Showing posts with label practical stuff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label practical stuff. Show all posts

Friday, October 17, 2014

Ebola

  by Burnell F Eckardt Jr
  in collaboration with the editorial staff

          There’s been plenty of well-founded worry about the Ebola virus these days. As I write this, we’re already tracking the possibilities of its spread through two Dallas nurses who contracted the disease from the Liberian man who came here and has died. One of those nurses took a flight to and from Cleveland, and that plane has been to Florida. Some schools have closed as precautions. Who knows where this can go? By the time you read this it may have been stanched, or it may have become epidemic, official reassurances to the contrary notwithstanding.
            One cannot help but think of the plagues of the Middle Ages to find points of comparison, most especially the Black Death of the mid-fourteenth century in which over a third of all Europeans died. But we can also make a more recent comparison. Having just recently updated the chronicles of St. Paul’s in Kewanee, I happen to be somewhat versed in the ease with which a plague can suddenly sweep across even a nation that has the advantage of knowing more than medieval folk did about how disease is spread.
            In 1918, the Spanish Flu pandemic reached the shores of America, probably through the U.S. Government War Exhibition in Chicago, which opened in September of that year and brought a quarter of a million visitors. Chicago was the nation’s largest rail hub at the time.   As was the case across Illinois, Kewanee’s first announced victims were servicemen who were still away from home, but soon the ravages of the disease were felt by families here and across the nation.  By the end of October, over 40,000 new cases were reported in Chicago in one week alone. In the same month Kewanee noted its first local death of an influenza victim.
            Articles appearing in the Kewanee Star Courier appear to have been written with the aim of quelling people’s fears.  Weekly stories would announce the reported decline of new cases, or of good news on the flu front.  An often-reprinted article entitled “Spanish Influenza—What It Is and How It Should Be Treated,” confidently averred that it is “nothing new . . . simply the old ‘grippe’” of 1889-90, and insisted that there was “no occasion for panic.”  When the war ended in November, the newspaper declared that the city received the news with “unbridled joy.”   At year’s end a half-page artist’s sketch chronicled the year’s mostly significant events, and most of it was devoted to excitement about the war’s drawing to a close, while allowing only a small corner to note that “Uncle Sam got the flu.”
            But obituaries didn’t lie, and since the middle of October there had been a steady stream of reports of new local victims who had died of “the flu and pneumonia.” And since it was customary in those days to print obituaries on the front page of the paper, their daily appearance seemed almost to mock the newspaper’s valiant if pitiful attempts to maintain a bright outlook.
            One of the particularly odious facets of a plague—and this pandemic certainly qualified as a plague—is that spiritual care became difficult to obtain in a time when it was most sorely needed.  The city of Kewanee closed all its public places, and all the local churches had agreed to cooperate.  By the year’s end they had all ceased to conduct services, with the sole exception of the funerals, which of necessity were held away from the church, and at which attendance was kept to an absolute minimum. St. Paul’s closed its doors with an announcement that arrangements could be made with the pastor for private catechetical instruction.   The church stayed closed for thirteen weeks.
Usually the victims of influenza would die within a single week of their contraction of the disease.  Delirium was not uncommon.  People everywhere were getting sick.  The city of Chicago ran out of hearses.  Morgues were stacked to the ceiling with bodies.
The pandemic didn’t actually abate until the late spring and summer of 1919.  Researchers estimate that between 30 and 50 million people died worldwide, with an estimated 675,000 Americans being among the dead.
St. Paul’s was able to open its doors sometime early in 1919, though people were still dying.  In one week alone during that period there were five funerals.  The official church record puts the number of deaths from influenza at 11.  It took until sometime in the year 1920 for the horrendous chapter of the influenza plague to come, thankfully, to an end, and, as was the case in all of mankind’s previous plagues, an awareness began to settle in that it was not yet the end of the world.
So today we are facing the threat of Ebola. We have received word that some of our Liberian brothers have questions about our communion practice and we realize these questions might soon afflict us as well. What of the common cup? What of the reliquae (leftover elements)? Should this disease take on the marks of an actual pandemic among us, we may once again be in need of extraordinary measures, and history can guide us. Under extraordinary circumstances, it might be proper for churches to take extraordinary measures, to quell fears where possible. There will surely be a temptation to attempt a sterile distribution of the Lord's Supper. The pastor should wash his hands thoroughly before the Service, but extra care might be taken and public awareness of this precaution could be raised. Hand-shaking could be forbidden. And certainly, the idea that glass individual cups could be used, perhaps with vodka dampened purificators or other precautions, will be brought up as more sanitary than the chalice.
The editors have considered all these things, and it seems to us all that such precautions are really no guarantee of complete sterility and that our fathers felt that the best course was not to change the mode of distribution but to abstain from public communion services; and we think that if we do face an actual pandemic of plague proportions, this would still be the best and safest course. Pastoral care would have to be handled mostly in a private way and may even require at times, if the communicant is quarantined or some such thing, the use of rubber gloves and a face mask by the celebrant. Unless the pandemic shuts down the power grid and the internet, we will enjoy ways of preaching to and catechizing our people that our fathers did not have. If things do get out of hand, it might become necessary, once again, to close our churches altogether for awhile and rely solely on individualized pastoral care and electronic media.

