Wednesday, May 05, 2004
Communication at Seabury
So, the trembles at Seabury continue, but at least more people are talking about it now. David raised some of the same questions I am raising and AKMA joined in with his words today, providing a much needed faculty voice. Ruth made some helpful comments in the comment section of my previous post, clarifying the facts of the case, providing a much needed administrative voice.
As the shock of all of this has settled down, I've been able to think more about it (with the help of some emails from classmates). This, however, does not mean I am going to lay down. Communication is a big problem at the school in that, at best, it is only slightly above poor. BY way of example, in the Fall quarter I noticed one of my classmates had ceased coming to class and chapel. When I inquired of another classmate after his health and if everything was alright with him, I was told that I couldn't ask that question, that it was a taboo subject. The next piece of information I got concerning this person was their announcement that they were taking an official leave of absence. Now, in my opinion, had the issue been handled a little better, I could have been helping this person in a variety of ways, not the least of which would be offering up prayers. But, it was all swept under the proverbial carpet.
Now, the announcement of the Dean's new appointment came as a total shock. I should add at this point that I feel very strongly that Jim will do a superb job in this new position and I am happy for him. The announcement came as so much of a shock that most of us students found out through the same article that I linked to above. That is, through the Episcopal News Service and not from the Dean. Now, I believe the announcement from the ENS also came as a surprise to the Dean, because he drafted a letter which was sent out very quickly after the ENS post came across, so that really wasn't anyone's fault except perhaps a hasty journalist. However, why did none of us know that he was being considered for this appointment? I don't think Frank Griswold woke up that morning and said, "You know, I think I'll appoint Jim Lemler today to the position of Missioner..." Or, more frighteningly, did people know and the word was being kept hushed? I have no idea.
To top it all off on matters of communication, when I started bringing it up on here (admittedly somewhat more reactively than was probably appropriate, but this is a place for me to work out and sort through my feelings) people responded in secret! All of a sudden, we're talking in a negative way about the school and people's defenses go sky high and they start talking from behind walls. What's the deal with that? To clarify my position on this I will say that I feel strongly about being accountable for what we say and do. As priests we cannot afford anonymity. How can we be the prophetic preachers we are called out to be as God's ministers if we cannot even sign our name to what we say? As Fr. Driebelbis so aptly put it in a class today, if we start by being able to be square with God, we can be square with others. Now, I need as much work on this in some areas as the rest of us do, but I've done you, faithful readers, the courteousy of letting you know who I am.
This will no doubt be met with objections, most of which I have heard before surrounding the controversy of what happened with the Gospel Mission II weblog. To those objections I say: First, if you are concerned with the public nature of this and other blogs and want to be anonymous, be anonymous. But don't be half-assed about it by identifying yourself as a Seabury student/alum/faculty/staff. Second, if you want to be in dialogue with me or are concerned about a conversation I am holding with someone else and want to join in, but don't feel comfortable posting to the site, email me. I want to hear from you and try to understand what you have to say, because I respect you!! I respond with great attention to those kinds of emails and hold them dear to me. So, please don't be left out of the conversation by your unwillingness to post to a public forum or by the absurd 1,000 character limit of my commenting system. But also, please try and gain confidence in being public with what you have to say. The stole is, when all is said and done, a thin piece of material and we can't hide behind it. Even if we could, God hasn't called us out as His minister to be afraid. I say this in love, not out of any attmept to force you to do anything you don't wish to do, but to tell you honestly how I feel about it. I hope it is taken as meant, with and in love.
~Joshua 1:9
~1 Chronicles 22:13
~1 Chronicles 28:20
~Matthew 14:27
~John 14:27
~Acts 18:9
-R
So, the trembles at Seabury continue, but at least more people are talking about it now. David raised some of the same questions I am raising and AKMA joined in with his words today, providing a much needed faculty voice. Ruth made some helpful comments in the comment section of my previous post, clarifying the facts of the case, providing a much needed administrative voice.
As the shock of all of this has settled down, I've been able to think more about it (with the help of some emails from classmates). This, however, does not mean I am going to lay down. Communication is a big problem at the school in that, at best, it is only slightly above poor. BY way of example, in the Fall quarter I noticed one of my classmates had ceased coming to class and chapel. When I inquired of another classmate after his health and if everything was alright with him, I was told that I couldn't ask that question, that it was a taboo subject. The next piece of information I got concerning this person was their announcement that they were taking an official leave of absence. Now, in my opinion, had the issue been handled a little better, I could have been helping this person in a variety of ways, not the least of which would be offering up prayers. But, it was all swept under the proverbial carpet.
Now, the announcement of the Dean's new appointment came as a total shock. I should add at this point that I feel very strongly that Jim will do a superb job in this new position and I am happy for him. The announcement came as so much of a shock that most of us students found out through the same article that I linked to above. That is, through the Episcopal News Service and not from the Dean. Now, I believe the announcement from the ENS also came as a surprise to the Dean, because he drafted a letter which was sent out very quickly after the ENS post came across, so that really wasn't anyone's fault except perhaps a hasty journalist. However, why did none of us know that he was being considered for this appointment? I don't think Frank Griswold woke up that morning and said, "You know, I think I'll appoint Jim Lemler today to the position of Missioner..." Or, more frighteningly, did people know and the word was being kept hushed? I have no idea.
To top it all off on matters of communication, when I started bringing it up on here (admittedly somewhat more reactively than was probably appropriate, but this is a place for me to work out and sort through my feelings) people responded in secret! All of a sudden, we're talking in a negative way about the school and people's defenses go sky high and they start talking from behind walls. What's the deal with that? To clarify my position on this I will say that I feel strongly about being accountable for what we say and do. As priests we cannot afford anonymity. How can we be the prophetic preachers we are called out to be as God's ministers if we cannot even sign our name to what we say? As Fr. Driebelbis so aptly put it in a class today, if we start by being able to be square with God, we can be square with others. Now, I need as much work on this in some areas as the rest of us do, but I've done you, faithful readers, the courteousy of letting you know who I am.
This will no doubt be met with objections, most of which I have heard before surrounding the controversy of what happened with the Gospel Mission II weblog. To those objections I say: First, if you are concerned with the public nature of this and other blogs and want to be anonymous, be anonymous. But don't be half-assed about it by identifying yourself as a Seabury student/alum/faculty/staff. Second, if you want to be in dialogue with me or are concerned about a conversation I am holding with someone else and want to join in, but don't feel comfortable posting to the site, email me. I want to hear from you and try to understand what you have to say, because I respect you!! I respond with great attention to those kinds of emails and hold them dear to me. So, please don't be left out of the conversation by your unwillingness to post to a public forum or by the absurd 1,000 character limit of my commenting system. But also, please try and gain confidence in being public with what you have to say. The stole is, when all is said and done, a thin piece of material and we can't hide behind it. Even if we could, God hasn't called us out as His minister to be afraid. I say this in love, not out of any attmept to force you to do anything you don't wish to do, but to tell you honestly how I feel about it. I hope it is taken as meant, with and in love.
~Joshua 1:9
~1 Chronicles 22:13
~1 Chronicles 28:20
~Matthew 14:27
~John 14:27
~Acts 18:9
-R
0 Comments:
