Or, St. Paul, Meet Messrs. Bolman & Deal

By Dr. Kenneth C. Harper[1]
Pastor-Head of Staff, Central Presbyterian Church, Miami, Florida
Adjunct Theological Faculty, Barry University, Miami Shores, Florida

Leadership: The Importance of the Topic

Few topics command more attention than Leadership.[2] The Wall Street Journal’s most-recent list of best-selling books contained at least nine titles pertaining to leadership.[3] Biographies and autobiographies of great leaders are held up as models for our lives. And some of the greatest classics of management literature, from Max Dupree’sLeadership Is An Art[4] to Peter Drucker’s The Effective Executive,[5] focus on the topic. Nor has Christian literature been lacking. In the United States , where no state church survives by virtue of a protected and tax-supported status, entrepreneurial impulses have been the norm rather than the exception. In an environment of religious competition, seeking an edge through superior leadership takes on spiritual significance. John Maxwell’s The 21 Indispensable Qualities as a Leader[6] and Leadership 101: What Every Leader Needs To Know[7] stand as just two examples of an attempt to combine biblical insights with management psychology. Christian psychologist and spiritual writer John White analyzed the book of Nehemiah as a paradigm of faith-infused leadership.[8]

The sheer profusion of texts is enough in itself to suggest that the topic is multifaceted and complex. Original attempts to define leadership potential by identifying so-called “leadership traits” foundered on the twin realities of annoying exceptions and inconsistent performance. For example, though early studies suggested that leaders tend to be taller than average, Napoleon was short. And though early leadership theory suggested that leaders were more intelligent than average, Chicago’s 1960’s-era Mayor, Richard Daley, was cunning but not intelligent. Furthermore, leaders who had been extremely successful in one field were sometimes ineffective in other settings. Military leaders, for example, who’d been extremely successful in battle, found the transition to civilian politics daunting–one thinks of Ulysses S. Grant or Douglas MacArthur.

This paper will proceed in three segments. In the first, we will examine the metaphors of Christian leadership used by Paul in his Thessalonian correspondence. Segment two will examine the “Four Frames of Leadership” developed by Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal. The third segment will endeavor to interrelate the two and suggest areas where churches might incorporate such concepts.

Paul’s Leadership Among the Thessalonians

The Apostle Paul visited Thessalonica on his second missionary journey in AD 49 or 50, the record of which is found in Acts 17:1-9. Following his prudent departure, first to Beroea, thence to Athens, and finally to Corinth, Paul heard words of criticism, probably from Timothy (see I Thessalonians 3:6-8). The criticism centered first on Paul’s failure to return and continue his ministry (implied in I Thessalonians 2:17-18) and secondly, impugned his motives for ministry (see I Thessalonians 2:5-6). First Thessalonians is written with a view to correcting certain errors of which Paul has been aware, and to provide an apologia and explanation of his ministry.[9] As he writes, Paul uses four metaphors to describe his spiritual leadership in Thessalonica:[10]

1. Steward.“On the contrary, we speak as men approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel. We are not trying to please men but God, who tests our hearts” (I Thessalonians 2:4 [NIV, emphasis added]). Although the usual Greek term for steward oijkonovmo~, is not found in this text, the concept certainly is. Just as an owner entrusts the management of property to another, just so, Paul describes himself as having been entrusted (a cognate of pivsti~ and pisteuvw, i.e, one in whom the owner can place his faith) by God with the message of the gospel. The two terms are found side-by-side in Luke 12:42, “And the Lord said, ‘Who is the faithful and prudent manager (oJ pisto;~ oijkonovmos oJ frovnimo~) whom his master will put in charge of his slaves…’” Likewise in I Corinthians 4:2, Paul puts the words in proximity when he writes, “Moreover, it is required of stewards (oijkonovmoi~) that they be found trustworthy (pistov~).”

Stewardship involves the careful utilization of resources. God has given the church two resources for the accomplishment of her mission–His Word and His people. The task requires faithfulness to God and a certain commitment to the details of the responsibility. A good steward will be familiar with all the master’s assets under his care, and will attempt to maximize the effectiveness of each. In the church, too, good stewardship requires a careful utilization of the financial resources entrusted to the church (the usual meaning of the word “stewardship” in congregational life), but also the physical plant, real and professional property, and the utilization of staff and volunteers. All the time, talents, and energies of God’s people are covered.

It needs to be said, as a way of preparing the way for another section of this paper, that “the gospel,” which God entrusted to Paul, was much more than the kergyma–as though the substance of Paul’s teaching could be compressed to a minimalist “Four Spiritual Laws.” The gospel included not only justification, but sanctification as well, the whole world coming under the Lordship of Christ.

2. Mother. “But we were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children. We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us” (I Thessalonians 2:7-8 [NIV]). The Greek word here is trofo;~, rather than the more typical mhvthr, hence the translation “nurse” in the New Revised Standard Version. The New International Version’s “mother” is preferred due to the presence of ta; eJauth~ tevkna, “her ownchildren.” A wet nurse may care for other children, but only a mother nurses her own children.

Further, Paul describes himself as qavlph, “tenderly caring.” The role of the mother is nurturing, an interpretation reinforced by the image of nursing and by the act of tender caring. The mother’s care is focused on the individual child. That intimacy of care is a source of nurture. In the church, both in first-century Thessalonica and in twenty-first century America , there are Christians who need the gentle presence of a pastor who will comfort, who will guide, who will teach, and who will ease troubled consciences with the healing words of grace and forgiveness.

3. Father.“For you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children, encouraging, comforting and urging you to live lives worthy of God, who calls you into his kingdom and glory” (I Thessalonians 2:11-12 [NIV]). Although a father also shares a parental love for his children, there is a fundamental difference between paternal and maternal love. Although both are designed to aid children on their road to adult maturity, the father’s love (at least as it has been traditionally understood), is sterner and more challenging. At the risk of simplistic stereotyping, a child who has come home from the losing end of an encounter with the neighborhood bully will likely receive a comforting hug from his mother, but a pep talk and lesson in self-defense from his father.

The role of father in the first century embodied at least two aspects. The first was the role of provider. A father typically shows his love for his family by seeing to their needs. Paul himself links the image of “father,” to the task of bread-winning by inserting verse nine, “You remember our labor and toil, brothers and sisters; we worked night and day, so that we might not burden any of you while we proclaimed to you the gospel of God” (I Thessalonians 2:9 [NRSV]). The role of breadwinner gives the father power in the family—as it is sometimes baldly stated, “If you sit at my table, you abide by my rules.” The second aspect of paternal power was the absolute authority which Roman law gave to the father. Scottish commentator William Barclay describes the patria potestas, the father’s power, as follows:

A father had absolute power over his children as long as he and they lived. He could sell his child as a slave or even kill him. Dion Cassius tells us that “the law of the Romans gives a father absolute authority over his son, and that for the son’s whole life. It gives him authority, if he so chooses, to imprison him, to scourge him, to make him work on his estate as a slave in fetters, even to kill him. That right still continues to exist even if the son is old enough to play an active part in political affairs, even if he has been judged worthy to occupy the magistrate’s office, and even if he is held in honor by all men.” It is quite true that, when a father was judging his son, he was supposed to call the adult members of the family into consultation, but it was not necessary that he do so. There are actual instances of a father condemning his son to death. Sallust (The Cataline Conspiracy, 39) tells how Aulus Fulvius joined the rebel Cataline. He was arrested on the journey and brought back. And the father ordered that he should be put to death. The father did this on his own private authority, giving as his reason that “he had begotten him, not for Cataline against his country, but for his country against Cataline.” Under Roman law a child could not possess anything; and any inheritance willed to him, or any gift given to him, became the property of his father. It did not matter how old the son was, or to what honors and responsibility he had risen, he was absolutely in his father’s power.[11]

Yes, power. Power and authority are the keys to understanding the leadership metaphor of “father.” Paul had authority derived from his apostolic status, his special commission from the risen Lord Jesus Christ. And, as we will see, he used it judiciously.

4. Herald. “We also constantly give thanks to God for this, that when you received the word of God that you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word but as what it really is, God’s word, which is also at work in you believers” (I Thessalonians 2:13 [NRSV]). Just as the herald doesn’t bear his own message to the people, but serves as mouthpiece for the monarch, Paul says that his message came from God’s word and not Paul’s own. The herald does not have leave to change the monarch’s message. If, for example, he was sent forth with the unpleasant news that the king was going to raise taxes in the coming year, and if he saw the want and hardship of the ordinary people, he still would not have leave to change or soften the king’s decree. Although the word khvrux, “herald,” doesn’t appear in verse 13, Paul has used the verbal form, ejkhruvxamen, in verse nine, so the concept was not far from his thoughts.

In summary, Paul utilizes four metaphors to characterize his ministry in Thessalonica: Steward, Mother, Father, and Herald. Two of the metaphors are focused on persons, mother and father. Two of the metaphors are impersonal. Faithfulness, not feeling, are required of stewards and heralds. The four images bespeak the twin emphases of ministry: God’s Word and God’s people. It is remarkable that Paul sees himself as doing justice to both aspects of ministry. Typically, those who are gifted in biblical understanding and teaching (the steward and herald), are less gifted in the personal dimensions of ministry (mother and father). Conversely, those who gifted in attending, parent-like, to their flocks, may be less inclined to include in their ministrations the “stern command” of discipleship.[12]

Bolman and Deal’s Four Frames of Leadership

Enter Lee G. Bolman and Terrence E. Deal. The website of the University of Missouri-Kansas City, has this biographical summary of Lee Bolman:

Lee Bolman is an author, scholar, consultant and lecturer who currently holds the Marion Bloch Missouri Chair in Leadership at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.

He has written numerous books on leadership and organizations with co-author Terry Deal, including Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (1991, 1997, 2003); Leading with Soul: an Uncommon Journey of Spirit (1995; 2d ed., 2001); Reframing the Path to School Leadership (2002); Escape from Cluelessness: a Guide for the Organizationally-Challenged (2000); Becoming a Teacher Leader (1994); and Modern Approaches to Understanding and Managing Organizations(1984). Bolman and Deal’s books have been translated into ten languages.

Lee consults and lectures worldwide to corporations, public agencies, universities and schools. He holds a B.A. in History and a Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior from Yale University. Prior to assuming his current position, he taught for more than twenty years at Harvard University.

He lives in Kansas City, Missouri, with his wife, Joan Gallos, the two youngest of his six children, Christopher and Bradley, and an orthopedically-challenged Dalmatian, Vincent Van Gogh of KCMO.[13]

And for Terrence Deal, this biographical summary comes from Reframing Organizations:

Terrence E. Deal is professor of education at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Before joining Peabody, he served on the faculties of the Stanford University Graduate School of Education and the Harvard Graduate School of Education. He received his B.A. degree (1961) from LaVerne College in history, his M.A. degree (1966) from California State University at Los Angeles in educational administration, and his Ph.D. degree (1972) from Stanford University in education and sociology. Deal has been a policeman, public school teacher, high school principal, district officer administrator, and university professor. His primary research interests are in organizational symbolism and change. He is the author of fifteen books, including the best-seller Corporate Cultures (with A. A. Kennedy, 1982).

