In the American zeitgeist is the story of the boy who saved Holland – from a 19th century novel called Hans Brinker; or The Silver Skates: A Story of Life in Holland by American author Mary Mapes Dodge. I suspect it’s known to some of us because of the 1974 children’s book The Hole in the Dike by Norma Green – I certainly have vivid images of it from childhood.
For those who missed this one, it’s a story within the Hans Brinker novel, about a boy who, noticing a link in the levee, or dike, that helps protect his town of Haarlem; given no alternative, as the water is rushing in, he sticks his finger in the hole, and stays there through the cold night. In the morning, villagers find him and repair the hole – and I would expect, take care of their young hero too.
This story came to mind when I read an email sent from the UUA Transitions office to those congregations and ministers in ministerial transition. The email was full of information about the changing ministerial landscape and what that will mean for congregations – and ministers – as they seek a match. The short version is that things have changed drastically in the last few years, and matches may not look like they used to, if they happen at all. The staff highlighted many issues that we’ve been talking about here at Hold My Chalice, around compensation, percentages of ministry, and other judgments and expectations.
But what caught my eye was this paragraph:
While most ministers love ministry, so many ministers reported the demoralizing nature of one antagonist (sometimes more than one) who was relentless and without boundaries, who was even known by the congregation as such, yet the minister felt no real support and were left on their own to repeatedly face time-consuming expectations from the antagonist. As one minister said, ‘I understand helping people live into covenant. I just didn’t think I was the only who would be doing it.’
I didn’t think I was the only one who would be doing it.
There stands a minister, their finger in the dike, trying to hold back the sea of poor boundaries and bad behaviors, all by themselves with only the congregation’s covenant to help fill the hole.
At least the Dutch boy had villagers come help.
Too many times, congregations work on and pass a congregational covenant, and then ignore it and keep allowing poor boundaries and bad behaviors to exist. And then when the religious professional (often but not always the minister) raises the alarm, everyone else ignores the alarm – or worse, blames the religious professional for making any noise.
People, the dikes are leaking. The levees are overflowing. The town is flooding.
But sure, get mad at the minister for actually trying to do something about it.
Your covenant is YOUR covenant. You don’t get to ignore it once you’ve approved it. You don’t get to let one person – or perhaps a small group (like a right relations team or committee on shared ministry) do all the work for you. And you certainly don’t get to be mad at that person or small group when they try to call people back in to address their poor boundaries or bad behavior.
That’s not how covenant works. That’s not how any of this works.
A covenant minded by one person isn’t a covenant. It’s a worthless effort of time and energy.
A covenant requires YOUR investment, YOUR care, YOUR attention. And by “your” I mean EVERYONE in the congregation or community. And that means that everyone is responsible for helping others come back into covenant when they engage in poor boundaries or bad behavior.
That’s not a reason to kick out the minister.
That’s a reason to HELP the minister.
Because they’ve had their finger in the dike all night and they’re cold, and hungry, and worried.
Programming note: I will be on vacation later this month, so there will be no Hold My Chalice October 24th and 31st.
Thank you for saying this so clearly. From my work on the UUA Board and the Article II Study Commission, the noncovenental behavior of some impacts our Association's elected and professional leadership as well.