We do have plenty of reason, however, even from a medical point of view, to be hopeful that no such thing will befall us in these days. It is certainly true that the Lord will provide and that He might well deliver us to Himself through Ebola or some other horrific disease. We trust, without flinching, that if the Lord deliver us to that fate through the Chalice or the Services of the Church that it is His good and gracious will to do so and that the forgiveness of sins that always comes to the faithful through the Lord's Supper will be what we truly need. Indeed, such an end, as all those that God gives, will be a blessing. But we should not shirk our duty to the 5th commandment in all of this or engage in extra-Biblical fantasy that the Lord never delivers crosses through the means of grace. The Lord never hurts or harms His children in any place or time and certainly He never harms them in the Lord's Supper, but the Lord does call His people home and allow them to suffer trials on this side of glory. We do not refuse medical care because the Lord provides and we should not ignore the dangers of plague if it is visited upon us. Again: extraordinary and temporary measures may be necessary. Meanwhile, like many before who have not only been threatened by plagues, but have actually suffered them, we can, and should, pray. For the prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

Wednesday, October 3, 2012

A Worker-Priest Responds

Chaplain Dean Kavouras
By Dean Kavouras

[Note: Fr. Kavouras has responded to my call for discussion about the controversial - and yet increasingly common - situation of bi-vocational pastors.  My original article "Diary of a Worker-Priest" is in the current print edition of Gottesdienst.  I am meeting more and more pastors who work secular jobs either part-time or full-time, and so we need not only theological discussion about this trend, but also practical insights from men who live this pastoral life.  Pastor Kavouras is well-known in the LCMS for his chaplaincy work with police, the fire service, and the FBI, as well as his magnificent little book on his chaplaincy work following September 11.  He is a true mentor to men serving in such chaplaincy capacities.  I really appreciate his insights, and hope you do too!  Published with permission. + Larry Beane]

Fr. Beane seeks responses from others who are worker priests.  For 28 of my 34 years in the ministry I have provided my own support.  After 6 years of nothing but trouble, getting kicked around, run around and ruined financially, I decided that I don't mind this happening to me, but I will not let it happen to my wife and children.   That was back in 1984. At the time I stumbled upon a job selling debt collection services to businesses.  Within 3 years we decided to strike out on our own and have been at it for 25 years on our own.  In addition, about five years ago, I learned how to buy and sell coins for a profit.  Both of these businesses are immensely enjoyable because I like the world of finance, I like business in general and I love sales, which besides managing the business took up most of my time.

Time management is no problem for two reasons.  When you are self employed, especially when engaged in sales, your schedule is flexible.  We had the good fortune of making a liveable wage in less than half of a normal work week.  Besides this many pastors don't use their time wisely.  As far as I can tell a pastor's duties are as limited as they are important: prepare for and celebrate the Mass, catechize, hear confessions (not very time consuming these days), visit sick and shut in members.  These last two duties, however, are not the exclusive domain of the pastor.  A well trained, qualified deacon (not just a warm and willing body) who is locally ordained for that purpose can do it.  While there may have been a need for a professional clergy when parishes were large, and prosperity was flowing, today we must 
recognize that confessional churches are small and getting smaller.  Why would they have a full time pastor for the limited duties needed?  We need to break free from our mental mold and deal with reality.  I recognize it is hard.  But try if you will.

