DOC

Prosessekerkradegemeenteleiers1doc - Hoop

By Deborah King,2014-08-12 16:04
7 views 0
Prosessekerkradegemeenteleiers1doc - Hoop ...

    Hoop

Opening

LEIER: Wat is hoop?

    LESER 1: Wat ‘n mens al sien, hoop jy tog nie meer nie. Wie hoop nog op wat hy reeds sien? Maar as ons hoop op wat ons nie sien nie, wag ons daarop met volharding. [ Rom 8:24-25 ]

    LESER 2: Om te hoop beteken dat ons elke oomblik ingestel is op dit wat nog nie gebore is nie. Selfs al gebeur sekere dinge nie in ons leeftyd nie, beteken hoop dat ons nie desperaat en moedeloos sal raak nie. Dit beteken nie veel om te hoop op dit wat reeds bestaan of op dit wat nie moontlik is nie. Hulle wie se hoop swak is, gee hulle maklik oor aan gerief en self geweld. Hulle wie se hoop sterk is, sien en koester elke teken van nuwe lewe. Hulle is elke oomblik gereed om te help dat nuwe dinge onder ons gebore word. [ Erich Fromm ]

LIED

ONS DEEL IN TEKENS VAN HOOP WAARVAN ONS IS DIE TYD BEWUS GEWORD

    HET. [ Dit is belangrik dat ons alle tekens van hoop wat ons in ons alledaagse lewe en verhoudinge vind, sal koester en met mekaar sal deel. ]

GEBED [ Almal saam ]

    Here ons God, U weet hoe min hoop daar in ons lewe is. Ons dae is dikwels vol van slegte nuus berigte van lyding en dood, haat en onvrede, werkloosheid en bedrog. Ons samelewing bloei steeds sonder ophou. Ook in ons eie harte voel ons onseker en magteloos. Soos die psalmdigter vra ons ook dikwels: waar is God vandag? In so ‘n tyd wil ons opnuut aan Jesus dink. Ons wil dink aan Sy kruis hoe Hy gely en gesterf

    het. Toe alle hoop verdwyn het, het U Hom uit die dood opgewek. Selfs die dood kon U liefde nie keer nie. Deur die opstanding van Christus skep U nuwe lewe, nuwe hoop. Gee ons vandag weer tekens van U liefde en sorg. Vul ons harte met nuwe verwagting. Laat die hoop tog in ons groei. En help ons ook om dit te vier. Alleen so kan ons dissipels wees mense vol blydskap, moed en hoop!

AMEN

    LEIER Alhoewel ons hoop en verwagting nog nie ‘n vaste besit is nie, bevat dit tog ‘n element daarvan. Die feit dat ons op iets wag, wys reeds dat ons dit op ‘n manier besit. Indien ons met geduld en hoop op iets wag, is die krag van dit waarop ons wag reeds werksaam in ons lewe. Hy wat in alle erns wag, is alreeds in die greep van dit waarop hy wag.

VIERING VAN HOOP [Almal saam ]

    Te midde van hongersnood en geweld, vier ons die belofte van oorvloed en vrede.

    Te midde van onderdrukking en tirannie, vier ons die belofte van diens en vryheid.

    Te midde van twyfel en wanhoop, vier ons die belofte van geloof en hoop.

    Te midde van vrees en ontrouheid, vier ons die belofte van vreugde en lojaliteit.

    Te midde van haat en dood, vier ons die belofte van liefde en lewe.

    Te midde van sonde en verval, vier ons die belofte van redding en vernuwing.

By die herinnering aan ‘n sterwende Heer, vier ons die belofte van ‘n lewende Christus.

LIED

AFSLUITING

     Mag die God van hoop julle vul met sy genade en vrede. Mag julle deur die Leier:

    krag van sy Gees groei in hoop.

    Wolfgang Greek: Ten Lessions from the Future. CEO of Future World, The Global Bisiness and Technology Think Tank

    Verwerk deur Frederick Marais

The worlds of Horus and Seth

    The Egyptian Museum in Cairo houses a mind-numbing number of artefacts that shed light on the way people lived and worshipped in the Nile Delta some three to seven millennia ago. In one particularly dimly-lit corner of the museum, I found a little-known statue of a pharaoh being counselled by two deities.

On the left is Horus, the god of structure and predictability. On the right: Seth, the god of

    chaos and disorder. Even thousands of years ago, the conflict between order and chaos, and the dilemmas created for those in authority, were well recognised.

    In a very real sense, today‟s business executive is in the same position as that stone pharaoh. Everything we have been taught about business was crafted in the Industrial Age - in an economy where central authority, predictability and control were the touchstones.

We are the sons and daughters of Horus. But we are living in Seth‟s world!