He has published numerous articles on change and leadership. He is a consultant to business, health care, military, educational, and religious organizations both domestically and abroad. He lectures widely and teaches in a number of executive development programs.

Bolman and Deal’s works have earned a level of acceptance seen in their inclusion on the curricula of many business schools and theological seminaries.[14]

Bolman and Deal approach the complexity of leadership in organizations through four frames of reference. They are:

1. The Structural Frame.[15] Although the highly structured and inflexible complexity of the modern assembly line factory has been parodied, either viscously by Charlie Chaplain in “Modern Times,” or comically by Lucille Ball in the “Chocolate Factory” episode of “I Love Lucy,” the structure of modern organizations is hugely useful and efficient. The structural frame of leadership traces its history to the original studies of human efficiency carried out by Frederick W. Taylor (1911), the father of time-and-motion studies, and to the sociological theories of Max Weber.[16] The structural frame of leadership looks at the task which must be accomplished, breaks the task into discreet segments, and prescribes a method for doing each in sequence. Quality assurance makes sure the process is done competently and completely.

In addition to the obvious assembly line application of the structural frame, there are other areas where precision in repetition is valuable. The first is the military. The need for all soldiers to do tasks “by the numbers,” is essential for uniformity and predictability of performance–crucial in combat settings. And in aircraft maintenance, precision in repetition is an essential ingredient for aircraft performance and passenger safety.

Bolman and Deal insist that there can be a great variation in how the structural frame is implemented. Communication of the structure to those employing it can take place in round-table discussions. The structures themselves may be modified in feedback sessions with those who employ them.

Six assumptions undergird the structural frame:

· Organizations exist to achieve established goals and objectives.

· Organizations work best when rationality prevails over personal preferences and external pressures.

· Structures must be designed to fit an organization’s circumstances (including its goals, technology, and environment).

· Organizations increase efficiency and enhance performance through specialization and division of labor.

· Appropriate forms of coordination and control are essential to ensuring that individuals and units work together in the service of organizational goals.

· Problems and performance gaps arise from structural deficiencies and can be remedied through restructuring.[17]

2. The Human Resource Frame.[18] In Leading With Soul, Bolman and Deal describe the odyssey of a business executive who has begun to feel burned out, and is urged to meet with a therapist who is in reality a spiritual advisor. In the course of their inaction, which goes on periodically for over a year, the executive comes to understand that leadership is a profoundly human endeavor, and involves sensitivity to colleagues–to people. In essence, Leading With Soul is a hypothetical case study of the Human Resource frame. Organizations are made of people. Employees ask, “How well will this place fulfil my needs?” Employers ask, “How do we find and retain people with the skills and attitudes needed to do the work?”[19] The core values of the Human Resource Frame underscore this interplay.

· Organizations exist to serve human needs rather than the reverse.

· People and organizations need each other: organizations need ideas, energy, and talent; people need careers, salaries, and opportunities.

· When the fit between individual and system is poor, one or both suffer: individuals will be exploited or will exploit the organization—or both will become victims.

· A good fit benefits both: individuals find meaningful and satisfying work, and organizations get the talent and energy they need to succeed.[20]

Just as the Structural Frame evolved from Frederick Taylor’s time-and-motion studies, the Human Resource Frame traces its roots to Douglas McGregor’s “Theory X v. Theory Y” (1960). McGregor argued that most management was based on “Theory X,” i.e., supervisors operated as if their employees were fundamentally lazy and in need of constant oversight in order to ensure productivity. McGregor’s “Theory Y” posited instead that people who feel that their work has value, and who are valued by their employers, will find within themselves the motivation to excel. The task of fitting employees with positions is the task of the Human Resource Frame.

3. The Political Frame. The Political Frame recognizes that in a world of limited resources of money and time, individuals and groups of individuals will vie for those resources that are important to them. And, where divergent goals compete, groups and individuals will vie for the resources that will further their goals. Bolman and Deal begin their chapters on the Political Frame by noting that the Space Shuttle Challenger’s disastrous final flight was the product of competing goals between Thiokol Chemical, NASA, Congressional expectations, and public relations.

Five propositions summarize the Political Frame’s perspective:

· Organizations are coalitions of various individuals and interest groups.

· There are enduring differences among coalition members in values, beliefs, information, interests, and perceptions of reality.

· Most important decisions involve the allocation of scarce resources—who gets what.

· Scarce resources and enduring differences give conflict a central role in organizational dynamics and make power the most important resource.

· Goals and decisions emerge from bargaining, negotiation, and jockeying for position among different stakeholders.

The Political Frame requires organizational leaders to understand the dynamics of power and the political landscape of the organizations over which they exercise leadership.[21]

4. The Symbolic Frame. Viktor Frankl, the well-known proponent of “logotherapy,” was a Jewish psychotherapist caught up in Hitler’s “final solution.” In his oft-told story, his manuscript confiscated, Frankl found the will and purpose to live in mentally rewriting that destroyed work. Along the way, he discovered that those prisoners who were able to “make sense” of their suffering were more likely to survive than those who believed that chaotic randomness had invaded their lives.[22] Those who lived constructed a narrative, a framework of reality, which gave focus to their lives. Children, too, find in the narratives of fairy stories a framework for their fears.[23] Organizations are the same. They need narratives, symbols, rituals, and myths to provide an explanatory context for their efforts. The core assumptions of the Symbolic Frame are:

· What is most important about any event is not what happened but what it means.

· Activity and meaning are loosely coupled: events have multiple meanings because people interpret experience differently.

· Most of life is ambiguous or uncertain—what happened, why it happened, or what will happen next are all puzzles.

· High levels of ambiguity and uncertainty undercut rational analysis, problem solving, and decision making.

· In the face of uncertainty and ambiguity, people create symbols to resolve confusion, increase predictability, provide direction, and anchor hope and faith.

· Many events are more important for what is expressed than what is produced. They form a cultural tapestry of secular myths, rituals, ceremonies, and stories that help people find meaning, purpose, and passion.[24]

In the Symbolic Frame, the leader’s task is to articulate the organization’s vision over and over again, through stories that are handed down, to cheer-leading those who embody the organization’s core values, through the company meetings and parties that have become of the life of the organization.[25]

In summary, the Structural Frame requires the leader to develop, communicate, and enforce policies and procedures which will maximize efficiency and uniformity. The Human Resource Frame requires the leader to know enough about his people and their work to match each in ways that maximize productivity and satisfaction. The Political Frame requires the leader to understand the realities of politics, and negotiate the competition and conflict between differing goals and scarce resources. The Symbolic Frame requires the leader to keep the central focus of the organization ever before it through stories, rituals, and symbolic actions.

Integration: St. Paul, Meet Messrs. Bolman & Deal

This paper’s thesis is that there is a congruence between Paul’s four metaphors of spiritual leadership and Bolman & Deal’s “Frames.” We now turn to each pair in turn, with biblical examples, and suggested applications in current ministry situations.

1. The Structural Frame and the Steward. Stewards care about getting things done well, with a view towards the effective utilization of resources. Those who exercise leadership from the perspective of “The Structural Frame/Steward,” will care about policies and procedures, checks and balances, and will be comfortable with structure and accountability. The steward will make sure that care is taken and policies enforced to protect the church.

The Apostle Paul exercised just such care in his financial ministry. In organizing the collection for the saints in Jerusalem, he set forth procedures for managing the collection. “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put aside and save whatever extra you earn, so that collections need not be taken when I come. And when I arrive, I will send any whom you approve with letters to take your gift to Jerusalem. If it seems advisable that I should go also, they will accompany me” (I Corinthians 16:2-4). The collection and the transportation alike were treated with accountability and sensitivity.[26] Representatives of all the contributing churches accompanied the gift on its journey to Jerusalem. “He [i.e., Paul] was accompanied by Sopater son of Pyrrhus from Beroea, by Aristarchus and Secundus from Thessalonica, by Gaius from Derbe, and by Timothy, as well as by Tychicus and Trophimus from Asia” (Acts 20:4).

Paul’s wisdom is profound. There are few matters so sensitive as finances. Therefore, churches should have financial procedures in place to reduce the likelihood of embezzlement or mismanagement, or even suspicion. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has the following guidelines in its constitution: [27]

4. Church Finances

The treasurer shall be elected annually by the session, if permitted

by the state in which the church is located, and his or her

work shall be supervised by the session, or by specific assignment

to the board of deacons or trustees. Those in charge of the various

funds in the church shall report at least annually to the session, and

more often when requested. The following minimum standards of

financial procedure shall be observed:

a. The counting and recording of all offerings by at least two

duly appointed persons, or a fidelity bonded person;

b. The keeping of adequate books and records to reflect all

financial transactions, open to inspection by authorized church

officers at reasonable times;

c. Periodic reporting of the financial activities to the board

or boards vested with financial oversight at least annually,

preferably more often;

d. Afull financial review of all books and records relating to

finances once each year by a public accountant or public

accounting firm or a committee of members versed in

accounting procedures. Such auditors should not be related to

the treasurer (or treasurers). Terminology in this section is

meant to provide general guidance and is not intended to

require or not require specific audit procedures or practices as

understood within the professional accounting community.

Even such minimal standards instill confidence in donors.

A second area where great mistrust can be alleviated by carefully-considered and thoroughly-monitored policy is sexual misconduct. [28]

The call of God is to careful management of the resources entrusted by God to the church. Those who exercise leadership from the perspective of “The Structural Frame/Steward” will take care to see that all things are done “decently and in order” (I Corinthians 14:40) and will enrich the church thereby.

2. The Human Resource Frame and the Mother. Mothers care about their children. The maternal spirit is focused on persons—their needs and hurts. When Paul likens his leadership to a mother, he is focusing on individuals. Paul seems to have undergone a development in this dimension of his ministry. At the start of the second missionary journey, Paul seems not to have had much patience with John Mark. “Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. But Paul decided not to take with them one who had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not accompanied them in the work. The disagreement became so sharp that they parted company; Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus ” (Acts 15:37-39). By the end of his ministry, however, there seems to be a different emphasis. “Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful in my ministry. I have sent Tychicus to Ephesus” (II Timothy 4:11-12).

However, the “Human Resource/Mother” personality par excellence in the New Testament church is Barnabas. Look at this list of activities:

· He responded to human need by selling a piece of land (Acts 4:37).

· He introduced a newly-converted Paul to the suspicious church (Acts 9:27).

· He put together Paul’s need for a ministry with Antioch’s need for a minister (Acts 11:25).

· He recruited John Mark for missionary service (Acts 12:25)

· He accompanied Paul on the first missionary journey (Acts 13:1-2, etc.)

· He stuck up for John Mark at the beginning of the second missionary journey (Acts 15:37).

