementations vary widely)

·        How may the organization use "outside directors," that is, persons "free" of conflicts of interest?

·        What conflicting interests do the other, "inside" directors, bring to their service on the board or committee?

·        How should the organization manage these conflicts?

·        Who are the constituents or "stakeholders" we serve and what are their needs?

Responsible leaders and governors will sort through the organizational principles and standards that best promote the goals of the group they lead. In so doing, they will find myriad methods, models, resources, and "gurus" on the "hows and whys" to get things done, to improve their organization, and to take its mission effectively to the people it seeks to serve.[47]

Responsible leaders and organizations use such resources wisely. They recognize that the purpose of these resources involves the gathering of concepts and frameworks to use as tools for thinking and shaping their organization. They encourage their boards and committees to experiment and to work systematically through alternatives as they calibrate systems and process to fit the needs and culture of the specific organization. In doing so, they should counsel their governors to:

·        Select a method or two at a time to read and learn about.

·        Recognize that any method or writer may offer useful contributions.

·        Remember that all methods contain flaws or unresolved points.

·        Avoid infatuation with, or zealous conversion to, any single system of perceived truth.

·        Start talking with your officers and board or committee ... patiently.

·        Understand that the road to responsible governance is a long conversation.

·        Avoid strong opinions on things we don't fully understand.

Our search for ways to improve the governance of our organizations, and the fullness of our understanding of responsibility, teaches us that governance will never cease to be complex, difficult work. We can, however, at least focus this work by insisting that our fundamental purpose of governance leads us to renew our missions and to improve our effectiveness in accomplishing the missions of our organizations.[48]

This quest for responsibility in governance also leads us to develop and pose questions for discussion in a calm, "round table" attitude with our governors. Leadership responsibility includes the strategic development of an atmosphere of learning and trust where a few of these points can receive systematic reflection over time:

·        What is your committee or board's function?

·        Do you know what you're supposed to be doing?

·        Do you like what you're supposed to be doing?

·        Do you see yourself as a "leader"?

·        Do you view your committee or board as a collection of leaders?

·        Where are you and your committee or board leading? who is following?

·        How does your committee or board relate to the officers in "what it does"?

·        Is your committee an "executive committee" or a "committee of executives"?

·        What type of "governor" personality and approach do you reflect?

·        As an individual, what are your responsibilities and authority during the meeting?

·        As an individual, what are your responsibilities and authority outside the meeting?

·        Does your committee or board "hide" behind the officers?

·        What style does your chairperson use? Dictator? Collaborative? How is it working?

·        Do your officers "hide" behind the committee or board?

·        Do you understand and sense enthusiasm for the mission and values of your organization?

·        Why do you serve? Should you continue? How?

·        How profound and meaningful are your committee or board discussions?

·        Do you actively participate in these discussions? Too much? Too little? Why?

·        When you discuss the "last meeting" with fellow governors, what do you say? Is it stimulating and joyful, or are you chronically frustrated?

·        How do you describe your board or committee work and actions to outsiders, and how do you characterize your enjoyment of this work?

·        How did you follow up the last time you thought about these issues?

·        When your board meets, are the right persons in the room? Too few? Too many?

VI.              Points Unresolved

In the previous parts of this paper, we have considered both (i) a panoramic view of the biblical basis for personal and collective "responsibility" and (ii) a closer look at some elements of our work together as leaders and governors of Church organizations. Just before we sketch our Vision of what we hope our efforts will produce, let us acknowledge that we may not reach many of our aspirations here on earth. Forces and circumstances of the human condition, and the continuing state of war in the Great Controversy, impede realization of our hopes, dreams and plans.

Tension Among the Essential, Necessary, Good and Useful. We experience tension and incompatibility among competing values, principles, standards and goals.[51] We struggle over alternative governance mechanisms, boundaries, and the increasingly articulated demand for "transparency." Let us pause to ask, "What is 'transparency?'" Does the person who demands it bear any responsibility to define what he or she expects? What level of micro-minutiae will we demand of our leaders in terms of "the right to know?"[52] We find that reaching alignment among leaders and governors requires time, prayer and extended conversations over time to resolve or learn to live with our differences and to galvanize our effectiveness.

Limited Resources. We don't ever seem to have sufficient resources. This shortage includes more than mere physical assets and wealth. We stretch to find the time, people and skills to develop and bring to life all the dreams we see.[53] Beyond these limitations, however, we struggle even more with developing sufficient amounts of credibility, understanding and perseverance among our leaders and governors to maintain necessary traction for our organizations.