Further, I suspect that if we survey all of Christendom over the last 2,000 years, we might find that part time clergy are the rule, rather than the exception.  We would probably find pastors who spent a good part of their day growing their own plot of food, farming, tending animals, and going to market in order to live.  And, think of the pastors today who are full time clergy, but only by the grace of their wives who take on the double burden of bearing children and providing for the household.  If a wife is willing and able I see no problem with it, but if she is not willing or able, or only haltingly so, then the pastor needs to man up.  There is no theological requirement for a full time, professional clergy.  Indeed I believe that I have accomplished as much, if not more, than others on a part time basis because I never got involved in the busy work.  Almost everything I do is pure ministry.  We have eliminated, of necessity perhaps, all busy work in our parish.  We have one meeting every two months with the Board of Admin.  We celebrate Mass every Sunday and hold a bible class and SS preceding the Mass.  I do my preparation, personal studies, visit the sick and shut ins, and provide some pastoral counseling, as well as carry out my chaplain functions.  We also sold our building two years ago, it was drowning us, and now we rent from a sister congregation, but maintain two very separate congregations in the same building.

As for ups and downs?  In my case it is mostly ups.  The money is good, the independence is better, the wide range of people I meet and things I get to see as I consult with business owners, learn about their businesses, and counsel them on their collection needs is vast and stimulating beyond what one would imagine.  The switching back and forth from one reality to another took a little getting used to, but I find it happily satisfying.  When one mistress gets trying, I fly to the other.  But I love them both and serve them both.  I consider them both gifts from God, both as fields of service.  If there is a down side it is that some people don't consider you legitimate if you are less than full time (especially if you own a collection agency, and are a coin dealer).  I don't like to create confusion in people's minds but that is their problem, now isn't it?  I have never had that problem personally because I kept my two worlds separate, purposely so.  I never talk about my business ventures to the church, not ever.  It's none of their business.

Cleveland, being a large city, means that I don't run into members in my business dealings very often.  As for types of employment that could muddy the waters.  If you live in a small town, and end up dealing with your members as customers, especially if it is what some wrongly call "menial" employment, it could cause some confusion in people's minds.  But if dealt with properly that goes away and there is no such thing as menial labor if done with honor.

But I have a suggestion for pastors needing extra income, viz., that you consider self employment, and especially sales.  Sales is an art and a science that can be learned and acquired just like any other skill.  It pays very well.  With that ability a person can make an above average income, in less than average time, and work in whatever field he enjoys. If you like men's clothes, welding supplies, corporate jets or silk flowers you can turn selling those things into you own business.  There are also other professions and skills which people might possess: construction trades, accounting, law, medical professions, computer programmer etc.  Use them.  What's wrong with being a part time plumber and part time pastor?  Or practicing law or accounting on a limited basis to supplement your low pastoral income?  Again, this takes a re-think on our part, and on the part of our people.

Also as Fr. Beane mentioned, being out there leads to some interesting discussions.  I have lost track of the number of people I have counseled and prayed for in my business dealings because of my dual vocation. People open up to us.  Also, people can read you in the business world, they can perceive if you are a man of integrity, and pastors excel in that area.

Lastly, I would suggest that since confessional churches are magnet churches, and not neighborhood phenomena, that two confessional churches would do well to share buildings, two separate parishes
housed under one roof.  Find someone you can live with, and do it. Why do we maintain buildings that are bleeding us to death?  Sell one, make the other sound, if you can find reasonable people of like mind.

Monday, September 24, 2012

Why?



By Larry Beane

As a postscript to Fr. Curtis's advice on advice, I would like to offer some of my own.

