Together with Brad, Jeff, Mark, Paul, and Tory, I traveled to Springfield, Missouri, last week to meet with Dr. George O. Wood, otherwise known as "My Dad." Unlike them, I already knew my dad pretty well: his work habits, story-telling ability, leadership style, vision for the movement, etc. Like them, however, I also learned a few new things that I didn't know. Admittedly, my observations are biased in favor of our new general superintendent, but I'll try to be objective.
First, the general superintindency is a very big job. I knew this in a theoretical way, but I experienced it first-hand in my dad's office. The number of people he deals with, together with the range of issues he must handle, makes me tired. While the other guys went on a tour of headquarters, I sat in my dad's office and read. He was constantly on the phone talking with pastors, responding to email, or dealing with his coworkers. And I knew he got into work early that day. Frankly, my dad--who's 66--made me a bit embarrassed about my own work habits. If I worked as hard as he did, I bet my church would be healthier and larger than it is now.
Second, I was very surprised by how pastorally focused my dad is. Remember, my dad's been in denominational office (first district, then general council) for 19 years. Aside from a six-month stint as Central Assembly's interim senior pastor, he has been focused almost exclusively on denominational issues. And trust me, they're huge. AG Financial Services has $2.6 billion in funds under management. The US AG is primus inter pares with over 200 other national AG fellowships. Important decisions must be made about national schools, GPH, and other General Council level ministries. But my dad communicated to us bloggers the importance of the general superintendent pastoring the pastors. As you know, there were huge wildfires in southern California last week, and I heard my dad make calls to several pastors whose homes and congregations had been effected by the fires.
Third, my dad is a team player. He knows that the general superintendency is a spiritual trust, and he is incredibly appreciative of all that his predecessors in office (Brother Trask particularly) have done for the movement. He also values what his co-workers do, whether at the level of the executive leadership team or the guy pushing the broom in the warehouse. Part of that team-player attitude is being open to the constructive criticism of others, being willing to let them lead from their strengths, and being ready to share credit for successes. One of the ways this team-work attitude showed up was in a pretty frank meeting with J.T. Wray and Julie Horner of GPH. Dad encouraged them to be open to our (hopefully) constructive critiques of GPH. I personally thought our hour-and-a-half meeting with them was really successful.
Anyway, for what it's worth, that's what this George Wood thinks of the other George Wood.
Monday, October 29, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
36 comments:
I know how much people love anonymous comments but...
Not taking away anything from our new Superintendent...I'm glad he was elected and no doubt everything you've (the authors) said is accurate and sincere but...
It's like you guys have had a drink of the Springfield cool-aid. What happened to the Pre-General-Council honest discussion about where we are and where we need to head? There's all this talk about discussing the real issues on the trip but no real dialog about what those issues were.
I love our fellowship, but it seems that now that there is attention on this blog and the higher-ups have taken notice and are "listening"... the authors of this blog seem to just be towing the line. I loved this blog for the honest discussion and sometimes debate... but now it seems it's all just back-patting.
I agree... I skimmed the last ten posts and finally at the 11th post found something that could be considered "honestly debatable". Please don't get me wrong.. I'm not talking debate just for the sake of it... but to talk about real stuff. No real questions have been raised that would move us forward. Come one guys... where's the edge that we once loved at FutureAG?
Perhaps I have other reasons for moderating my comments, other than that I've drunk "Springfield cool-aid." For example, perhaps I love my dad and think that he and his colleagues should be talked about respectfully. Perhaps I'm giving the new executive leadership team the chance to prove itself. Perhaps I learned things in Springfield that I didn't previously know and that changed my pre-General Council opinions. Perhaps the fall season of church life has sucked up so much of my time that I'm struggling to write anything at all. Perhaps I'm so overwhelmed by my church's building renovations that I'm struggling to regain my pastoral feet.
In other words, rather than assuming the worst about me (that I'm so gullible that I've been hoodwinked by the powers that be), why not assume the best? And then, why not extend that same charity to the leadership of our movement?