Learning Curves. Our governors and leaders need more time, training and conversation to gather more information and knowledge about these areas of responsibility and available resources:

·        Financial statements and reports: How do we raise our financial literacy on the meanings of terms and measurements?

·        Executive management reports: Are they short enough to digest, yet clear and detailed enough to inform?

·        Calibrating the committee system: How do we move issues through the organization in a way that is efficient but not under-analyzed?

·        Operating history and current realities: How much time should we spend in the past to enable us to chart the future with competence?

·        External and denominational forces and context: Are we growing more accustomed to the accelerating rate of change in both these areas?

·        What to change and what to keep: Classic paradoxes between what we cherish and what we need for tomorrow. We are a Church, not a museum.

·        Build and preserve relationships: God placed all the treasure of heaven at risk to restore our relationship with Him; are we as invested in our horizontal relationships with one another?

·        Overcome suspicion and misunderstanding: Christ's last recorded prayer as He wrestled with the Father in Gethsemane focused on trust and unity;[54] how great a priority is this for us who claim to follow Him?

Governance Disabilities and Dysfunctions. As we consider our participation in the governance of our Church at all levels, we may encounter random, often humorous, characteristics of leaders and governors past and present. Among these, we find an array of governance disabilities that express themselves through recurring personalities and actors. While well-intended, these dysfunctions can frustrate even the best leadership, however talented and competent, slow down constructive decision processes, and disrupt unity, communication and action.[55]

·        Shimei:[56] do you think you are called to ridicule leadership openly?

·        Balaam:[57] are you so set in your ways that not even talking donkeys could get through to you?

·        Do you like to use e-mail like scud missiles or even ICBM's with MIRV's[58] to make your point? Do you care where your "payload" lands and whom it injures?

·        Is your organization a "sheep in wolves' clothing," talking and acting tougher than your heart and the Spirit are leading?

In our next and concluding Part, we will consider what scripture describes as our anticipated heavenly job descriptions and how these relate to our responsibilities here on earth. Your author has failed to locate any reference in scripture regarding the word or concept of "watch dog" in our anticipated heavenly job descriptions. The apostolic points of counsel to "elders" or "overseers" of the church do call for vigilance.[59] But many recent interpretations of such responsibilities by would-be "guardians of the Church" have seemed to grow teeth in the mouths of these self-appointed watch dogs that cause far more damage than any contribution to Christian oversight or responsibility.

We may catch ourselves at times in one or more aspects of these brief and, in some cases, humorous sketches. When we do, and if they recur, let us pause and correct these distractions lest they cause greater harm to the actor and the mission of the organization. Collegial, timely, and loving correction also fosters growth and "acting with responsibility."

On a more serious note, this gentle reminder of our capacity for dysfunction reminds of our capacity to do great good and to cause great harm. Persons who act with responsibility remember always these fundamental aspects of organizational governance:

·        The safest time for a governing body is during the meeting.

·        Governors and leaders are at our most dangerous, and most damage is inflicted, between meetings.

Unless your organization has authorized you to discharge a function or to speak openly in its behalf, beware of the temptation to "fix it" on your own. "Unify, communicate, act" coexist in synthesis and do not create "Lone Ranger" credentials. We, each of us and together, are a body, and we must beware of the human propensity to aggrandize and enlarge our individual perceptions of how effective we can be on our own. Poor Uzzah illustrates this area of concern. He paid the ultimate price for "fixing it" on his own.[60]

In a complex organization, one does not act "with responsibility" if one assumes a self-appointed "lone wolf" mission without counsel or authorization. Our authority as leaders and governors is not personal; rather, it derives as and while we are connected to the governing body we serve. Unless that body of our fellow believers has vested us with authority or a task, the authority of the individual does not extend beyond the body and it does not carry with it inherent power to "fix" or "help" the situation. Enormous damage and misdirected resources flow from disruptive speech and behavior that occur outside of the official proceedings of the committee or board.

We close this portion of our discussion, therefore, with the essential point that challenges us. Will we determine to act with responsibility as we serve our Church and pursue its mission? To do so will require daily dying to self and rededication in our resolve to "press together"[61] in unity, sustained by our improved recognition of the strength God offers us through our diversity. Mere tolerance will not suffice; we stand together in Christ because He created us with differences and has chosen to make us one with God. Upon these key points, above and beyond all the others we have considered, rest our hopes for governance where leaders and governors "act with responsibility."