Actually, I don't really have advice so much as some questions. In this video, two of my brother pastors are giving the same advice that I would also give a new pastor (and I frequently do). In no way am I questioning their wisdom. Like I said, I agree with this advice in general - which is what a YouTube video is: general advice. And I believe the only way to keep a man in the ministry - a man who has devoted four years of his life, possibly his family's life, four years of seminary and church resources, financial and otherwise, to train for the holy ministry - is to really be careful about making changes in the parish. I think most of us in the ministry have seen and experienced the heartbreak of classmates and friends, brothers in the office, who have quit or been run out of their parishes by trying to change something. And so, to new graduates, we all counsel "festina lente" - make haste slowly - especially in matters of worship.  It is such universal advice as to be cliche.

In the video, the second pastor speaks of things that will make the new pastor "uncomfortable."  I think he has hit on something very profound.  Pastors - especially new pastors - can expect "discomfort."  He doesn't mean that the temperature might be too high in his study or that his shoes don't fit well any more.  Rather, he is referring to things that will cause a pastor spiritual discomfort, discomfort in his conscience, in what he knows is right, in his being hamstrung from leading and teaching what he himself has been led and taught to do. For that is what many of our seminary graduates find when they are sent forth to their primary congregations. In some cases, these men will be shocked and scandalized by what they will find.

In spite of the fact that, as Fr. Duddleswell pointed out from the BBC series "Bless Me, Father," it is an "ugly Protestant word," I am going to ask: "Why?"  Why are pastors uncomfortable in theology and practice, and perhaps must remain so for years, decades, or even their entire ministries?  Why?

Why do we teach men in seminary that we in the LCMS practice closed communion - not because it is policy, not because it is in the handbook, not because some bureaucrat or convention (popes and councils) have decreed it by parliamentary fiat - but because it is the right and proper thing to do, the biblical thing to do, the Christian thing to do - only to then tell these men to act immorally, contrary to the Bible, and against what the church has always done - once they get into a real parish?

This is the very definition of dissonance.

Why do we pledge to norm our teaching by the Book of Concord, which unambiguously confesses against infrequent communion, and is actually quite clear that the Holy Sacrament is to be offered at least weekly - only to pull the stilts out from a man and encourage him to violate the confessions (at least for a spell) that he has sworn to uphold as soon as he actually gets a call?

Why do we train seminarians meticulously in the theology and practice of the liturgy only to tell them to yield to their congregation's wishes (even if it is just for a while) to abolish it if that is what they encounter when they leave the seminary's bosom?

In any other context, we encourage people to keep their vows - even if it is unpopular. We never counsel a seminarian or newly minted pastor to cheat on his wife if that's what is going on in his parish (at least for the time being), until he has "earned their trust," until he has led Bible studies, preached sermons, and distributed CPH tracts on marital fidelity for a period of months or years.

We don't encourage pastors to ignore the commandments the way we encourage them to ignore entire articles of the Augsburg Confession (at least until enough catechesis has happened).

Why do we educate our pastors about the importance of these matters only to tell them they are not actually so important to actually do them when they actually get a call - in the interest of not being a "bull in the china shop" or not being "winsome" or some such?

Again, I am not encouraging anyone to be a "bull in the china shop." The situation is what it is. If you go into your first call and immediately institute every-Sunday Eucharist, abolish non-liturgical worship, or close down the "y'all come" communion statement, there is a right good chance you will swiftly be CRM, unemployed, or maybe even divorced. You might be moving back in with your parents and looking for a fast-food restaurant that is interested in hiring M.Div.'s who washed out of the pastoral ministry.

But again, I am asking "why" this is.

I think the answer is this: we don't believe Walther.

Yes, that's it. And I'm not a particularly big fan of Walther.

But we give grandiloquent lip service to Wather's Law and Gospel. We use the very words as almost a mystical incantation, even pronouncing it in some cases as "Lawn Gospel". It is as Lutheran as brats and beer. But here is the problem: if a congregation (or a subset of members) refuses to accept a pastor's instruction and exercise of pastoral shepherding - be it for closed communion, frequent communion, or liturgical worship - they are sinning. It may well be a case of a small faction of the congregation that is leading the charge against "the new guy" who wants to "change" how "we've always done things." Not only are such parishioners sinning by endorsing unbiblical practices and/or violating their own promises to abide by the Lutheran confessions, but they are adding rebellion against authority and impenitence to the mix. And if things get ugly - as they often do in these situations - rumors and attacks on reputations, gossip and slander may start flying around the parish.