I too agree that this site has become nothing more than an A/G hangout, rather than a LAUNCH PAD for ideas and change.
What did you 5 talk about? What REAL changes can we expect? Why SHOULD young A/G ministers stay A/G?
I think we have to understand that this is a new administration, whether or not you feel it is "old boys club." We have to allow time for them to get their feet on the ground. Ever started a new job? I am coming up on 2 years at my new church position and just recently in the last 6 monthsfeel like I have an understanding of where we are at and what course of action needs to be taken.
Let's give them a little understanding before criticizing their lack of change. I am not suggesting that we pretend like their are no problems and go buisness as usual. I know I personally have 6 or so issues I would like for either my DC or the GC to address.
I am looking to schedule some time for praying and fasting for our leadership and these issues before the new year.
Time to start a new blog. The creaters of this blog have entered into the politics of AG Meca and no longer can bring questions up for discussion. More effort is spent "bragging" about their visit, but nothing is brought up what was discussed, how this blog can continue to be of use as "ears", etc. Now the concern is how can we be supportive now that "dad" is in office (notice, "he and his colleagues should be talked about respectfully", but that didn't matter before dad was in office), vs having discussion.
And yes, respect is important, but it is just important about previous leadership as well, whether they are our dad or not. They worked just as hard, whether you saw it or not. We haven't seen them working as hard as you now have seen your dad work, so we are now to take your word for it since you experienced it firsthand? We have pastors laboring in the field working just as hard, many times holding secular jobs along with their ministry jobs, so respect is due there also.
This blog was created to discuss where we need to head. Are we there now? Did new leadership all of a suddent take us there? Doesn't new leadership still need to hear what we have to say? That's what got their attention in the first place, let's keep it going.
R. Parks
Southern California
I am with George Wood on this one...
I have loved every post (going back to the beginning) of George P. Wood. He is as articule and smart as his dad.
Before I make my comment (yes anonymously too)let me say that I love Supt. Wood, however I do believe the A/G at present is really messed up on so many levels as has been evidenced by all the discussion here the past few months. Regarding the 1st "anonymous's" comments I see where he/she is coming from, although I love Dr. Wood and this fellowship, the former dialogue that was had before the General Council was very refreshing and long overdue. Now that new officials are in, it does seem that out of respect for them, the "put it all on the table and say it like it is" mentality is not there.
I am noticing that Dr. Wood is actually proving more open than most of the people on this board, at this point. His emails, new website, and message that he put out on video with his family on his website were incredibly relevant and a big step in the right direction. I am very impressed by his immediately taking steps to meet with people, post on message boards and the like. But I do feel that those on this board who used to post so strongly have toned down their comments now that there are new leaders that have been elected.
I am thinking the reasoning for this is that when there is a resignation and new people have not taken office yet, comments are not so personal in nature, perhaps, or seen as divisive or critical because they are not directed at a person per se but more as "this is the problem and this is the direction we need to head, and this is the kind of leader we need to get there..." The comments are not really directed to a person at that point but rather at a process. Now that someone is elected, to make any type of criticism to some probably seems sort of disunifying or as some kind of personal attack.
George P. I totally see where you are coming from and it has nothing to do with your father (I know it's hard not to take it personally) but the issue with many is - they have been disappointed before (by others) so many times and wanted a change for so long and it is hard not to be skeptical.
I have no doubt that Dr. Wood has the leadership it takes to pull us out of this hole we are in. I just hope that the honest dialogue continues. We now have a leader who is willing to put it all out there on the table and talk about everything including his family going to counseling and his bout with depression. Let's not mess it up folks, by shying away from talking to him about the real things we see as the issues that needs to be addressed. He's LISTENING folks. So let's really talk and not just give a bunch of accolades.
now that's what I'm talking about. BTW, I don't think I said anything about the current leadership or past leadership for that matter other than I too am glad they were elected. Didn't think I was disrespecting them at all. I was addressing the authors of this blog. Not them. I've just been missing the real open and honest debate . I will say it's good to see a little spunk on here even if it's directed towards me.