· He represented Gentile believers at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:2).

· He represented the Jerusalem Council to the Gentile believers (Acts 15:22).

As has been stated, one of the resources through which God has ordained to do his work is the church—God’s people. And in the church today there is a persistent need for the effective utilization of lay people. Two tools to help accomplish this are the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Spiritual Gift Inventories.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is the most widely administered psychological tool currently in use. Inspired by Carl Gustav Jung’s work on Psychological Type, Katherine Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs-Myers, developed a tool which utilized and expanded Jung’s categories.[29] The tool has a wide variety of applications and is used in vocational counseling as well as spiritual direction.[30] It has been appropriated by evangelical Christians as well, as an effective way of identifying spiritual strengths and weaknesses.[31]

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, though fully compatible with the biblical doctrine of diversity within the body of Christ, is a secular resource. A resource which has been useful to many has been one of the many Spiritual Gift Inventories, which endeavor to discover where a believer’s spiritual giftedness may lie.[32]

The call of God should bring out the best in God’s people. Therefore, leaders who are gifted as “Human Resource/Mothers” are a valuable asset to the Kingdom of Christ.

3. The Political Frame and the Father. Fathers rule their households—or at least they did in Roman society. Paternal authority was power; fathers ruled the miniature political system that was the family. Leadership which brings together the Political Frame and the father metaphor, is leadership which is savvy about the realities of power and comfortable and wise wielding it.

The Apostle Paul certainly understood the realities of political power, and he was not reluctant to use it. On at least two occasions, Paul used his status as a Roman citizen to ensure that he was treated legally. In Philippi, he insisted on a public apology, likely hoping to secure some additional toleration for the fledgling church. “But Paul replied, ‘They have beaten us in public, uncondemned, men who are Roman citizens, and have thrown us into prison; and now are they going to discharge us in secret? Certainly not! Let them come and take us out themselves.’ The police reported these words to the magistrates, and they were afraid when they heard that they were Roman citizens; so they came and apologized to them. And they took them out and asked them to leave the city” (Acts 16:37-39). And again, after the riot in Jerusalem’s Temple precincts, he appeals to Roman law. “The tribune directed that he was to be brought into the barracks, and ordered him to be examined by flogging, to find out the reason for this outcry against him. But when they had tied him up with thongs, Paul said to the centurion who was standing by, ‘Is it legal for you to flog a Roman citizen who is uncondemned?’” (Acts 22:24-25). Paul also exploited differences between factions of Judaism in his appearance before the Sanhedrin. “When Paul noticed that some were Sadducees and others were Pharisees, he called out in the council, ‘Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. I am on trial concerning the hope of the resurrection of the dead.’ When he said this, a dissension began between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided” (Acts 23:6-7).

Political realities in the church often lead to conflict which inexperienced leaders have difficulty surviving.[33] And naïveté about “Christian” behavior can lead leaders to ignore political realities as “unspiritual.” Fortunately, hard realities are leading to an increased awareness of church conflict and how it may be managed.[34] Those clear-eyed realists who lead from the “Political Frame/Father” perspective will be better able than most to lead the church away from the shoals of schism or self-destruction.

4. The Symbolic Frame and the Herald. Heralds trumpet the message. They keep the message before the people. Here is where the pastor must shine. The herald must ask two questions: What must I proclaim? And, to whom am I to proclaim it? The message is the gospel and has the twin powers of myth and history behind it.[35] And the herald must know the people. Except in smaller congregations, where a matriarch or patriarch keeps the flame of tradition alive as newly-minted seminary graduates pass through the revolving door of short-term ministry, the pastor is best equipped to be the herald. To do that, he or she must hear the congregation’s stories, understand its history, and identify its core values.[36] The pastor is present and should preside at the symbolic rituals of congregational life: Baptisms, weddings, funerals, the Lord’s Supper, as well as anniversaries and other locally-specific celebrations. The pastor will cheerlead and coach—always keeping before the congregation the call of Christ and their setting for ministry.

Paul did as much. He labored tirelessly to place the gospel of God’s free grace to all in Jesus Christ before all people (I Thessalonians 2:9). And he understood the value of symbolic actions. He understood that Peter’s reluctance to continue dining with Gentile believers was nothing else than a repudiation of the unity of the body of Christ. Hence, his vehemence (Galatians 2:11-14).

Conclusion

Some years ago, in my presidential address to ETS Far West, I wrote

The pastor of a church in twentieth-century America is not only called upon to be a preacher and “curator of souls.” He or she is also called to be a counselor, conversant with psychological technique, a program director, administrator, and fund-raiser. The Pastoral Activities Index, published by the Presbyterian Church, lists 189 types of tasks which pastors may be called upon to perform in eight distinct categories. A cartoon in The New Yorker shows a briefcase-toting gent addressing a flock of sheep, “Your shepherd, Louie, has retired. I’m Mr. Smathers. I will be your grazing-resource coordinator and flock welfare-and-security manager.”[37]

Yes, ministry in the twenty-first century is a complex business. New challenges to ministry require new insights for ministry. The rich diversity of biblical imagery, coupled with the best of management insight may, if the Lord blesses our work, lead us to that place where we will hear his words of praise, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant” (Matthew 25:23). God grant it.

---

[1] Presented at the Evangelical Theological Society, Annual Meeting at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, November 17, 2005.

[2] One thinks immediately of the journal by that name published in Christianity Today’s family of publications.

[3] I used the “Business” list from last Friday’s edition, November 11, 2005 (Vol. CCXLVI, No. 102, p. W-5). The titles I included are: Secrets of the Millionaire Mind by T. Harv Eker (HarperBusiness), Good to Great by Jim Collins (HarperBusiness), Who Moved My Cheese? By Spencer Johnson (Putnam), Now, Discover Your Strengthsby Marcus Buckingham and Donald O. Clifton (Free Press), Little Book of Selling by Jeffrey Gitomer (Bard Press), Winning by Jack Welch and Suzy Welch (HarperBusiness), The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick M. Lencioni (Jossey-Bass), 7 Habits of Highly Successful People by Stephen Covey (Free Press), andThe Martha Rules by Martha Stewart (Rodale Press).

[4] East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press, 1987.

[5] New York, etc.: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1966. See also: Peter Drucker, Managing the Non-profit Corporation: Principles and Practices (New York: HarperBusiness, 1992).

[6] Thomas Nelson, 1999, 144 pp.

[7] Thomas Nelson, 2002, 96 pp.

[8] Excellence in Leadership: Reaching Goals with Prayer, Courage, & Determination (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1968).

[9] For a discussion of technical introductory issues see: Charles A. Wannamaker, The Epistles to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text in the series The New International Greek Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans & Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1990), pp. 3-63.

[10] I am indebted to John R. W. Stott for this observation. See his The Gospel and the End of Time: The Message of 1 & 2 Thessalonians in the series, The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1991), esp. pp. 49-55.

[11] William Barclay, The Letters to the Galatians and Ephesians: in the series The Daily Study Bible (Revised Edition; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1976), pp. 79-80.

[12] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship (Revised edition; New York: The Macmillan Company, 1963), pp. 63-69.

[13] See http://www.bloch.umkc.edu/classes/bolman/bio.htm.

[14] An internet search revealed that Reframing Organizations is used in the curricula of the following theological schools. The list is representative, not exhaustive. Western Theological Seminary, Hope, Michigan; Golden Gate Baptist Seminary, San Francisco, California; Bethel Seminary, St.
Paul, Minnesota; Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, California; Jewish Theological Seminary, New York City; McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, Illinois, and Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri.

[15] Lee G. Bolman & Terrence E. Deal, Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (Second edition; San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1997).

[16] Bolman & Deal, Reframing Organizations, p. 38.

[17] Bolman & Deal, Reframing Organizations, p. 40.

[18] Lee G. Bolman & Terrence E. Deal, Leading With Soul: An Uncommon Journey of Spirit (Revised edition; San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2001).

[19] Bolman & Deal, Reframing Organizations, p. 103.

[20] Bolman & Deal, Reframing Organizations, p. 102.

[21] Hence the popularity of Sun Tsu’s The Art of War. See R. L. Wing’s new translation, The Art of Strategy (New York, etc.: Doubleday, 1988).

[22] Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning (Revised edition; Boston: Beacon Press, 1985).

[23] Bruno Bettelheim, The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales (New York: Random House Vintage Books, 1989).

[24] Bolman & Deal, Reframing Organizations, pp. 216-17.

[25] In a story which I was unable to track down, McDonald’s founder Ray Kroc is supposed to have seen a fly in the kitchen of one of McDonald’s restaurants, and pulled the franchisee’s license on the spot. True or not, the story communicates powerfully Kroc’s high standards of sanitation and cleanliness. See also the examples in: Thomas J. Peters and Robert H. Waterman, Jr., In Search of Excellence: Lessons From America’s Best-Run Companies (New York: Warner Books, 1984), pp. 255-58.

[26] See the still-helpful discussion in: Richard Longenacker, The Ministry and Message of Paul (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1971), pp. 74-75.

[27] The Book of Order, G-10.0400.

[28] Candace R. Benyei, Understanding Clergy Misconduct in Religious Systems: Scapegoating, Family Secrets, and the Abuse of Power (New York & London: The Haworth Press, 1998).

[29]Isabel Briggs Myers, Gifts Differing (Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1980), pp. ix-xii.

[30] Otto Kroeger and Janet M. Thuesen, Type Talk: The 16 Personality Types That Determine How We Live, Love, and Work (New York: Dell, 1988).

[31] M. Robert Mullholland, Jr., Invitation To a Journey: A Road Map for Spiritual Formation (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1993), pp. 49-73.

[32] As one of many examples see, David Ewart’s “Spirirual Gifts Inventory,” www.bc.united-church.ca. It is worth noting that Ewart comes at the topic as a minister in the United Church of Canada, and thus avoids some of the charismatic theology which can diminish utility.

[33] G. Lloyd Rediger, Clergy Killers: Guidance for Pastors and Congregations Under Attack (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Logos Productions, 1996). See also the brief, but helpful discussion in: Robert Farrar Capon, Exit 36: A Fictional Chronicle (New York: Seabury Press, 1975), pp. 186-87.

[34] See, fir example, Charles H. Cosgrove and Dennis D. Hatfield, Church Conflict: The Hidden Systems Behind the Fights (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994).

[35] J.R.R. Tolkien, “On Fairy Stories,” in The Tolkien Reader (New York: Ballantine Books, 1966), pp. 74-75.

[36] James F. Hopewell, Congregation: Stories and Structures, edited by Barbara G. Wheeler (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), pp. 103-17.

[37] Unpublished paper by Kenneth C. Harper, “The Pastor-Scholar: Reviving a Classic Model of Ministry.”