And so we tell the pastor just to sidestep the whole thing, go along to get along. Back up ten yards and punt. Hopefully, you will get the ball back in the fourth quarter (i.e. when you are nearing retirement and the antagonists in your parish have all gone to their eternal reward).

We do not counsel the pastor to call the sinners to repentance. We do not encourage the pastor to - in Walther's words - give "not one drop" of the Gospel to the impenitent. In fact, we tell him to do the polar opposite: to yield to the sinner. It's just easier. It's less trouble. The paychecks keep coming. The seminary doesn't have egg on its face. It keeps the DP off your case. And you get to look "pastoral" and "wise" in not confronting the sinner.

But I want to ask again, "Why?"  Why do we ignore Law and Gospel in this case?

And to that question, I think the answer may be that we believe Walther a little too much. Poor C.F.W. just can't get a break!

I think much of the problem is our Waltherian polity. Pastors are not just beholden to, but dependent upon, the very people whom he is expected to call to repentance. It is not unusual for the biggest donors to be the most demanding, the loudest and pushiest of those who object to things like liturgical worship, closed communion, and weekly Eucharist. Often the very people leading the charge to compel the pastor to tolerate sin are the ones the pastor can ill afford to tick off.  The sheep corral the shepherds.  Hebrews 13:17 is turned on its head.  The pastor is a hireling.

Moreover, the pastor is caught between the pincers of the congregation and the district office. In our current polity, the District President wields considerable power. It may be apocryphal, but I've heard a quote attributed to Dr. William Weinrich that our district presidents today enjoy powers that Roman Catholic bishops can only covet. If a pastor causes headaches for his DP, the DP can in turn blackball the pastor - even if only informally, by dropping a name or raising an eyebrow.

And so new pastors are told from every source imaginable: the congregation, the district president, the seminary, and yes even from Gottesdienst editors - make changes "slowly" - a pace that might even be so slow as to not make them at all.  Gospel reductionism covers a multitude of antinomianism.

But woe to you, Pastor, if you do not heed this advice even if you heed your conscience. You will very likely be eaten for lunch. Your reputation may be trashed, you might lose your salary, your district president may put you under restriction, your former professors may pretend you don't exist, your colleagues in the ministry may click their tongues when they talk about you, and you might even find yourself depressed and on psychotropic drugs.  And you would have plenty of company.

And like the poor vicars who are compelled against their consciences to speak the Words of Institution over bread and wine, nobody in the seminary or the ministerium or the synod bureaucracy will help you. In their defense, they cannot. Our polity leaves pastors (and those training to be pastors) twisting in the wind.

In fairness, there is not much anyone can do other than mourn the loss of our friends while secretly thanking God that it isn't us that has been devoured - at least this time.  This is our dirty little secret.  I don't have any answers nor any advice of my own other than to reiterate our Lord's pastoral advice to the apostles to be "wise as serpents and as innocent as doves" (Matt 10:16) and St. Paul's pastoral advice to St. Timothy: "No longer drink only water, but use a little wine" (1 Tim 5:23).  The former advice is paradoxically theological, while the latter is therapeutically practical - even as both are biblical.

And as Fr. Curtis says, your mileage may vary.

Thursday, July 5, 2012

Checklists in the Ministry

Earlier this year, I read this book review of The Checklist Manifesto. "Checklists seem able to defend everyone, even the experienced, against failure in many more tasks than we realized. They provide a kind of cognitive net. They catch mental flaws." And this is really the major point. Checklists help people get done what needs to get done without as many mistakes.

Consider for example packing lists, grocery lists, recipes. These are just checklists. Now I could do all of these things without, but when I do I usually forget something. And that's what we're trying to avoid. We're trying to avoid missing something. We don't want to have to reinvent the wheel every time. So we make lists of what needs to be done.

There are some things that we do as pastors that can benefit from a checklist. This is one of the points behind Fr. Curtis's post on Concerning Pulpit Supply. Another of these things is funerals.