Creative and useful engagement with our Christ given mission as Assemblies of God people is what attracted me to this blog. We face immense challenges corporately and need our people to forge ahead with all of their gifts. This forum encourages this.
The blog serves as a way to encourage the divergent thinkers among us. It embraces their questing for solutions through critique. Sometimes that kind of searching does result in good criticism, but it must never end at the criticism, at the point of the knife. Yes, I know, solutions that heal our ills would never be created without insightful criticism. Yet, the critiques must never be thought of as accomplishing anything useful if solutions are not produced. It is like an Army surgeon taking on a traumatic IED injury to the chest, only to walk away for a smoke, with the chest left wide open. Yea, we need to cut away, but we also need to sew up the wound, before we take the break. A few of the anonymous comments on Paul's recent reflection have focused on the knife more than any application of a healing balm.
I believe the tenor and content of this blog has been quite appropriate. It honors God and reveals discernment and wisdom on the part of the team. As long as it is managed with wisdom, we will be fine. I don't expect this blog to solve every problem in our movement. If it helps out with a few ankle biters, it will be well worth the effort. This developing internet community can have phenomenal mentoring influence on individuals. So, please don't get sidetracked, chasing all of the possible criticisms that one might throw onto the blog. If any of us bring a criticism, I'd love to see suggested solutions.
George Paul, thanks for your comment on the visit to Springfield. Such accounts are encouraging and reflect reasonable hope for all of us who watch our church. God is in this thing; at least I'm convinced of that.
George P. Wood,
Well said.
Children expect instant gratification, but adults should be wiser than that. Unfortunately, our culture is full of twixters, or adult-age children, who want it and want it now. And, too often, our response is to bend over backwards to cater to their wants. You can couch it neatly in terms of our "meeting a sub-culture on their level", but sooner or later they'll have to grow up and face reality. As Stand to Reason asks, "Are you changing culture, or is culture changing you?" Is this Brian McLaren video an example of the best that the emergent church can offer?
I'm engaged in a study of Proverbs with my 12 year-old daughter. What a wonderful experience it has been to deeply study the wisdom of the ages, and to impart the facets of the Biblical genre of wisdom literature upon my daughter. Perhaps we could learn a few lessons from a book such as the Proverbs?
As it is, Po-mo cool-aid will not be found in our house.
The kool aid comment was accross the line for sure. Come on guys...let's keep a better perspective. Desiring honest debate about pertinent issues is not going to take place with that kind of talk.
Nothing wrong with you loving your dad and speaking highly of him GP, I'm glad you do...you rightly are extremely proud of him! I do believe however that it would be extremely difficult for you to have true objectivity when it comes to discussing issues related to the leadership of our movement.
I admire and respect our leaders and want them to have an opportunity to address the issues facing us but that does not mean that dialogue and debate about what people see and feel should be tossed aside, ignored or delayed. We have serious issues facing us that need serious discussion.
Help!!!!!!!! Do you have out there anybody who may help me to change my opinion about Springfield??? I was disappointed by what I have seen and heard in 2005 at CBC as a student with the resignation of the former president about the merging story. Until now I am still lost. Please help me to better understand what was going on at this time!!!! Brad, Jeff, Tory, Mark, Paul, and George, you are invited to visit Burkina churches. Great job for this blog!!!!
Douglas Ouedraogo another son of G S from Burkina Faso West Africa / adcissin1.multiply.com
While I'm excited about the future with Dr. Wood at the helm, I have to agree this site has lost its momentum.
What are the issues that we can begin implementing for the future of the AG?
Is anyone working on getting online voting for those not able to attend GC as a proposal for 2009?
What about an idea post that just lists ideas of how things can be improved (always keeping it constructive of course) - i.e. how could the district office structure be improved, for all the GPH questions, what do you need at the local level from them? And if they produce it would you even buy it or not?