Kenneth C. Harper

The cable car lurched up Powell Street in San Francisco; at the Knob Hill stop we got off. We were attending the 1997 Evangelical Theological Society convention, and had arrived a few days early to take in the sights. Entering Grace Cathedral (Episcopal), we immediately encountered the labyrinth. Since I knew but little about labyrinths, we did not walk it. It was not, however, my first encounter with the labyrinth in a spiritual setting. Over two years earlier, a Festival of Christian Art at Solana Beach Presbyterian Church (in the San Diego area) had included a portable labyrinth, with the pattern painted on canvas. Between those two incidents I had seen a few articles in denominational publications touting the labyrinth as a powerful and recently-rediscovered spiritual tool.[1] I was determined to learn more, and that day in San Francisco’s Grace Cathedral was the beginning. I read Lauren Artress=s paean to labyrinth walking, walked both a portable labyrinth in Orlando and an outdoor one in Saint Louis, and delved deeper than I would have guessed into New Age spirituality and sacred geometry.[2] The distilled product of my research I now present to this gathering.

Description and Definitions

Labyrinths are elaborate, intricate, and sometimes bewildering patterns, typically leading from an opening in the perimeter to a center or goal in the middle and out again. Labyrinths may be unicursal or multicursal. Unicursal labyrinths have but one single serpentine path; the walker, if he or she moves continuously forward, will inevitably arrive at the center. Multicursal labyrinths have false routes, dead ends, and one correct path out of many; in theory, if the labyrinth were complex enough, a walker might never reach the center, and might become hopelessly lost. Although by formal definition the words Alabyrinth@ and Amaze@ may be used interchangeably, for purposes of clarity in this paper the word Alabyrinth@ will be used only of unicursal patterns or structures, and the word Amaze@ will refer only to multicursal structures or patterns.[3]

Labyrinths and mazes may be enclosed or not. Those which are enclosed use walls to separate the different paths or parts of paths, and blind the walker to where he or she is relative to the whole pattern. These walls may be the interior walls of a cave, cardboard and fabric (as in a child=s fun-house maze), or topiary (as in the hedge mazes of formal gardens). Labyrinths used in a spiritual context are never enclosed. The pattern is flat upon the surface; the walker=s vision is not impeded. Indoor labyrinths may be woven into wool carpeting, as at Grace Cathedral, embedded in stone, painted on canvas, etc. The pathways of outdoor labyrinths may be marked with lime, rows of stones, or simply mowed into the grass.[4]

Labyrinths – Ancient and Medieval

In ancient mythology, Minos commissioned Daedalus to build a maze in which to banish the Minotaur, offspring of his wife’s unfaithfulness. Periodically, Minos would sacrifice Athenian youths to the Minotaur. Ariadne took pity upon Prince Theseus when the lot fell to him, and gave him a ball of thread to play out as he entered the maze. Thus he was able to find his way out of the labyrinth once he had slain the Minotaur.[5] Perhaps inspired by this legend, the labyrinth became a common feature in Greek coinage and mosaics. This seven-circuit labyrinth, though perhaps inspired by the legend, is surely meant only to represent it. For one thing, it is unicursal, and that precludes one from becoming hopelessly lost; for another, it has only seven circuits. Indeed, the Cretan seven-circuit labyrinth is one of the easiest to construct.

Descriptions of labyrinths and mazes show that the ancients were fascinated by this figure. Pliny the Elder, in his Natural History, describes an ancient labyrinth in some detail. Here are excerpts of his description:

There still exists, in the nome of Heracleopolites, a labyrinth first built, it is said, three thousand six hundred years ago, by King Petesuchis or Tithoës . . . . This great mass is so solidly built that the lapse of time has been unable to destroy it, but it has been badly ravaged by the people of Heracleopolites, who have always detested it. To describe the whole of it in detail would be quite impossible, as it is divided up into regions and prefrectures, called nomes, thirty in number, with a great palace to each; in addition it must contain temples of all the gods of Egypt and forty statues of Nemesis in the same number of sacred shrines, as well as numerous pyramids.[6]

Although these descriptions seem fabulous, they reflect the observations of Herodotus, who lived in the fifth century BC, and who claimed to have visited an Egyptian labyrinth not unlike that described by Pliny.[7]

Penelope Doob argues that the ancients= fascination with mazes derives from their dualistic nature. On the one hand, they represent chaos and mystery for those trapped within. On the other hand, they represent order and complexity when viewed from an exterior vantage point. Outside v. inside, order v. chaos, rational complexity v. irrational mysteryBthese dualities captivated ancient maze builders and those who wrote about them.[8]

Although some ancient and early medieval Christian writers knew about the mazes of the ancients, there is not evidence to suggest that they themselves ever used mazes or labyrinths in a spiritual context. Medieval labyrinths were built in connection with pilgrimage.[9] Pilgrimage as a spiritual act became an increasingly popular form of devotion as the Middle Ages wore on. It may be remembered that Geoffrey Chaucer=s (1343-1400) Canterbury Tales uses the literary device of stories told by pilgrims en route to the shrine of Thomas à Becket at Canterbury Cathedral. The capture of Jerusalem in 1099 by the forces of Christendom opened those ancient holy sites to pilgrims from the west. However, the Moslem recapture of those sites in 1187 closed that window of opportunity. To provide a meaningful substitute, several cathedrals were fitted with labyrinths. The pilgrim walked that winding way as the culmination of his travels. In Chartres, the glorious rose window on the west wall of the cathedral was mirrored in the labyrinth laid in the pavement at his feet. Indeed, the center design of the labyrinth mimics the center design of the rose window.[10] As Jaskolski puts it, arriving at the center Afelt@ like an arrival in the Heavenly City.

Going through a labyrinth seemed like a symbolic pilgrimage to Jerusalem, the then unreachable goal of the Christian pilgrim=s journey, but at the same time it seemed to bring an inner realization of the meaning that the actual pilgrimage in this marvelously built cathedral, lit mysteriously by the colorful glow of its windows, possessed in the here and now: arrival at what was, in terms of salvational history, the midpoint of the world, the earthly and heavenly Jerusalem, as a representation of which the cathedral was constructed.[11]

Jaskolski then speculates on the symbolism inherent in the labyrinth=s design.

Instead of the seven concentrically nested loops that we have had up till now, the figure now gets eleven of them. According to Christian number symbolism, eleven stands for sin, trespass, and intemperance (since it exceeds the number of the commandments) and for imperfection (since the perfect number twelve has not yet been reached). It identifies the labyrinth as a world of sin. But the eleven concentric circles have the sign of the cross laid over them, and this organizes the figure in such a way that the path must turn when it reaches the axes of the cross and thus makes it into a Way of the Cross. Thus the world of sin is placed under the saving sign of Christ, which conquers Satan.[12]

Of those original cathedral labyrinths, only those at Reims and Chartres yet survive. Pilgrimages declined with the rise of world exploration, colonization, and trade which began in the fifteenth century and flourished in the sixteenth. Perhaps those with wanderlust turned to more secular motives for travel.

The Modern Rediscovery of the Labyrinth

With the Enlightenment came, once again, an upsurge of interest in mazes. These were invariably multicursal (which is one reason why we, the children of modernism, think of a maze when we hear the word, Alabyrinth@) and were designed more out of fascination with geometry and mathematics than from spiritual motives. Garden mazes were a feature of country houses of the rich. Maze designs were utilized in decoration, and became a fad of the 1920’s.

While it seems labyrinths never disappeared entirely from the scene, they were relegated to the fringes of spirituality. In 1992, Dr. Lauren Artress walked a labyrinth at a spiritual retreat. At about the same time she learned of the Medieval labyrinth laid into the floor of Chartres Cathedral. She secured the support of the Dean of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco to install two eleven-circuit, Chartres-style labyrinths on that site. The first was woven into a wool carpet and is centered at the entryway of the cathedral=s nave adjacent to the baptismal font. The second is a terrazzo labyrinth, laid in the pavement of an outdoor patio.

Several factors converging seemed to have a synergistic effect. The first was the support of labyrinth walking by a legitimate (and wealthy!) ecclesiastical entity. The second was the vivacious and winsome personality of Dr. Lauren Artress, who has traveled the world over to promote the labyrinth as a transforming spiritual tool. The third factor is the coming of age of the baby boomers and their rekindled interest in spiritual issues. The result has been an exponential increase in interest. The ministry founded by Dr. Artress, Veriditas, catalogues 270 labyrinths in the U.S. on their web page.[13] In addition, more labyrinths are being built, and the effort to promote them is increasingly vigorous, as well.[14]

Evaluation

Why Does It Work?

What happens when one walks a labyrinth? Here are a few brief accounts from those who have felt the greatest impact.

As I stood waiting my turn to enter the labyrinth, I began to weep. I had no idea why. I still had no idea why as I walked, overcome by periodic waves of weeping, nor did I have any insight as I finished my walk. As I got outside, however, I suddenly felt as if my older sister was talking to me, and I realized that I was in the midst of a healing. . . [She then describes how her dying sister had laid a Adeathbed wish@ upon her which she was unable to fulfill; now she felt she had peace with her sister=s memory.] [15]

Beneath my feet, I had the strange sense of the stone being alive. In the past, pilgrims visiting the church had actually slept on the floor, and though my twentieth century bed was much softer, I shivered with a sense of kinship. They would have journeyed by donkey cart of horseback or on foot, while I had come by airplane and bus. And yet, throughout the centuries our desires had been the same: to make our way to the center of something larger than ourselves, to the core of life, to God. Following the stone path, I moved inside the curving pattern. . . . I felt myself not saying a prayer, but being in a prayer, part of a prayer. . . . I stood transfixed, perhaps minutes, perhaps more.[16]

I had been impatient with people lately and it was beginning to affect my work. My hope, once I admitted it to myself, was to get insight about this. I figured if I got any help at all it would be a reminder to stop being impatient, so I entered the labyrinth not expecting to receive much. Frankly I expected a Zen meditation stick reminder on how important patience is. Instead, I received three clear messages, none of which seemed to speak to patience directly. The first was ASpend time with the people you love.@ The second was AMake time for creativity@ and the third was ATake time out for retreats.@ I didn=t intellectually understand how this guidance related to patience. However, the message seemed crystal clear and it felt right. Later I realized that my impatience was from not taking care of these parts of myself. . . . The labyrinth was great help in getting me to see this.[17]

Of all people, we who are evangelicals should recognize the place and power of testimony. We appeal to others to Ataste and see that the Lord is good@ (Psalm 34:8). However, as evangelical scholars we do not idolize experience, but rather believe that all experiences are subject to the audit of God=s Word. To begin this Scripture-informed evaluation, let us begin by asking why many find the labyrinth to be an effective spiritual tool.

The first thing that happens when one enters the labyrinth is a quieting of the chattering, distracting Aself talk@ which continually buzzes in our brains. The labyrinth walk serves as a centering deviceBan exercise to quiet the mind and to replace it with a calm and relaxed state. Some psychologists recommend breathing exercises, relaxation techniques, Yoga, or other exercises to achieve this physiological and emotional state.[18] And many Christians find it helpful to prepare for their devotions by following a predictable, set routineBfor example, brewing a cup of coffee, sitting in a particular place, opening one=s bible or devotional book, saying a prayer of preparation, etc.

Further, the act of walking the labyrinth draws in the body. Motion and posture become aides in the spiritual exercise. Many have recognized the fundamental unity of the person as body-plus-mind-plus-spirit, and many others have reported how such physical conditions as illness and exhaustion can take their toll on spiritual vitality.[19] In a more positive vein, bowing, kneeling, folding or raising hands, can aid in prayer.[20] High church evangelical-turned-Catholic Thomas Howard argues persuasively that we ignore the physical dimensions of our spirituality to our peril.[21]

The power of the labyrinth is enhanced by its connection with pilgrimage. The experience of pilgrimage is so widespread that Jungians Jean and Wallace Clift regard it an archetype of the collective unconscious. We=re meant to go on pilgrimages. They nourish a deep part of the soul. Pilgrimages have as their common features that they are journeys, of some distance and/or difficulty, which are undertaken to nourish the spirit. Almost any site can become a pilgrim=s destination. Many American feel a surge of patriotic feeling when visiting the Capitol, or Lincoln=s Memorial, or any other of the Ashrines@ in Washington, DC. A generation of baby boomers made pilgrimage destinations out of JFK=s eternal flame at Arlington National Cemetery, Dealey Plaza in Dallas, or John Lennon=s apartment building in New York City. New additions to the catalogue of secular pilgrimage sites are sites connected with Princess Diana and JFK, Jr. There is a power in pilgrimage, a power which the labyrinth taps. Artress elaborates:

At Grace Cathedral, we had been working with the theme of pilgrimage for three years through Quest. Our setting seemed perfect. The trustees, dean, and chapter on which I serve are custodians of a grand and beautiful sacred space. It is located in the center of one of the most welcoming and intriguing cities in the world. Our canvas labyrinth had been available to the public for six months by then. Each time it was open, at least one hundred and fifty people from various spiritual paths turned up to walk it. It had captured the imagination of believers and nonbelievers alike. I realized the labyrinth was not just a symbol for pilgrimageBwe were providing sacred space for anyone seeking transformation. We were providing a destination for modern pilgrims.[22]

As the mind and body relax on this symbolic pilgrimage, many report that the Aright brain,@ intuitive, imaginative, and creative parts of life awaken. Some remember dreams and experience flashes of insight into what they mean. Others see new solutions to old problems, solutions to which they were previously opaque. Yet others seemed to gain an internal peace or sense of harmony and love.

Not all who walk the labyrinth find themselves equally moved. The examples quoted above were form those who felt a powerfully spiritual experience. Others find the event only mildly interesting. Why is this the case? In an effort to quantify the labyrinth experience, the Education Committee of Central Presbyterian Church, Miami, Florida sponsored a labyrinth workshop on October 10, 1999. A portable labyrinth, a full-sized replica of the Chartres labyrinth on canvas, was borrowed from the Presbyterian Youth Connection, the PCUSA=s national youth ministry. Some fifty people walked the labyrinth; of these twenty-nine filled out a questionnaire on the experience. An attempt was made to correlate response to the labyrinth with several different parameters: Generation cohort,[23] each of the four scales of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator,[24] the Keirsey-Bates Temperaments,[25] and gender. Use of the Chi-Square Goodness-of-Fit Test failed to establish a statistically-significant correlation between response to the experience of labyrinth walking and any other tested function.[26] It may be that the sample size (N=29) was too small; Chi-Square is most effective when n>5 for each cell.[27]

Anecdotal data suggests that there should be a more positive labyrinth response from those who are ANF=s@ (à la Keirsey).[28] Intuitive-types are best able to make the connection between walking a labyrinth and imagining a spiritual pilgrimage. Feeling-types are most adept at harmony issues, and tend to enter into experiences; Thinking-types tend to objectify experiences, keeping them at arms length. Larger scale testing is clearing a research need.

If we were to indulge in the constitutionally proscribed practice of guilt by association, surely the labyrinth project would be vulnerable to indictment. In the first place, it is housed in San Francisco=s Grace Cathedral (Episcopal). It may be remembered that the Episcopal Bishop of California in the 1960’s was The Right Rev. James Pike, co-founder of the ecumenical effort COCU, and liberal cleric extraordinaire. It could be argued that his posture of scorn toward historical orthodoxy would influence its current ministries.[29] Might the sins of the fathers visited upon the ecclesiastical sons and daughters?

The second Aguilt by association@ issue comes when one sees the kinds of people praising the labyrinth. They largely are more in tune with New Age spirituality than with the gospel. In an Internet Anetcast,@ one participant described laying out a labyrinth in his back yard, utilizing a dowsing rod to place the center of the labyrinth over a water source and aligning the entrance with Amaximum power flow.@ Another participant spoke of entering the labyrinth and being hit immediately with waves of nausea and feelings of horror, which she attributed to the triggering of a Apast life@ memory.[30] Faced with this kind of unconventional spirituality, evangelical Christians might well be gun-shy.

Fortunately, one needn=t resort to such expedients to raise cautionary flags over the labyrinth. Three criticism are germane. The first is that it is contentless. There is not underlying world view. Each walker takes to the labyrinth his or her own philosophical and religious perspectives. In fact, there is a deliberate effort to divorce the internal/personal response to the labyrinth from any external/historical reference. Although he following quotation from Jungians Jean and Wallace Clift refers to the medieval pilgrimage site of Santiago de Compostela, one can apply it also to labyrinth walking.

The view that the bones of St. James the Apostle were miraculously transported to a remote corner of northern Spain to be discovered in a field of stars by a miraculous vision centuries later seems to us historically unlikely. Yet there is a absolutely no possibility of questioning the connective, trans-formative meaning of Santiago de Compostela for centuries of pilgrims who still walk, ride bicycles, horses, and donkeys, as well as cars, including some rather unlikely Protestant pilgrims. . . And there they fulfill their Aquest for something more and new and better.@[31]

While this absence of content is touted by those who champion the labyrinth, Christians are not likely to be quite so content to bypass Christ. Lauren Artress rhapsodizes about a world knit together by tens of thousand of labyrinths, and the commonality of those who walk them. Peace will come. Conflict will abate. However, one cannot simply suspend epistemology. C. S. Lewis, writing to his friend Dom Bede Griffith, O.S.B., a missionary in India, says AYour Hindus certainly sound delightful. But what do they deny? That has always been my trouble with IndiansBto find any proposition which they would pronounce false. But truth must surely involve exclusions?@[32] Furthermore, those of us who read our Bibles know that there is no eternal peace without the Prince of Peace, and that conflict will not end until The Final Conflict and our Lord=s return. Nor is such contentlessness necessarily neutral. Jesus warned that the life from which one demon was cleansed, being empty and inviting, drew in seven, so that Athe last state was worse than the first@ (Matthew 12:45).

A corollary of this contentlessness is the absence of moral striving as part of the labyrinth experience. There is no sense that one must repent of sin before or during the labyrinth walk. Nor is there any hint that there must be preparation before walking, neither that some may not be worthy to walk. It is a come-as-you-are experience.[33] Indeed, a crucial ingredient for the Medieval pilgrim, penitence, is absent from New Age spirituality, as is difficulty.

The second criticism is related to the first: Walking the labyrinth is experience driven. Granted, there does seem to be a kind of mysticism generated by the labyrinth. But, mysticism, as C. S. Lewis points out, is like an ocean voyage. All crossings are fundamentally similar; what makes them particular is the destination.[34] A danger of the labyrinth project is that it confuses the journey with the destination. Thus, there is no awareness that one may make wrong choices; that one=s experience may be misleading. The labyrinth=s design may even lend support to the old syncretistic and universalist cliché that we=re all on the same journey, regardless of our religious or philosophical convictions. One could argue that a multicursal maze is more compatible with the Christian message than a unicursal labyrinth, as Doob herself muses.

. . .[T]he labyrinth often represents the course of life from birth to death and the fixed order of God=s creative universe. In this context, the multicursal model makes an orthodox statement about man=s relationship to God and to his own fate: God designs the master plan, the paths and laws within which individuals, aided perhaps by grace, ecclesiastical instruction, or the sacraments, choose their own course and thus their own ends: entrapment and damnation or extrication and salvation. This model illustrates the interactions of divine ordinance and human free will. The unicursal labyrinth, on the other hand, is potentially heterodox, more appropriate in a classical, fatalistic context: God establishes an inevitable pattern that all who enter must follow, so that individual free will is irrelevant.[35]

In response, I would argue that the unicursal labyrinth can be just as AChristian@ as the multicursal maze, for it may speak to the walker of the necessity of making one=s way to the foot of the cross, the center of human history and the core of all meaning. Then the Christian must find himself back into the world, where both sin and the Spirit are found.

But another fundamental weakness of experience-driven religion, is that the experience becomes stale over time. A recent internet posting described a Washington, DC labyrinth which has added driving music, electronically projected images, and strobe light to the experience. Apparently, the labyrinth by itself is no longer a captivating enough experience for these pilgrims.[36]

A third criticism is that the event is fundamentally a solitary one. At a recent luncheon, historian Martin Marty contrasted Amoored@ spirituality with Aunmoored.@ Moored spirituality is anchored in a faith community, its Scriptures, and its traditions.[37] Unmoored spirituality takes a buffet approach to life, picking and choosing according to individual whim and current fashion. The labyrinth is an expression of Aunmoored@ spirituality; each walks the labyrinth by oneself, in glorious isolation form other pilgrims.[38]

Despite these cautionary notes, this writer urges careful consideration of the labyrinth, and recommends its use in a Christian context. It is true that there is no specific Christian content or message inherent in the labyrinth. However, Christians, evangelicals included, utilize a number of spiritual disciplines which are not unique to the gospel. Note this paragraph from management gurus Terrence Deal and Lee Bolman, in their book, Leading With Soul:

To aid in the journey inward, every religious tradition has developed spiritual disciplines, or exercises. One is prayer. . . Others include meditation, studying scriptures, singing hymns, following prescribed rituals, journeying to sacred places, and contemplating nature. Similar practices have evolved independently in many different places and eras. There is a meditative tradition, for example, in almost every major religion, including Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism.[39]

Even though these exercises are not exclusive to Christianity, there are few, if any, here who would advocate the giving up prayer, reading of Scripture and devotional books, giving alms, performing acts of mercy, singing hymns, etc. because we share them with those of other faiths. Each activity must be evaluated in its own right for potential conformity to the gospel rather than dismissed (as we noted earlier) through guilt by association.

There are two powerful motifs, unique to Christianity, which Christians can bring to the labyrinth experience, and which will infuse it with distinctively Christian content. The first is this: We need to rediscover the biblical category of pilgrimage. In the great roll call of faith which is Hebrews 11, we read

By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to set out for a place that he was to receive as an inheritance; and he set out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he stayed for a time in the land he had been promised, as in a foreign land, living in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. For he looked forward to the city that has foundations, whose architect and building is God (vv. 8-10).