Funerals require a lot of components. And this can be difficult to remember because you can't always plan for when they are coming. A well-made checklist can relieve you of the stress that comes with the  thought: I hope I'm not forgetting anything. So here is a checklist that Fr. Christopher Seifferlein has made for funerals.

Part of his checklist includes what readings to use with the family at different stages and what to focus on. Having prefabbed sermon outlines like this can be very helpful for when you are on your way to visit the grieving family and you're thinking to yourself: "Um, what do I say? What am I going to talk about?" The LSB Agenda and the Pastoral Care Companion help a lot, but they don't do it all. You still have times when you're expected to say something that isn't from the book. So spend a few minutes now going through a few of the suggested texts for "At the Visitation," "For Those In Grief," etc, and put together a short outline of what you say when you visit them. (I have done this for hospital visits. I have something I do for my first visit, second, and then returning home, something for pre-surgery and post-surgery, etc. I don't always stick to it because I also use the propers for the week. But having it there takes the pressure off in case I get a midnight call or something.)

Anyway here is the list:


Funeral Checklist
Before Funeral Home
  • Pray for the deceased and for the family
  • Pull File and/or Church Records
  • Determine age of deceased:  ____
  • Arrange the ringing of the church bell
  • Call church organist to determine availability
  • Determine time and date of funeral home meeting: ________________
At Funeral Home
  • Readings & Prayer-Discuss the theological purpose of the funeral
Widow at Nain-Remembrance, Grief, Burial, Words of Christ (Why are we here, what are we here for, my role)
  • Determine the time and date of service:____________
  • Determine organist arrangements
  • Discuss placement of casket during visitation (narthex or at the front of the nave)
  • Determine how many pews to reserve on each side of church.
  • Explain Funeral Pall its use symbolism, request assistance from pall bearers if so desired
  • Determine cemetery where burial will take place
  • Discuss the families wishes regarding the desire to stay by the cemetery until the casket is lowered.
  • Request Favorite Hymn & Reading Selections from Family
  • Determine meal and menu arrangements.  Give name/# of individual to call for luncheon to funeral director
  • Determine the number of people expected for the service: ____
  • Determine the number of people expected for the luncheon: ____
After Funeral Home
  • Call Elders/arrange Elder(s) to assist with funeral
  • Call Head of Luncheon Committee (Carol Navis)
  • Call Cemetery Sexton (Bob Navis)
  • Call janitor and arrange for church to be cleaned before and after the service
In Preparation for Service
  • Determine Readings
  • Determine Hymns
  • Call and relate service information to organist
  • Complete Bulletin
  • Liturgy Preparation
  • Sermon Preparation
  • Prepare Wake Readings/Prayer-Theme: “Jesus In Remembrance of Me,” or “Upper Room.”
  • Prepare Pre-Service Readings/Prayer-Mary/Martha-Sustained by Jesus Words
On the day of the funeral
  • Meet with elder to go through the service: ringing of the bell at the beginning of the service, ringing of the bell at the end of the service  
  • Meet with organist to go through the service including the execution of the prelude/postlude
  • Meet with Funeral Director to go through the service including placement of the casket, funeral pall
  • Get out the funeral pall
After Funeral Service
  • Put Death Date in Computer
  • Put dates on computer to call the deceased
  • Fold up funeral pall
  • Put Funeral on Official Acts of the next Council Meeting


Use this as a starting point. Not every place is the same, so you will have to adjust it for your circumstances. But it's a great start. And the likely hood of you forgetting something, will be smaller.


Sunday, February 12, 2012

Tricking Yourself To Be Disciplined

Some people have the discipline to focus their energies on getting things done with relative ease. They don’t get side tracked easily, or find themselves wandering down an unexplored rabbit hole that leads to no where after two hours. It seems almost innate. I know it’s not, but some folks seem to have an easier time with this than others.