Take a look at this table...

Industrial Age ‘Culture’ Information Age ‘Spirit’ Industrial Age “Culture” Informational Age “Spirite”

Wolfgang Gruke: Ten Lessions from the Future. CEO of Future World, The

    Global Bisiness and Technology Think Tank

     Learn a skill Lifelong learning

     Security Risk-taking

     Job preservation Job creation

     Capital equipment Intellectual capital

     Status quo Speed and change

     Hierarchical and regulated Distributed and networked

     Zero sum Win-win

     Measure inputs Measure outputs

The great excitement of the future is that we can shape it

    Charles Hardy

    Tomorrows successful leaders will value principles more than they value

    their companies

    Steven Covey

The important thing is to try to…take control over your own destiny

    Michael Porter

    The traditional concept of management is reaching the end

    of the road

    Michael Hammer

    We’re talking about changes in basic assumption…few traditional organizations ever go through the eye of the needle Peter Senge

    The major challenge for leaders in the twenty-first century will be how to release the brainpower of

    their organizations

    Warren Bennis

    Do we have corporate cultures that are anchors on change? Or cultures

    that enable us to adapt to the changing environment?

John Kotter

    Marketers will move from focusing on large

    segments to targeting specific niches. In

    niches there are riches.

    Phillip Kotler

My one-word messages for the twenty-first century is “Asia”

John Naisbitt

    The dominant competitive weapon of the twenty-first century

    will be the education and skills of the workforce. Lester Thurow

    Corporations are starting to take on the complexity of biological systems. And at that point, they become out of our control. Kevin Kelly

Opdrag aan die leiers:Groepsbespreking oor leierskap

    1. Kyk na die aanhanlings en neem tien minute om te se watter van die aanhalings het iets te se vir die kerk en watter ons liefs moet ignoreer.

    2. Kyk na Gulke se paradigmas as „n inleiding. Skryf nou saam met die groep „n defenisie vir leierskap vir die finalejaarklas van 1979 op „n blaaibordvel

    en dan een vir die die klas 25 jaar later: 2004 op die blaaibord 3. As julle hiermee klaar is kan julle op die meeste 5 dinge op „n blaaibordvel neerskryf om met die groter groep te deel. Less is more Doel van die oefening:

    a. Is om ons te laat nadink oor leierskap

    b. Is om te leer by wat in die wereld om ons aan die gebeur is tov van

    leierskap

    c. Isom begrip te ontwikkel dat daar ‘n groot verskil is tussen die styl van leierskap van 25

    jaar gelede en vandag.

    INVITATIONAL LEADERSHIP - a Model for the Future

By Keith Coats

    Keith's skills lie in his ability to find appropriate frameworks and processes for individuals and companies to think strategically and explore leadership. Keith has attended several international leadership conferences and is an experienced international speaker and trainer.

    Keith is an associate of FutureWorld. (http://www.futureworld.co.za/Subpages/Network.asp) Keith has done formal research in the subject of Leadership teams in organisational change.

    Keith has held the positions of:

    Regional Director of an International Youth

    Development Agency, Youth for Christ,

    Lecturer at Natal Technikon, (Leadership and Management)

Introduction:

    Proposing future models is always going to be a risky business. Of course, get it right and one is potentially elevated to “guru” status and placed among the Nostrodamus and Faith Popcorn‟s of the world. British management writer / broadcaster / economist, Charles Handy has said that we need to expend energy attempting to make sense of the future without allowing our past, however glorious, to get in the way of our future. He also makes the point that life can only really be understood backwards but has to be lived forwards. Certainly then, surveying the landscape of the future only serves to highlight the current paradoxes that populate our present. Understanding such paradoxes is what is important rather than attempting to resolve them, a futile endeavor by the very definition of the term “paradox”. In essence leadership will shift from, “having all the answers” to “framing the right questions”. In her dynamic book, Leadership and the New Science, Margaret Wheatly

    likens her attempt to charter the future as similar to that of the explorations of those early sea adventurers whose early maps and accompanying commentary were, “descriptive but not predictive, enticing but not fully revelatory”. She adds, “They (the explorers) pointed in certain directions, illuminated landmarks, warned of dangers, yet their elusive references and blank spaces served to encourage explorations and discoveries by other people…they

    contained life-saving knowledge, passed hand to hand among those who were willing to dare similar voyages of their own” (Leadership and the New Science,XIII)

    I would hope that this paper would serve to encourage you in your own voyage of discovery and perhaps contribute towards some “life-saving” knowledge in the process of

    mapping and living effective leadership in the domain in which you serve.

