A mission.hack is defined here. We look at mission statements or at mission initiatives and examine different ways of expressing them. Hacking them…if you will.
An important and refreshing change happened in the first minutes of the UMC’s General Conference with radical implications for our local church committees and ecumenical business gatherings. It is that important.
From lay delegate Will Green on the ground at GC:
[A] member of the New England delegation, my friend We Chang, asked the Bishop to change her language around a motion being “defeated” so that we don’t use war and violence language. The Bishop loved the suggestion and it got applause from the gallery!
Thus, for the whole of GC2008, measures are not “defeated” they are “rejected.”
It started me thinking:
- How often do your church committees “defeat” measures? Reading through a church’s committee minutes can sound at times like armies swathing across Europe.
- How often do you vote with “ayes” and “nays?” Hearing it like two opposing sides can seem like there are only two areas, black and white, no shades of gray, reinforcing the opposing sides mentality.
Perhaps a change in language will assist us as we grow in mutuality towards each other? Maybe examine your own committees and see if the very language we use promotes combative relationships and “winners” and “losers.”
Thoughts on this?