I’m not one of these people. I have to trick myself to be disciplined. I have to put my alarm clock on the other side of the room so that I’ll actually get out of bed to shut it off. I have schedule my prayers as daily service just to ensure that I do it. I have to write my sermon rough draft longhand just to overcome my perfectionist tendencies to procrastinate. (I’m an only child--so think first-born tendencies on steroids). Nothing that I do just comes about without planning it or tricking myself into doing it. It’s really annoying but it’s the only way I can get stuff done.


So if you find that you have similar difficulties, here’s a couple of resources that I found immensely helpful on getting things done.


First, the book Getting Things Done by David Allen. Reading this book made me feel like Mel Gibson in Braveheart: “FREEEEEDOMMMMM.” GTD helps put everything into perspective and tells you why there are things on the To Do list that never get off. There are two main premises to his book.


The first premise is to get everything out of your head and down on paper so that you can free up your brain for real thinking. Since more and more of our work is brain work not physical work, we need to a method for keeping it all straight. Starting, maintaining, and finishing multiple projects at a time can overload your brain and make you feel like completely overwhelmed. But with the GTD method you get that out of your head so that you can devote your brain to thinking that will actually get things done instead of spinning your wheels. But it also let you enjoy your days off because you know that you’re not forgetting anything because it’s all written down in the GTD format.


The second premise is that when you are making Task/To Do lists, you must do enough thinking to write down what the action is. Don’t write down the abstract, overarching project, but write down the very next thing you must do to get you one step closer to getting it done. So, for example, if I had to get an oil change for my car, I wouldn’t write down “Get oil change for Accord.” I would write “Call dealership to make Friday appointment for Accord’s oil change.” The difference between the two is that I’ll look at a Task List with “Get oil change for Accord” on it and think: “I don’t have time to do that now.” And so I won’t move any closer to getting it done. But if I see “Call dealership . . . .” I’ll think to myself, “Oh, I’ve got a minute that I can do that while I drive to my next homebound visit. You must do just enough thinking to write down the next action to DO. I know it seems silly, but it’s immensely helpful.


Here’s the Getting Things Done website for more information (http://www.davidco.com/).


The other resource is helpful in managing bigger blocks of time. If you’ve ever gone home, thinking “what did spend all day doing?” This is for you. The resource is called The Pomodoro Technique (http://www.pomodorotechnique.com). Here’s how it works.


Look at your day to identify your available time. Determine how many 25-minute time blocks ("pomodoros") will fit in the time. Then assign work to those blocks. No single task can take more than 3-5 pomodoros. (If it does, you need to break the task into subtasks.) Between most pomodoros plan a short 2-3 minute break. Every few hours plan a longer break. Then during the day, time every pomodoro with a timer. Record the work, including changes to your plan, plus any problems keeping focused on the task for the full 25 minutes.


I know it sounds silly and really simple but it’s really helpful. It tricks you into getting things done. And this why: It provides a physical support structure that helps you execute several crucial mental processes: making a commitment, resisting interruptions, focusing on finishing, and monitoring progress.


Setting the timer helps you make the commitment to the work. You write down what you'll do during the pomodoro, and then you turn on the timer. That simple existential action embodies your choice to commit.


The running timer inoculates you against interruptions, because you are supposed to stop the timer if you stop work. That makes the choice to stop--to be interrupted--an active, conscious choice instead of a passive reaction. Plus, you know that you will have a short break soon, when you can deal with the interruption. All this motivates you to resist interruptions.


The running timer also helps you focus on achieving the goal. The mini-deadline every 25 minutes is a natural incentive to finish. You are more aware of how much time you are taking, and you are motivated to beat the clock, if you can.


Taking a short break to record what you did and clear your head helps you monitor the work and consider whether or not you are making the best use of your time. You become much more aware of how long a task is taking, and can stop yourself from going down the slippery slope, using up all your discretionary time for email or some other low-value task. The small breaks give you a chance to adjust your plan to meet the realities of the work.


Both these methods help you to be disciplined but offers some flexibility at the same time. It’s the best of both worlds for pastor types because sometimes you don’t have the mental stamina to write, but you can make phone calls. Or sometimes you don’t feel like talking to people but you are able to do reading or internet research for project X or Y or Z. They offer those tricks that help you stay focused so that you can unplug and be Dad or Son or Husband when you’re not at work.