Though we who are evangelicals sing the gospel chorus, AThis world is not my home; I=m just a-passin= through,@ our actions belie our words. We are very much at home in Babylon.

The second truth is this: We need to emulate the early Christians in calling our faith, AThe Way.@[40] Paul called himself a follower of the Way when he testified before Felix, ABut this I admit to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our ancestors, believing everything laid down according to the law or written in the prophets@ (Acts 24:14). To view our faith thus is to shed the notion of the Christian faith as only a static treasure of doctrines, and to add the dimension of daily obedience in the midst of the complexities and ambiguities of human life.

Evangelical Christianity has sometimes been criticized for failing to account for the depth of human frailty. Yet all of us, Christian or not, are subject to what novelist Frederick Beuchner calls the Atragedy, irony, and absurdity@ in life.[41] The labyrinth bears powerful testimony to the fact that life may bring us close to the goal, only to turn suddenly into a world of troubles which sweep us far from the heavenly vision. If our faith is overly dependant on circumstances, we will be perplexed. But if we remember that our Savior walked to Calvary bearing a heavy load before he appeared to the women on Easter morning, then we will realize that our ultimate hope is in the one who alone is, Athe way, the truth, and the life@ (John 14:6).

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY ON LABYRINTHS

Artress, Lauren. Walking a Sacred Path: Rediscovering the Labyrinth as a Spiritual Tool. New York: Riverhead Books, 1995.

Burton-Christie, Douglas. “Into the Labyrinth: Walking the Way of Wisdon,” Weavings, Vol. XII, No. 4 (July-August, 1997), 19-28.

Clift, Jean Dalby and Lcift, Wallace B. The Archetype of Pilgrimage: Outer Action With Inner Meaning. New York and Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press, 1996.

Corbett, Peter. “Pathfinders: Walking Medieval Labyrinths in a Modern World.” Veriditas Ministries. www.gracecom.org.

Cornell, Judith. Mandala: Luminous Symbols for Healing. Wheaton, Illinois: Quest Books, 1994.

Doob, Penelope Reed. The Idea of the Labyrinth: From Classical Antiquity through the Middle Ages. Ithaca, New York and London: Cornell University Press, 1990.

Gaynor, Gillian. “An Amazing Journey,” Presbyterian Today, Vol. LXXXVI, No. 1 (January-February, 1996), 11.

Herodotus. The Histories. Trans. by Robin Waterfield. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Jaskolski, Helmut. The Labyrinth: Symbol of Fear, Rebirth, and Liberation. Trans. by Michael H. Kohn. Boston and London: Shambhala, 1997.

Matthews, W. H. Mazes and Labyrinths: A General Account of Their History and Developments. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1922. Also the reprint edition: New York: Dover Publications, 1970.

O’Roark, Mary Ann. “A Walk Through Time,” Guideposts, Vol. LIV, No. 7 (September, 1999), 40-44.

Penny, Lynn. “The Labyrinth-Take a Walk on the Spiritual Side,” Horizons (July/August, 1998), 4-8.

Zingg, Otto. “Prayer in Motion: Walking the Labyrinth,” Hungryhearts News. A publication of the Office of Discipleship and Spirituality, Presbyterian Church, USA, Louisville, Kentucky. (Winter, 1996), 1,4.

**********
FOOTNOTES

[1] Gillian Gaynor, AAn Amazing Journey,@ Presbyterians Today LXXXVI/1 (January/February, 1996): 11. Also: Lynn Penny, AThe LabyrinthBTake a Walk on the Spiritual Side,@ Horizons (July/August, 1998): 4-8.

[2] Lauren Artress, Walking a Sacred Path: Rediscovering the Labyrinth as a Spiritual Tool (New York: Riverhead Books, 1995), 201 pp. The Orlando labyrinth was part of a spiritual life conference at First Presbyterian Church of Orlando, Florida in February, 1998. The outdoor labyrinth was located at The Sisters of Mercy Retreat Center. On Spiritual Geometry, see, as one example out of many: Judith Cornell, Mandala: Luminous Symbols for Healing (Wheaton, Illinois: Quest Books, 1994); Lauren Artress is quoted and the Grace Cathedral labyrinth cited on pp. 136-37. Also, the Grace Labyrinth poster uses the word, Amandala@ in its text.

[3] W. H. Matthews, Mazes and Labyrinths: A General Account of Their History and Developments (London: Longmans, Green, & Co., 1922), p. 184-85. Matthews also uses the terms Apuzzle@ and Anon-puzzle.@

[4] Otto Zingg, APrayer in Motion: Walking the Labyrinth,@ Hungryhearts News (Winter, 1996): 1,4.

[5] Penelope Reed Doob, The Idea of the Labyrinth: from Classical Antiquity through the Middle Ages (Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press, 1990), pp. 10-12. Ms. Doob also provides an excellent summary of the myth.

[6] As quoted in Matthews, p. 10.

[7] Herodotus, The Histories, Book two, sections 148 and 159. See, for example, the recent translation by Robin Waterfield (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 154-55.

[8] Doob, pp. 24-25.

[9] It must be noted that Ms. Doob disputes this oft-repeated assertionBan assertion accepted as gospel by labyrinth walkers. She cites the absence of Medieval textual evidence testifying as to the function of the labyrinths. What few references there are to labyrinths in Medieval texts tend to be inferential. For example, labyrinthine patterns adorn the margins of liturgical texts pertaining to Easter Vigil; Doob conjectures that the Minotaur has become a Satan figure and Theseus has become a Christ figure, and walking the labyrinth becomes a re-enactment of the harrowing of hell. In response, this writer would argue that the argument from silence is weak, and that placement of labyrinths at popular pilgrimage sties (the Cathedral at Chartres, for example, contains the supposed garment worn by Mary during the birth of Jesus) show evidence of the connection (Doob, pp. 117-20).

[10] Penny, p. 6.

[11] Helmut Jaskolski, The Labyrinth: Symbol of Fear, Rebirth, and Liberation. Translated by Michael H. Kohn (Boston & London: Shambhala, 1997), p. 73.

[12] Jaskolski, Labyrinth, p. 63.

[13] Furthermore, Lynn Penny says that over 700 versions of the labyrinth are open to the public worldwide (Penny, p. 7)

[14] See, for example, the magazine of Veriditas Ministries and The World-Wide Labyrinth Project, Source (1100 California St., San Francisco, CA 94018), and such websites as: www.labyrinthsociety.org

[15] Artress, pp. 75-76.

[16] Mary Ann O=Roark, AA Walk Through Time,@ Guideposts LIV/7 (September, 1999): 42-43.

[17] Artress, pp. 118-19.

[18] Archibald Hart, Adrenalin and Stress (Dallas, etc.: Word Publishing, 1988), esp. ch. 12.

[19] C. S. Lewis, Letters, pp. 301-302.

[20] See, for example, the excellent, and biblical affirmation in The Book of Order of The Presbyterian Church USA: AIn the Old and New Testaments and through the ages, the people of God expressed prayer through actions as well as speech and song. So in worship today it is appropriate (a) to kneel, to bow, to stand, to lift hands in prayer, (b) to dance, to clap, to embrace in joy and praise, (c) to anoint and to lay on hands in intercession and supplication, commissioning and ordination@ (W-2.1005).

[21] Thomas Howard, Evangelical Is Not Enough (Nashville, etc.: Thomas Nelson, 1084), pp. 42-45.

[22] Artress, p. 34.

[23] William Strauss and Neil Howe, Generations: The History of America=s Future, 1584 to 2069 (New York: William Morrow, 1991), 538 pp. See also my 1994 ETS paper on the topic.

[24] Isabel Briggs Myers, Gifts Differing (Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1980), 217 pp. For a Christian perspective on and utilization of the Myers-Briggs, see M. Robert Mulholland, Jr.,Invitation to a Journey: A Road Map for Spiritual Formation (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 173 pp.

[25] David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates, Please Understand Me: Character and Temperament Types (Del Mar, California: Prometheus Nemesis Books, 1980), 210 pp.

[26] John J. Timko, Statistics By Example (Orange, California: Statistics for Management, 1989), pp. 165-69.

[27] Therefore, numeric values were assigned to the labyrinth responses and the data was analyzed again, using the two-sample Student=s t test for small samples (Timko, pp. 123-38). Again, the null hypothesis was retained (i.e., no statistically-significant variation was found).

[28] This emerged from an informal poll I took of participants in the meeting ALabyrinths,@ on Ecunet.

[29] For a sympathetic treatment of Pike see: William Stringfellow and Anthony Towne, The Bishop Pike Affair: Scandals of Conscience and Heresy, Relevance and Solemnity in the Contemporary Church (New York: Harper and Row, 1967). For a fictionalized look at Pike=s San Francisco years, see: Philip K. Dick, The Transmigration of Timothy Archer (New York: Vintage Books, 1991).

[30] Log onto www.gracecom.org and follow the prompts to the Labyrinth Project

[31] Jean Dalby Clift and Wallace B. Clift, The Archetype of Pilgrimage: Outer Action With Inner Meaning New York & Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1996), p. 166.

[32] C. S. Lewis, Letters of C. S. Lewis, edited and with a memoir by W. H. Lewis (New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World, 1966), p. 267.

[33] Apparently sensitive to this criticism, it has been suggested that the sheer length of the labyrinth and the accompanying uncertainty as to where one is in relation to the center constitute a sufficient challenge to reveal the determination and moral fiber of the pilgrim (see: Doob, pp. 82-86). I must disagree. A walk of an hour, usually in a comfortable and congenial environment, hardly seems sufficiently rigorous to reveal moral character.

[34] C. S. Lewis, Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer (San Diego, etc.: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1964), p. 65.

[35] Doob, p. 62

[36] John Harris posted note number 593 to the meeting ALabyrinths,@ on Ecunet, June 14, 1999.

[37] The luncheon was sponsored by the Religion Department of the University of Miami, February 13, 1998.

[38] The staff at Chartres leads a Aprocession@ in and out of the labyrinth. At least in that context one is joining with others in an organized and communal activity. Apparently smarting from this criticism, Douglas Burton-Christie argues that, appearances notwithstanding, the presence of other people on the labyrinth makes the experience communal. See: AInto the Labyrinth: Walking the Way of Wisdom,@ Weavings XII/4 (July/August, 1997): 27.

[39] Lee G. Bolman and Terrence E. Deal, Leading With Soul: An Uncommon Journey of Spirit (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1995), p. 57.

[40] Burton-Christie, pp. 21-24.

[41] Frederick Beuchner, Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy, and Fairy Tale (New York, etc.: Harper and Row, 1977), esp. pp. 37-47.