Like Mark Batterson said change comes from the inside out, what are willing to do to help the change happen?
Dear Bro. George P
I agree.
Let it be known, that this Church has passed the test of time and it will till Jesus comes. Disscusions we must have, new ideas that works lets embrace them,nevertheless, lets not be worldly, but as our Superindentent states, "lets be like Jesus"
I Corinthians 13.1,4-8
Blessings!
The relationship that these men have with the General Council is so beneficial because it is positive! The Leader of our movement sat down to talk with them... thats incredible!
Remember: we are only getting their reflections (George P. Wood's was an awesome reflection on leadership!) - we do not know exactly what was talked about.
Credentialed at 21, I feel well represented by these men - I would like to see it grow of course in the actual Presbytery but this is an incredible start!
Brandon Lemois
b_lemois@hotmail.com
To those who are worried that futureag has somehow lost its edge and that the moderators have succumbed to Springfield Kool-Aid, I offer four glimmers of hope:
1. Dr. Wood and the ELT posting and replying to comments on this blog
2. The Springfield Visit itself. When was the last time something like this happened in the Assemblies of God?
3. This quote from GPW's after-action report: "One of the ways this team-work attitude showed up was in a pretty frank meeting with J.T. Wray and Julie Horner of GPH. Dad encouraged them to be open to our (hopefully) constructive critiques of GPH. I personally thought our hour-and-a-half meeting with them was really successful."
4. The headline article from yesterday's AG News:
Wood eases access to top office
I'm sure futureagers could come up with more – please do
I see no better complimentary edge to the sword of healthy debate and discussion than its positive effect. This is what separates a walking blog from a mere talking blog. Put another way, the power of futureag has not only been the discussion of how to move us forward but the forward movement it is already causing.
For all of us who weren't there, let's appreciate the rudder movements that have begun to move the big ship that is the Assemblies of God. Let's not be so quick to talk about the problems (though they be many) without being quick to listen to the winds of change. Let's have some faith in the new leadership and the moderators. Lastly, let's remember that “there is a time for everything and a season for every activity under heaven” (Eccl-3).
Blessings to all
I am with George Wood on this one!
Everybody has gotten a little quite since they have been to Springfield...im with anonymous...i hope we dont start seeing coolaid mustaches...those are hard to get off.
Like everyone who posts on this blog, I want to see fundamental changes take place in our movement, at every level of our movement. Without such changes, I fear that our movement will simply be yet another stagnating, declining, and finally dying denomination. Unlike some who post on this blog, however, I'm willing to give the executive leadership team time to implement changes. (Would I be as patient if my dad weren't GS, I don't know for sure, although I hope I'd be gracious enough to trust the leaders of our movement, whoever they are.)
One of the most fundamental changes that must take place in our national leadership is corporate culture. I believe the ELT is taking appropriate steps to do that. As corporate culture changes at headquarters, I believe that people will be able to voice new ideas, constructive criticisms, and even radical visions for the future. Unless corporate culture at headquarters changes (and at district levels and at congregational levels), we might as well shut this blog down, for we'll just be yelling at a brick wall. From the people I talked to while in Springfield, I gathered that they feel headquarters is changing. I take that as a good sign, which is why I'm pretty upbeat about the visit.
For all of you who believe this blog has lost its edge because it's been co-opted by our visit to Springfield, here's my suggestion: Go there, meet with ELT and headquarter personnel, and draw your own conclusions. I'm pretty sure that you'll come to agree that the new batch of Cool-Aid tastes just fine.
the point isn't support or lack of support... its discussion, lets create an honest place not another political agenda... maybe this blog has served its purpose, it was meant to be an honest discussion of grassroots, not 'heres what the top is doing' - translated into cool lingo to gain support... it shouldnt be a George Wood blog... it should be grassroots, lets talk be honest... sure we have respect, and as for fasting in prayer, yea lets do it, but i dont think this should be a place to brag about where we've been, or who's office, or how we are fasting and praying, hopefully there is more we can talk about as a fellowship... random thoughts hope they make sense
Anonymous:
When you write, "it shouldn't be a George Wood blog," are you talking about my dad or me? If you're talking about my dad, you're obviously right. If you're talking about me, I'm not sure why I can't post or comment here. After all, as the pastor of small church in southern California, I'm also part of the grassroots.
