Cycling and Church ~ The Accordion Effect

It's harder riding in the very front of a group, since the very front doesn't have the benefit of riders in front of them blocking the wind. But it's also difficult riding in the back, especially if it's a big group.

Here's what happens. When the road is straight and relatively flat, there's no problem. All of the riders fall into a rhythm, settle into a pace, and everyone cruises along just fine.

But then there's a hill, or there's a sharp turn or a tunnel or an underpass that requires more caution. The front of the group slows down (you know, to be safe … or, because the hill goes up) ~ which then causes the back of the group to slow down as well.

However, the back of the group hasn't quite arrived at the hill (or whatever) that caused the front to slow down, which means they're slowing before they really need to.

Then, when the front of the group hits the top of the hill, or gets past the obstacle, they obviously pick up speed. But the back of the group isn't there yet, and so can't accelerate quite as easily. When the back is able to speed up again, the riders in front are farther ahead, which forces the back riders to work harder just to catch up with the group.

It's like an accordion ~ when the front slows, the back bunches up; and when the front speeds up, the whole group stretches out.

I worry, sometimes, that some people in our congregations experience our life together in that way. The leaders are up front, and hopefully are moving along as steadily as possible, so as to not lose people at the back. But inevitably the congregation approaches a hill or a turn or some other obstacle.  

I worry that there's an accordion effect in our congregational life, where some folks who aren't currently in front might have to work hard to keep up, or who might get left behind.

One of the groups I ride with tends to stop and regroup after big obstacles. The other group I ride with just keeps riding, trusting that those who get left behind can find their own way.

I'd prefer church to tend toward the former model rather than the latter.

But it might be even better if congregational leadership would pause every so often to turn around and make sure no one is left behind. A congregation can't spend all its time looking backward. A congregation also probably doesn't serve itself well if it spends all its time looking forward either.

$0.02

Cycling and Church ~ Sharing Leadership

On the final day of the Fuller Center for Housing Spring BicycleAdventure, I ended up in a paceline with some pretty strong riders. We had all experienced riding with each other through the week, and so we decided on the last day to see how we would do all working together.

We started the day knowing that some of us were faster riders, and some were not quite as strong. The thing is, though, that we made this unspoken commitment that we would all work together.

The way we worked the paceline that day was for one rider to be in front for a minute or two, with the rest of us trailing behind that person enjoying the break in headwind provided by the rider in front of us. After the front rider's minute or two was done, that person would move to the left, ease up on the pedals, and drift to the back of the line.

Obviously, when the front person moves to the back, there's a new front person who spends a minute or two working harder than the rest of us ~ at which point they move to the back, and another person takes over the leadership.

That day, each of us didn't spend the same amount of time in the front of the group. The stronger riders stayed on the front for a couple minutes at a time, and those of us who weren't as strong took shorter turns in the lead.

If we'd tried to keep things equal time-wise, our group would have been slower. Taking longer turns up front and having less time to rest behind the other riders would have worn me out and slowed me down much earlier in the day, and therefore would have slowed the whole group down, especially during those times when I was up front.

We had ridden together all week, but the way we rode together earlier in the week didn't matter at all on that day. I had spent a couple hours one day earlier in the week in the slipstream of another rider, as I worked to catch up with my dad. I wasn't strong enough that day to catch my dad, and he was strong enough to help me.

He was able to help me one day, and later in the week, I didn't have to pay him back. Every day, we started fresh. Every day, we contributed to the group what we were able, and received from others what they offered.

***

What if, in the church, we didn't hold grudges or keep score? What if we didn't worry about who works more than others, and who seems to just be along for the ride? What if everyone felt free to contribute to the group what they're able and to receive from the group what's offered?

When I ride my bike, some days I feel stronger and some days I feel weaker. Some days I can spend a lot of time in front, and some days I can't be up there at all. But on the bike rides, what I did on Friday doesn't matter when Saturday comes around. We start fresh every day.

What if every day, and every week, and every month, and every year in the church was brand new? That's the promise of our baptism (as Lutherans understand it), that we start new every day. God's promise of grace and mercy and forgiveness is renewed every day.

When someone asks a Lutheran when they were saved, they're just as likely to say “Just again this morning” as they are to say “A little over 2000 years ago” … or that's what they ought to say, anyway.

There has to be a balance, where we can encourage those who are stronger, those who have the gifts, to take greater leadership in the church while at the same time we don't discourage those who aren't quite as strong from taking their turn up front.

Sometimes it seems like church leadership, those who spend the most time and energy on making sure the congregation is in good shape, see their job as providing a service for those who 'just show up'. How would church look different if we were to operate as if we're all in this together?

$0.02

Personal Relationships and Government

I heard something disturbing yesterday on a radio talk show.  In an interview, I heard Representative Paul Ryan (R - WI) say something that bothers me a great deal, and that I believe is illustrative of, and contributes to, many of the problems we have in government. 

One of the closing remarks Rep. Ryan made was with regard to a question about how much he has talked with President Obama over the past couple years.  Rep. Ryan responded that he is a policy-maker, and is not interested in personal relationships. 


Here's the thing.  If people don't know each other, if we haven't spent time together socially, then we're much more able to demonize each other.  If, however, we are interested in personal relationships, it's much more difficult to yell nasty things at each other.  If we have had the opportunity to see that the person with whom we disagree is actually a real person (and not simply a set of bad ideas), we will treat them more civilly, and will be able to have an actual conversation instead of a shouting match.

Right now, in our government (and on the internet ... but that's a whole different issue), there are a lot of shouting matches.  If Rep. Ryan was willing to have dinner with President Obama (and vice-versa), maybe they'd figure out that each of them wants what's best for the country.  Maybe they'd figure out a way to actually talk with each other, to work together, and to actually get something productive done in Washington.  Maybe better personal relationships would increase the likelihood that productive policy-making could happen. 

Of course this issue isn't restricted to those two individuals ~ we're all guilty of the same thing. 

$0.02