[April 2015 Trumpet]
The President’s Corner
And the Winner Is...(Part 2)
Aside from the conclusion of MSU's continuing run through the NCAA's and the
start of major league baseball games that count, one of the most eagerly
anticipated bits of news this month is no doubt the announcement of our as yet
unnamed Trinity innovation award winners. What's that, you say? Considerable
doubt? Well, I am also having doubts about this awards business.
The reason is not so much that no good ideas have been floated around here
lately. Both Laurie Swanson and John Kolo came up with some worthy ideas last
month (although these were suggested either advance of or, perhaps, in spite of
this column's suggestion regarding award winners).
Instead, my reason for postponing or tabling the announcement of any awards
can be found elsewhere in this month's issue of the Trumpet, specifically, in our
Pastor's report. As close followers of Trinity developments will recall, our church
is in the midst of a redevelopment stage. As part of that process, churches
receiving assistance are expected to participate in certain steps involving their
mission statements and visions.
Some readers will no doubt recall that we have already recently engaged in that
process, so we could simply re-adopt our prior decisions, which would give us a
leg up on others. On the other hand, we have to ask ourselves whether those
prior decisions and the resulting documents still inform and guide Trinity today.
At our recent (March) Council meeting, Trinity took the first small step in this
process by beginning the task of choosing the members of the group that will reimagine our role in our community, Synod and the ELCA as a whole. The goal of
this discussion was not to put forward specific names but to identify personal
traits, outlooks and talents that would be considered favorable in members of this
group as well as a much shorter list of traits that would be considered
unfavorable. At the end of this exercise, Pastor asked each of us to prayerfully
consider this process and come back to April's meeting with names of persons
who we would recommend for inclusion in the group that would lead this study.
Our goal would be to have the resulting team beginning their work sometime in
June (when we could expect all of our members to be back in the state).
With respect to potential team members, aside from exhibiting the sorts of traits
and qualities identified as positive in our March meeting, the only firm guideline is
that this group should not simply replicate or be a subset of the Church Council
but should include non-Council members. On the other hand, it was expected
that one or more Council members would be included in the final team and that
Council membership would not necessarily disqualify potential candidates.
Conversely, even membership in Trinity is itself not a hard and fast requirement
for inclusion in this group as persons outside of Trinity but having a connection
with Trinity could also be considered for inclusion.
Thus, in this month's column, I am announcing that a much bigger game is afoot
than simply suggesting awards for good ideas. Rather, we are looking for a few
good members (and nonmembers) to constitute our new re-visioning group.
However, even this group cannot be expected to come up with every good idea.
So keep on submitting your favorite ideas to the Church Council, the new
committee and the Trumpet. Who knows? You may see your favorite ideas given
wings as part of a newly invigorated Trinity going forward for the next hundred
years.
Until then, happy imagining and happy submitting!
Yours in Christ,
David Herdman
Council President