Kenneth C. Harper

Description

It seemed as though the presbytery committee meeting would never end. From my “fortysomething” perspective, he issue had been thrashed out and talked to death. But the other committee members (including the moderator) were mostly “fiftysomething,” and the meeting droned on. Weeks later, a light bulb went on when I began to delve into the book Generations by William Strauss and Neil Howe.[2] The book’s thesis was summarized in the December, 1992 issue of Atlantic Monthly[3], and its terminology is creeping into the popular press[4]. Neil Howe spoke to a group of Presbyterian Church National fund-raising staffers in New Orleans recently.[5]

Generations is breathtaking in its scope, ambitious in its purpose and provocative in its thesis. Strauss and Howe look back to 1584 and forward to 2069, seeing a pattern of generational cycles, each lasting 89-90 years. Each generation, while unique, has features which divide it from the previous-born and the next-born. It also has features which divide it from the previous-born and the next-born. It also has features which parallel those of four generations back. The generations which currently make up most of American society are four: G.I.’s, Silent, Boomers, and 13ers.

The G.I. Generation, with birth years of 1901 to 1924, came of age in time to wage World War II. It is civic-minded, successful, competent, and produced every U.S. president from Kennedy to Bush. It believes in, and invests itself in institutions–the family, schools, government, the church. For this generation, the preferred way of meeting its goals is to organize itself for action. Now seventy to ninety-three years old, this generation (as a group) is the wealthiest older generation in the history of humanity. The AARP lobbies hard for seniors funding and maintenance of social security’s inflation-adjusted index.[6] G.I. belief in institutions is evident even in the existence of the Evangelical Theological Society. When a movement of Evangelical scholarship emerged following the modernist-fundamentalist controversy and World War II, what form did it take? An institution, with annual meetings, a journal, and regional gatherings.

The Silent Generation, with birth years of 1925 to 1942, has been compliant, process-oriented, and especially attuned to “fair play,” toleration, and compromise. The “silenters” have two other demographic features which shape their characteristics: They are the smallest and the most homogeneous of all the generations now alive in America. This has meant an eagerness to welcome diversity as a way of breaking up the boredom, and it has meant seeking vehicles for including diverse elements without controversy or divisiveness–hence conflict management and inclusiveness. It was doubtless a “silenter” who penned the following verse[7]:

Oh, give me your pity, I’m on a committee

Which means that from morning to night,

We attend and amend, and contend and defend

Without a conclusion in sight.

We confer and concur, we defer and demur

and reiterate all of our thoughts.

We revise the agenda with frequent addenda,

and consider a load of reports.

We compose and propose, we suppose and oppose,

And the points of procedure are fun;

But though various notions are brought up as motions,

There’s terribly little gets done.

We resolve and absolve, but we never dissolve,

Since it’s out of the question for us.

What a shattering pity to end our committee.

Where else could we make such a fuss?

The Boom Generation, with birth years of 1943 to 1960, is now 34 to 51 years old. Precocious, idealistic, and narcissistic, it is very impressed with its own wisdom. The Baby Boomers were the first distinct generational entity to receive exhaustive attention. The subject of almost endless sociological research, the boomers have been made to feel pampered and special. They were raised under the permissive guidelines of Dr. Benjamin Spock and it shows. Though highly idealistic, they do exhibit inconsistencies. For example, though moral vigilantes (they were eager to brand the Vietnam War “immoral”), they have found it convenient to make exceptions for their own case.[8] Their sense of entitlement allowed them a sexual revolution, experimentation with “recreational” drugs, and the materialistic greed of yuppies. Their entitlement also has given them the perceived moral high ground in societal issues, ranging from environmentalism to sexual harassment. Their style of management is highly confrontational and ideologically driven.[9]

With that background, let us return to my “endless” committee meeting. The moderator and most of the members were from the Silent Generation (as are the majority of mainline denominational leaders) seeking compromise, fairness, inclusiveness, and process, however long it takes. As a “Boomer,” I’m long on action and short on patience. Furthermore, we’re cocky enough to know we’re right, even when we’re not.

The remaining generation is significant enough to warrant extended discussion. These are the members of “Generation X.” The G.I.’s and Silenters have had their day; the boomers have been studied within an inch of their life. The next generation begs for understanding, especially by the church. Demographers have been so enchanted with the “baby-boomers,” they tend to forget something: A generation following the baby-boomers, thirteen to thirty-three years old this year (birth years of 1961-1981), has grown up almost without notice. More numerous than the boomers, this generation doesn’t even have a name: “Busters” (following “boomers”), “13er’s” (the thirteenth generation since the American Revolution)[10], “Generation X” (coined by 13er novelist Douglas Coupland).[11] To research their struggles is to wander beyond the antiseptic world of established print media. Anthropological studies of Generation X are better served by logging onto computer bulletin boards[12], listening to music, and viewing their cinema.[13]

These are the chronic underachievers, the generation of Bart Simpson, Beavis and Butt-Head. They’re more interested in the body (Air Jordans and pumping iron) than the mind (sinking SAT scores). If they use illegal drugs, it’s more likely to be steroids than hallucinogens. Their music has migrated from traditional rock-and-roll to Metalica, Pearl Jam, Guns’n’Roses, and Nine Inch Nails. They may not be able to spell, but they can log on with their computer modems and track down what they need to know. Their language skills may seem underdeveloped, unless you include MS-DOS. They’re the generation that’s had a hard time finding a career, of moving out of Mom and Dad’s. They likely will be the first generation of this century to enjoy a lower standard of living than that of their parents.

They’re street smart and pragmatic. They’ve had to be; they’ve had the most ignored childhood of the century. They’re the generation with more single parents and more latchkey kids than any generation alive. They’re survivors in a world they perceive to be at best indifferent and at worst dangerous. Placing results over ideology, they’re more likely to organize a work party to clean up a local park than circulate a petition favoring environmental legislation. They are a “can do” crowd, as Desert Storm proved.

They don’t naturally gravitate to church; it’s too predictable and too verbal. They’re more likely to live their Christian faith through group-building activities, work trips, mission projects, and action sports. Committee work leaves them cold. It takes too much time and too much talk; 13er’s are willing to cut procedural corners, even massage the system, to get the results they seek.

My hopeful prediction is that their energy will be harnessed for incredible good in the church and the world. If the friction between themselves and their boomer parents can be managed (and it may not be: this is the most serious generation gap since the 1960’s), their pragmatism and savvy can help reach the environmental, social justice, and Christian mission goals of their elders. But they are leery of starry-eyed idealism and have (what writer Ernest Hemingway called) a “built in crap detector.” A measure of Generation X’s wry disenchantment may be found in this posted E-mail note[14]:

Boomers Busters

Lassie Snoop Doggie Dog

Talk of Beatles Reunion Talk of New Edition Reunion

James Dean Luke Perry

Mrs. Robinson by Simon and Garfunkel Mrs. Robinson by the Lemonheads

Drive-in-theaters Drive-by-shootings

The Brady Bunch The Brady Bill

The Supremes Salt-N-Pepa

Somebody to Love by Jefferson Airplane Somebody to Shove by Soul Asylum

Tom and Jerry Beavis and Butthead

Mood rings Nipple rings

Dr. Marcus Welby Dr. Dre

Gloria Steinem Lorena Bobbitt

The Graduate Reality Bites

The earlier allusion to Hemmingway is fitting. William Strauss and Neil Howe (Generations and 13th Gen) see this group as reminiscent of Gertrude Stein’s “lost generation,” the same generation that gave us the no-nonsense theology of Reinhold Niebuhr and the brutal efficiency of George S. Patton. Our current generation of leadership has paralyzed the denomination by its idolatry of process, fairness, and political correctness. The 13ers can bring us back to a refreshing look at the bottom line. Just let them be reminded that their pragmatism falls under Christ’s Lordship, too.

Although the four generations just described make up the bulk of American society, a fifth generation is being born as the G.I. generation moves off the scene. These are the children born between 1982 and 2001; Strauss and Howe call them “Millennial Kids.” The feature which distinguishes them from their older counterparts (Generation X) is that they’re wanted.

These children were born to parents who really want to raise them right. Many children born into Generation X were seen as a drug to their parents’ careers or pleasure. However, a significant number of Generation X’ers, now old enough to become parents, are rebelling against the inadequate parenting they received by opting for lower, one-job incomes, a rejection of consumerism, and a commitment to a simpler lifestyle and a building of relationships within families[15]. If Strauss and Howe’s Generations thesis holds up, the Millennial Kids will be the G.I.’s redux. They’ll be responsible builders, socially engaged, and institutionally minded. SAT scores will rise; juvenile crime will fall; drug and alcohol abuse will be socially proscribed.

Difficulties

But, however elegant this scheme may seem, it’s unlikely to meet with universal acceptance. This section of the paper will focus on difficulties with the Generations theory through the raising of a series of questions.

1. How do blacks and minorities fit into this theory? Strauss and Howe admit that this is a majority view of history. Some may consider such an approach politically incorrect, slighting racial and ethnic minorities.

2. How does the theory account for exceptions-a contentious silenter, for example? There will obviously be individual variations within each of the generations. Not everybody will fit the description of a “typical” generation member. Two responses would likely be made. First, at an individual level, those persons who are/were untypical of their generation felt or feel like outsiders. We are “strangers in a strange land.”[16] For example, as a young Christian college student, I did not have sexual intercourse until marriage nor did I use recreational drugs. However, as a boomer, I felt odd about it, i.e., out of step with my contemporaries. Second, the theory deals with trends and tendencies. If one were to take a measure such as the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule’s scale for “affiliation,” the theory would predict that silenters would score higher, as a group, than boomers.[17] In other words, the bell-shaped curve would still be present, but there would be shift in the whole curve if it were tracked by generation or birth cohort-group.

3. How can we verify Generations theory? An excellent cautionary note is sounded by those who might say, “This is an elegant theory, but is it true? There are three ways of testing Generations theory. The first is historical research. Strauss and Howe believe that the cyclical patterns of generations they uncovered extend back to 1584. Historians might well explore their use of historical material for past generations. Specifically, historians might ask if these patterns truly emerge from the data or if they’ve been imposed on the data. Those who have seen earlier grand schemes for deciphering history will be particularly leery of accepting Strauss and Howe’s version uncritically.[18] As a cautionary note, however, historians sometimes resist frameworks or theories, tending to focus on specialty areas rather than on the “big picture.” I, for example, am an iNtuitive (of the Myers-Briggs type)[19], so I resonate with sweeping, broad-brush, birds-eye perspectives. Historians tend to be Sensing-types, more attuned to detail and specifics, and may feel that any scheme will have to be imposed upon, rather than emerging from, the data of history.[20]

The second way of verifying Strauss and Howe’s thesis is simply to wait. They have, by extending their book’s theory to the year 2069, set up some criteria for testing the theory’s predictive ability. For example, they contend that a crisis will emerge in the early years of the twenty-first century. While not (obviously!) able to describe the trigger in detail, Strauss and Howe are bold enough to predict the manner in which it will be addressed Time will tell. Or will it? There is a curious phenomenon of predictive schemes which I’m calling the “Heisenberg Indeterminacy” of the social sciences. Just as in nuclear physics, the act of measuring a subatomic particle changes its characteristics, so also it seems that the act of measuring social trends seems, by that very act, to reduce their predictive value.[21] It may be that Strauss and Howe’s work will render itself obsolete.