George P.
C'mon, everybody. Accusing these guys of being shills for the AG status quo is flat-out wrong. Apparently they're not whining, venting, or ranting enough for some of our tastes.
Let me get this straight. When AG leadership is unresponsive, we're unhappy. And when AG leadership bends over backwards to be responsive, we're unhappy. Our cynicism knows no bounds!
Anonymous said: "… this blog … was meant to be an honest discussion of grassroots, not 'heres what the top is doing' - translated into cool lingo to gain support …"
With all due respect, anonymous, you weren't the originator of this blog, so you really don't have the right to assert what "it was meant to be" or not meant to be. George, Mark, Tory and the others made clear the goals of this blog early on. Suggestion: revisit some earlier posts, like "Future AG 2.0" (August 16) and "Warning" (August 28).
Remember, "let your emphasis be on the creative and constructive above the critical and corrective."
Steve
I just have a problem with the leaders of this blog "representing" the younger A.G. nationally, locally, etc. No one elected Brad, Tory, Paul, Mark, or George. I hope HQ keeps this in mind...THESE FIVE DO NOT SPEAK FOR US (Pro or Con).
"THESE FIVE DO NOT SPEAK FOR US." Which "us" do you claim to be speaking for?
George,
The "us" is those who think the A/G has lost its credibility and purpose. Also, those of "us" from a younger generation who are not going to stick it out for the sake of "tradition."
Basically, the "us" are those who this blog was supposedly designed for.
I mean no disrespect, but please don't think for a second that you six are representatives. You were not elected or even chosen from amongst the viewers and participants of this blog.
It drives me batty that you six went to HQs, and it makes me equally nuts that your dad invited you six. If AG HQ really wants to learn, hear, etc. from us who want to be productive in the future of the movement, then THEY SHOULD COME TO US. Let them hold a conference, seminar, etc. Not bring in six guys who deemed themselves leaders.
You SIX demonstrated the total weakness of man and JUMPED at the opportunity to look important and assume more power than you actually had. YOU GUYS LET ME DOWN.
"You SIX demonstrated the total weakness of man and JUMPED at the opportunity to look important and assume more power than you actually had. YOU GUYS LET ME DOWN."
Easy now, Anonymous. Breathe deeply. Again. There ...
Now then ... I don't see that anyone was accorded special treatment. Bro. Wood was simply acknowledging that there are diverse voices out there, and that the FutureAG bloggers are among them, and that he's willing to listen to them and people like them. No one said the Springfield summit was anything official. It's not about power, please.
Keep in mind that the FutureAG blog-guys invited us to give our input before the meeting. They weren't obligated to, and I think it was big of them to keep it wide open.
You're reading WAY too much into all this. If you can only interpret what transpired in the light of "looking important" and "assuming power," it will be impossible to view any of it objectively. You need to seriously re-think your stance on this issue.
(BTW, I don't know any of the YOU SIX personally, and nobody's setting me up to come to their defense.)
Steve
Anonymous:
Evidently my sarcasm was lost on you. So, let me try it a second time: Exactly who from among the "younger generation" chose you to represent them? Who from among those who believe the AG has lost its credibility? Who from among those for whom this blog was written? As far as I can tell, no one chose you to represent them because absolutely no one knows who you are.
As for why my dad selected the bloggers to go to Springfield, perhaps it has something to do with the obvious success of the blog in generating comment among the fellowship. No formal vote was taken, but web traffic is a kind of a vote, don't you think? Why don't you throw up a blog and see how much feedback you generated.