Our styles and methods of leadership and membership will never converge. We will live and work with profound differences and variety all the way to the end. We will find no perfect set of bylaws, constitution or policies, despite our ever-fervent massaging of all these. The mission and reach of the Church have exploded far beyond our capacity to "administer." Human failure, forgiveness and restoration will attend our journey at every turn. Yet, despite these points that remain unresolved, we need not doubt the capacity of God to instruct, empower and unify us for His mission. For the Son has asked it and the Father will deliver.

VII.           Ultimate Vision

What then do we need and desire of our Church governance systems, leaders and governors? We cannot improve the effectiveness of our organizations, boards and committees without reflection and change at the point of each person. As the poets remind us, we must start with the person in the mirror. Once we make that commitment, our vision of what may be will lift us forward. We know what our job descriptions will be when we reach heaven; we will serve and worship God. In our work together with our Church, God extends to us a special privilege: to practice and prepare for that heavenly position while we serve and worship him here on earth.

Imperatives of Responsibility in Governance. The Church, meaning its leaders, governors and members, desires governing bodies that:

·        Recognize our responsibility for leadership and exercise it.

·        Articulate and promote the organization's mission and values.

·        Manage, delegate and set sound policy without micromanagement.

·        Trust, empower and support the people we appoint as governors and leaders.

·        Develop and protect a culture of learning and collaboration.

·        Develop a culture and traditions of informed civility.[64]

·        Pursue trust, forgiveness and accountability in synthesis.

·        Recognize that grace is not just biblical and spiritual, it's "good business" too.[65]

·        Respect, nurture and challenge our leaders and officers.[66]

·        Encourage variety in the background and development of governors.

·        Embrace diversity as a systemic and strategic strength.

·        Understand and respect the boundaries of friendship, church membership and corporate governance.

Governing Bodies That Act with Responsibility. In addition to the foregoing characteristics that express the aspirations for Church organizations, the best governing bodies will develop and display:

·        Timely action: Some actions just can't wait forever without causing damage.

·        Informed analysis: What do we need to know to reach sound decisions?

·        Effective internal and external accountability: Do we know what this will do to the people inside our organization, and how will it look to the "outside?"

·        Proactive communication: Anticipate and imagine your best message, content and tone.

·        Fair, thorough deliberations: Agree on the process and rules, then finish the task.

·        Orderly, peaceful and productive processes: Respect the views of others, yet keep focus on the point of the discussion.

·        Effective use of time: Be good stewards of the time others have given.

·        Balanced understanding of risk: Losses accompany progress and success.

·        The will to get something done: We're not here just for fellowship; there are goals to reach and tasks to do.

·        Perseverance[67] in trust and unity: This work is not easy; don't quit.

Individual Aspirations. So, let's set aside "the organization" for just a minute and focus on just you and me. What do we aspire, as individuals, to become in our journey of leadership? Try these on and see how well they fit. If some feel a bit too tight, then set them aside and come back to them another day. God is in control of your continuing education, and He will finish the task:

·        Take a fresh look at yourself, often; then step back and laugh a bit.

·        As you analyze a situation, try to connect the dots in straight, short lines.

·        As in the group aspirations above, persevere; don't quit on your Church, your fellow workers, or yourself . . . ever.

·        Another aspect of perseverance: don't give up on anyone; it's not your call.

·        Remember the "Elijah Rule:" The problem and the potential solutions belong to God.

·        Avoid boxing yourself into entrenched positions on complex issues. Take a breath, "get real," and relax; you'll think much better that way.

·        Do not pretend to understand if you're not fairly certain that you do; even if you think you understand, stay humble . . . you might be wrong.

·        Prefer the good solution over searching for the perfect ones.

·        Relate to your fellow leaders and governors in respect, nurture and challenge; remember, use all three together, not separately.

·        Make room in your heart and mind for new information and people.

·        Don't be afraid to unlearn something that no longer serves a good purpose.

·        Unify, Communicate, and Act!