A third manner of verification has already been implied. Psychological tests should show a generational bias along certain, predictable lines. Such work has not been done as yet, so the jury is still out.[22]

Application

Granting the legitimacy of the caveats articulated in the preceding section, and remaining open as to the verification issue, we now turn to applications first in theology and then in practical church life.

A discussion of a “theology of generations” logically begins in the context of apologetics where the task is to confront the issues which are the battle line in this culture and this society. The battle lines are always shifting; sociology can help apologists discern whether a battle is a minor skirmish or a major campaign. Sociology can also help theologians discern how best to utilize their time and energy. A societal trend which is on the wane may not require as much attention as one which is emerging.

In the field of eschatology, the extra-biblical evidence often adduced to buttress the premillenial interpretation of the Bible may, in coming years, diminish. The trends of declining SAT scores, rising juvenile crime, and increased drug use are likely to reserve themselves as the millennial kids reach adolescence and young adulthood. It is likely to prove increasingly difficult to point to alarming trends in society as a sign of the chronological nearness of Christ’s return.

In the field of anthropology, therefore, it is likely that increased emphasis on the nobility of humanity will strike a responsive chord in the society, while talk of sin will have to be carefully interpreted. Mahedy and Bernardi, in their work, A Generation alone, argue that the generation currently on our college campuses reacts negatively to blanket theological words like “sin.” They have been so long told by their elders that they’re shiftless and unfocused, that sin needs to be carefully defined as a deliberate and intentional choice of the self over the common or God-ordained good rather than general badness.[23] The interpretive need shifts, of course, from generation to generation. As Wycliffe Bible translators render the inerrant Word into understandable language, so too do we need to interpret theological ideas of sin in such a way as to “connect” with the different generations. Generation X, suffering from borderline Post-traumatic stress disorder, doesn’t need reminding of its own inadequacies[24]; the Millennial kids may be harder to convince.

The apologetic issue must be addressed as it always has. The evangelist and apologist must be a student not only of the Word of God but of prevailing culture. Only in such a way can we identify such generationally-specific issues as those sighted above, but others as well, as a way of speaking the truth in love. C.S. Lewis, in a talk to newly ordained Anglican priests, said that a requirement for ordination should be an exercise in writing theology in the language of the people.[25]

Another theological area for analysis is in the area of history and our theology of it. How, it might be asked, does one square an essentially cyclical schema with the linearity of Christianity, with its progression from Creation through Redemption ending at Consummation? An option would be to combine the cyclic pattern of Generations with the linear view of history. The analogy is of a wagon wheel rolling toward a destination, but presenting different sides of the rim to the road. The Bible itself does much the same thing with a recurring cycle of Sin->Judgment->Grace.[26]

When we turn to the area of practical theology, the points of application become both more controversial and more significant for the future of the church. Here we will once again spend relatively little space addressing the specific needs of the G.I. generation and Silenters. Of the former, I think the Spirit’s movement of humility would be in order. By and large, the G.I.’s should be challenged at the stewardship level to be generous in sharing the resources with which they’ve been entrusted.

To the silenters I would say, “Cut at the joints, but cut!” The Silent Generation’s fear of excluding anyone has been raised to an idolatrous principle of inclusiveness, especially in mainline churches, such that any vocal minority wields “veto by volume,” and genuine theological heresy is permitted in the guise of “inclusiveness” and “honoring diversity.” This much can be praised in the Silenters, however: they are gifted with patience. Their tolerance means that they have remained faithful to the church even when confronted with massive mediocrity and even incompetence

In the earlier-cited Presbyterian Outlook article, I wrote, “The second (more tentatively) positive note is this: Boomers are reaching an age where they’ll start inheriting key leadership positions, especially as representatives of the Silent Generation retire and move off the scene. Boomer church leadership is likely to be less bogged down in process and structure, more active, more contentious, and less tolerant. But it’s just possible that, out of that creative froth, the Holy Spirit will form a new vision and new energy for our church.” Maybe. It is my prayer. But it also is possible that with the advent of boomer leadership (a more confrontational leadership style), the Church’s coalition of impossibly contradictory special interests will fail and the church will be splintered into a thousand fragments. Boomer spirituality is more market-driven and needs-oriented. In the previously-cited editorial, Thomas G. Long uses the analogy of “channel surfing,” the practice of using one’s TV remote to sample the myriad channels on cable, pausing briefly when one’s interest is piqued.[27] The boomers “church surf,” switching allegiances, trying different offerings as their perceived needs change. In the religious consumerism of American Protestantism, is it any wonder that market research and target groups are center-stage? Worship must accommodate itself to a TV-shortened attention span, which is why such churches as Willow Creek Community Church use drama, contemporary music, and pop psychology cum Bible in its messages.[28] Educational options are more likely to appeal to Boomers if they are of limited and predefined duration; a four-to-six week study of “Christian Approaches to Stress Management” is more likely to attract students than a year-long march through the book of Romans. The crucial questions here are such issues as: How far should we go to seek success? Is numeric success equal to spiritual success? How do we appeal to people at the level of their perceptions when God’s assessment of their needs may be very different? Where does worship stop and entertainment begin?

The Boomers, as a group, are more introverted than the generations which flank them. Hence, their spiritual journey is more likely to be interior and idiosyncratic, even monastic. It is less likely to depend on groups and fellowships, and more likely to be solitary.[29]

In contrast, Generation X will pursue its spiritual quest in the company of others. There is, among the X’ers, a thirst for belonging, a desire to make the family of God one’s extended family, a sense of sacrament in koinonia. There may evolve theological justification for conflict between the two generations: Boomers will fault X’ers for their scholarly shallowness and their disinterest in theological issues. X’ers will fault Boomers for their enslavement to the materialism of the age and the sacrifice of their relationships on the altar of professional and financial success.

Both the later boomers and the X’ers will demand excellence for their Millennial Kids. Nurseries will have to be state-of-the art and antiseptic. Children’s ministries will be a growth field in Christian Education.

Conclusion

The two biblical quotations on the Appendix are a fitting conclusion to this brief opening of the discussion of generational theory, theology, and church life. “One generation shall laud your works to another, and shall declare your mighty acts” (Psalm 145:4, NRSV) reminds us that God will have His witness in each and all generations. Each generation, being fallen, will need instruction and correction. Each generation, being faithful, will have unique insights and strengths. “A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever” (Ecclesiastes 1:4, NRSV) reminds us that the Word of God stands immovable as the earth amidst the changing tides of history.

**********footnotes**********

[1] Some of this material appeared in abbreviated form in The Presbyterian Outlook, May 17, 1993 and December 27, 1993.

[2]William Strauss & Neil Howe, Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069 (New York: William Morrow, 1991).

[3]Neil Howe and William Strauss, “The New Generation Gap,” The Atlantic Monthly (December, 1992), pp. 67-89.

[4]See, for example, John Leland, “Battle for Your Brain,” Newsweek Magazine (October 11, 1993), pp. 49-53 and Jeff Giles, “Generalizations X,” Newsweek Magazine (June 6, 1994), pp. 62-72.

[5]Related in personal conversation with the Rev. Mark Allen, who was present.

[6] Insight (March 2, 1987), pp. 8-10.

[7] Posted by Merrill Cook, at note 10974 of “Pnet Chat,” a meeting on PresbyNet, the PCUSA electronic bulletin board.

[8] The capacity of Vietnam-eligible men to avoid the draft is documented in an earlier work of Strauss’s. See Lawrence M. Baskir and Wiliam A. Strauss, Chance and Circumstance: The Draft, War, and the Vietnam Generation (New York: Knopf, 1978).

[9] Donald A. Luidens, Dean R. Hoge, and Benton Johnson, “Lay Liberalism Among Baby Boomers,” Theology Today, LI/2 (July, 1994), 249-255.

[10] Neil Howe and Bill Strauss, 13th Gen: Abort, Retry, Ignore, Fail? (New York: Random House, 1993)

[11] Douglas Coupland, Generation X: Tales for an Accelerated Culture (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1991) or his more recent Life After God (New York, etc.: Pocket Books, 1994).

[12] For example, the “Generation X” meeting on PresbyNet. Strauss and Howe used the literary device of E-mail correspondence (replete with a hacker who “crashes” their correspondence) in 13th Gen.

[13] A sampling would include “Reality Bites,” “Pulp Fiction,” “Heathers,” and “Natural Born Killers.”

[14] Note 189 on “Generation X” of PresbyNet by “Miranda,” quoting from Jamie Reno’s article in the February 22, 1994 issue of USA Today.

[15] William Mahedy and Janet Bernardi, A Generation Alone: Xers Making a Place in the World (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1994), esp. 91-114.

[16] The phrase is from Exodus 2:22 and was used by science fiction writer Robert Heinlein as a novel title.

[17] Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, @ 1954 by Psychological Corporation.

[18] See, for example, the discussion of Marxist or Evolutionary Historiography in John Warwick Montgomery’s The Shape of the Past: An Introduction to Philosophical Historiography (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Edwards Brothers, 1962).

[19] Or “N-type.” See the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or the interpretive book by Isabel Briggs Myers, Gifts Differing (Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1980).

[20] A similar debate emerged over the interpretive scheme developed by the late Francis Schaeffer. Much of the debate which followed was between those who believed that Schaeffer was forcing the date to fit and those who believed that the date did fit. See, for example, Ronald W. Ruegsegger (ed.), Reflections on Francis Schaeffer (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986) and Lane T. Dennis (ed.), Francis A. Schaeffer: Portraits of the Man and His Work (Westchester, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1986).

[21] As minor and humorous examples, researchers in the 1960’s discovered a statistical correlation between the performance of the stock market and the length of women’s skirts. More recently, published reports have noted a statistically-significant correlation between the political party in control of the White House and whether the NFC or AFC wins the Superbowl. Both theories lost their predictive value upon publication.

[22] The present author is currently engaged in work correlating results from couples who took the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as part of premarital counseling with cohort-group. The research is planned for publication next year in the Journal of Psychological Type.

[23] Mahedy & Bernardi, pp. 53-70.

[24] Thomas G. Long, “Beavis and Butt-Head Get Saved,” Theology Today, LI/2 (July, 1994), 199-203.

[25] C. S. Lewis, “Christian Apologetics,” God in the Dock: Essays in Theology and Ethics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), pp. 89-103.

[26] Montgomery, pp. 124-27.

[27] Long, p. 200.

[28] Norman Shawchuck, Philip Kotler, Bruce Wrenn, and Gustave Rath, Marketing for Congregations: Choosing to Serve People More Effectively (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1993).

[29] The emerging interest in spiritual disciplines is a measure of this trend. Now that boomers have reached a point where they control such prosaic things as seminary curricula, they’re appealing for the topics which resonate with their brand of spirituality.