You wrote, "You SIX demonstrated the total weakness of man and JUMPED at the opportunity to look important and assume more power than you actually had. YOU GUYS LET ME DOWN." I cannot believe how incredibly arrogant and judgmental this comment is. You don't know me. So don't you dare presume to look into my heart and know what motivates me.
George
George,
I never said I was representing anyone, or even presuming to. However, I do think my previous statement is true: You have not been elected. You are a "default."
Apparently, I struck a nerve.
BTW, you can call me "Zorro!"
"Zorro" said: "...You have not been elected. You are a 'default.'... Apparently, I struck a nerve."
We are coming very close here to personal attacks, methinks. Let's focus on conversing issues, not cornering individuals.
Yikes! in Springfield
Zorro concedes.
I wasn't trying to personally attack, but I could see how it would come across that way.
APOLOGIES.
- Z
Zorro:
Yes, your remarks struck a nerve. (At least they struck my nerve; I won't presume to speak for the others.) What bothers me is the presumption that you know what motivates me (or the others), and that you are in a position to judge us. You don't, and you aren't.
Having said that, however, I'm all for a civil, open exchange about the large issues facing the AG. Personally, I think we need to prayerfully, thoughtfully, and energetically change quite a bit with our movement. But we won't get anywhere by insinuating that people are being driven by base motives.
I think the golden rule applies here: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If you don't want your motives called into question, don't call into question the motives of others.
As for the other issue of how representative we bloggers are, I'm in a somewhat different position than the other five. They were the originators of this blog. Two (Jeff and Mark) lead good-sized churches. One (Mark) is nationally prominent both within and without the AG. Two are church planters (Brad and Tory) who are very plugged into that crowd. And Paul is just a genius. Did anyone elect them? No. But so what! They grabbed people's attention with this blog and in many ways directed the discussion at general council. They were also leading lights at a bloggers' meeting at general council. So, while they weren't elected, I certainly believe they are representative of people desiring progressive change within the fellowship. As for me, I simply brokered the invitation from my dad to the other five. I was included for that reason. Make of that what you will. And if you'd like to criticize my representativeness, that's fine. As I said, I'm in a somewhat different position than the other five.
George
'With all due respect, anonymous, you weren't the originator of this blog,'
anonymous here... well if the blog was just a marketing tool for george wood, then that is really sad, im giving him the benefit here and saying it probably wasn't... and as to my reference of this not needing to be a george wood blog, i was meaning senior... hey great idea though, he should have a blog would be awesome... maybe no comment section though ha, im just saying this wasnt set up to be his blog for us to read... and i hope that stays, but by seeing he was recently posted on the main page maybe i am wrong, and again this is why i made the comment, 'maybe this blog has served its purpose' ... i dont know, i do also feel the side though, that its just constant complaint... from what i can tell ol GW is doing an awesome job, who knows? but i do think there is plenty of room for rearrange with the assemblies of god (even the name sounds crazy cultish)
i agree the name shouldnt be a sacred cow... aog australia just rearranged and uses Australian Christian Churches as the main name for the aog... pretty interesting, brian houston down there is rocking it... he also had some awesome things to say about leaders of fellowships being connected to local church and pastoring, check out the hillsong podcast 'becoming a leader that sees not only hears' interesting thoughts...
sacred cows make the best hamburgers
Anonymous November 19, 2007 4:31 PM:
You're absolutely correct that this is not a George O. Wood blog. (I hope you don't mind that I, George P. Wood, am a poster on this blog!) GOW has started a general superintindent's website here: http://ag.org/top/General_Superintendent/. I think he's going to start a blog in a few months, and I think it's going to include a comment section.
I'm the person who posted GOW's long article on the home page. I did so because it was the 99th comment on Paul's post, "The Living Room Conversation." I thought that was a goofy place to leave such a substantive reply to the issues raised by the post. GOW has also posted several replies elsewhere.
While FutureAG is not a GOW blog, don't you think it's a good thing that he's actively reading this blog and interacting with what's written here? I do.
GPW
Post a Comment