How about our American colonial friend and hero John Dickerson, whom we met earlier in Part II? You may recall that he delivered a brave and lonely speech against the Declaration of Independence. Up until July 2, 1776, Dickerson's Pennsylvania delegation had stood divided on the question of independence, with four of its seven delegates opposing Declaration. Once Dickerson saw that the will of the people and the decision of the Congress lay overwhelmingly in favor of a Declaration of Independence, he recognized that the Congress must speak with one voice in a moment of unity. Although Dickerson could not renounce his convictions on the issue, he and another of his colleagues voluntarily absented themselves from the Pennsylvania delegation to enable its vote count to swing in favor of the Declaration by a vote of three to two.

On July 2, 1776, and then again on the Fourth of July, the Congress voted to adopt the Declaration, with twelve colonies voting in the affirmative. New York abstained. Again Dickerson absented himself to permit history to take its rightful course. But the issue had been settled, and all opposition now converged into the necessary unity of the infant organization, the United States of America, to win the independence it had declared. History records the paraphrased recollection by John Adams, Dickerson's opponent in the crucial debates: "[T]hough ill and exhausted from the strain of the past weeks, [Dickerson] departed at the head of the first troops to march out of the city to join in the defense of New Jersey, a scene that made a deep impression on many."[68]

Would you risk your life or your career to support and live for the body of Christ? Someone far greater than Dickerson has asked this of us. He has modeled this for us. The Lord Jesus Christ is His name. So, let us wrestle with passion in support of our convictions, then embrace our opponent and embrace the decision once the body has spoken. The phrase "acting with responsibility" symbolizes this seeming paradox of unity and diversity. Let us dwell prayerfully on the many messages we receive about responsibility and duty, of the joyful opportunities and resources God has placed in our hands, and of the great freedom and wholeness that we are privileged to announce and to live. May these messages, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, bring and preserve our hearts and minds to the point were we desire and rejoice to "act with responsibility" in service to our Church and the millions of our neighbors who depend on our faithfulness to mission.

Ted L. Ramirez

Washington, D.C.

May 23, 2005

Appendices

Appendix 1.

Privileges and responsibilities of persons who participate in the various components of governance and administration of a Church organization

Appendix 2.

Components in the constructive assessment and management of conflicts of interest for organizations of the Church

• • Basic building blocks to consider in the development of effective governance of a Church organization

    Define and articulate mission Define and measure quality Identify and grow resources Identify values Clarify responsibility Creative planning Courage and vulnerability A bias for action Seek more knowledge, all the time Affirm and champion truth Establish and multiply goodwill Elevate faith and trust

    Proactive and constant communication Improve clarity and focus Evaluation process Evaluative culture Work ethic; balanced role models Awareness of structure, processes and relationships Submission to one another Embrace risk as fuel for growth Perseverance, don't quit... ever Confront the difficult issues

    Appendix 5.

    Sources and points of tension and incompatibility among competing values, principles, standards and goals

    Gospel mission and its interpretation "Transparency:" unsettled notions and misunderstandings of what it means and how we achieve it Civil law and regulatory compliance Divergent management principles and styles When governors are unclear or dissatisfied as to the organization's mission Organizational procedures and traditions Alternative approaches to governance mechanisms Unclear standards of duty Confused zones of action, responsibility and boundaries Priesthood of all believers[69]--everyone feels "empowered" Global multi-organization friction, confusion and blaming: "I wish the [Church, General Conference, Division, Union, Conference,] would just . . . "

    Appendix 6.

    Tangible and intangible resources necessary to the Church organization, and which often seem insufficient in supply

    Time Money People and Skills Opportunity

    Credibility and Understanding Teamwork Training Perseverance

    • [70] ("I'll fix it myself!")
    • • [71] (self-appointed accuser)
      • Selected Sources for Footnote 64: Scholars who emphasize relational over purely transactional approaches to dispute resolution

        Robert H. Mnookin (Samuel Williston Professor of Law, Harvard University and Director of the Harvard Negotiation Research Project), Why Negotiations Fail: An Exploration of Barriers to the Resolution of Conflict, 8 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution 235 (1993).

        Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet (Associate Professor of Law, University of Colorado School of Law) and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning: Negotiating to Create Value in Deals and Disputes (2000).

        Leigh L. Thompson (J. Jay Gerber Distinguished Professor of Dispute Resolution and Organizations, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University), The Heart and Mind of the Negotiator (Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004)

        Melissa L. Nelken (Professor of Law, University of California, Hastings College of Law), Negotiation and Psychoanalysis: If I'd Wanted to Learn About Feelings, I Wouldn't Have Gone to Law School, 46 Journal of Legal Education 420 (1996).