The Context:

    What is beyond doubt is that the future is not what it used to be. The rapid advances being made in the world of biogenetics (what the metaphor of “brain” was to moderns, “genes” will be to postmoderns), nanotechnology and vapor-phase technology are gathering revolutionary momentum. Artificial intelligence is already present in fifth-generation computers and the sociological scaffolding of belief is groaning under the strain of supporting an outdated worldview.

     Some futurists claim that at the current rate of urbanization (world cities growing at 8 million people per month with half the world‟s current population living in cities) we are moving from a world made up of countries, to a world made up of cities. It has been said that not only will the life expectancy of today‟s teenagers increase to 120 years but also that within their lifetime there will be people who won‟t understand what “country” means. Writer / thinker / teacher Leonard Sweet makes the point that already science and technology make-up at least half of postmodern culture (adding that the church invests little of it‟s energy in these areas except for, “periodic sloganish outbursts of critical concern” (Quantum Spirituality p.132).

    The current leadership models within our organizations and institutions with which we are familiar, are grounded in a particular context referred to as the “Newtonian” worldview, shaped primarily by the genius of Sir Isaac Newton and French philosopher / mathematician Rene Descartes during the course of the seventeenth century. In essence, Newtonian thinking held that the world was like a machine, the whole made up by the parts. To understand the machine one only had to remove the individual part, examine it and replace it. So too to fix it. It was this framework / worldview that informed the industrial revolution which in turn paved the way for our contemporary organizational hierarchies, establishing the “rules of the game” in so far as leading organized work is concerned. This represents a gross over-simplification of events and influences that have led us to our current context but are sufficient for the purposes of this paper.

    Newtonian thinking led organizations to champion the twin towers of control and predictability marshaling their energy and resources accordingly. In this context leadership evolved to be something that was always “at the top”, always visible, controlling, strong and the place where the “buck stopped”. The desired state was one of equilibrium and stability, achievable by imposing control, constricting people‟s freedom and inhibiting local change. The „system‟ in which this took place would be described as a „closed‟ system. This was a system where information was controlled and chaos and change minimized. It is noteworthy that nature has taught us that the attempt to manage for stability and to enforce an unnatural equilibrium always leads to far reaching destruction. In essence (and ironically), managing for stability threatens the very system itself.

    However, as explorations into the subatomic world gathered momentum from the early part of this century, a growing dissonance with Newtonian thinking emerged. The “rules of the game” that held true in the Newtonian universe, collapsed in the subatomic world being explored. The subatomic world offered a new landscape of connections and paradox, of

    phenomena that could not be reduced to simple cause and effect, or explained by studying the parts as isolated contributors. The early pioneers / adventurers of quantum theory,

     Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg found that at the end of each question they asked in an atomic experiment, nature replied with a confusing paradox.

     Growing out of this new understanding emerged an alternative worldview, one that provide some critical reference points for the way in which we view organizations and leadership. For one thing, there appeared to be a fundamental “connectedness” in this new order which refuted the matter / persona dichotomy of the Newtonian worldview. A Swiss physicist, J.S. Bell proposed a theorem in 1964 (and confirmed experimentally in 1982 by Alain Aspect at the University of Paris) that proved that the world is fundamentally inseparable. In other words that matter could be affected by non-local causes and be changed by influences that travel faster than the speed of light. Wheatley makes the point that we have broken the world into parts and fragments for so long that we are not well prepared to see that a different order is moving the whole. Finding new ways to think about, to see, sense and comprehending the whole represents one of greatest challenges for today‟s leadership. Bohm makes the point that the notion that the “fragments” of our world exist separately is an illusion, one that leads to conflict and confusion. (Leadership and the

    New Science p42).

    Berkley University physicist, Henry Stapp, has described Bell‟s Theorem as, “the most profound discovery in the history of science”. Bell proved that everything is connected to everything else. We are not sure how this connectedness works, but there is a certainty that there is “separation without separateness”. Nothing can be understood in isolation, everything has to be seen as part of the unified whole. The notion that the world and our universe are made up of „separate things‟ is an illusion. In the language of this new science, this is referred to as the “butterfly effect”. Edward Lorenz, a meteorologist, first drew attention to this by asking whether or not the flap of a butterfly wing in Tokyo affects a tornado in Texas or a thunderstorm in New York? His answer was an emphatic, “yes”. There is a Chinese proverb that states, “If you cut a blade of grass, you shake the universe”.

    Understanding this connectedness has vast implications for our constructions of organizations and leadership now and into the future. Future leadership will be built on epigenesis: the formation of an organism out of genetic / memetic characteristics rather than generic principles, but one that advances in complexity of form and structure. (“Memes” is a term first coined by Richard Dawkins and refers to culturally transmitted ideas and customs that have been implanted in the human brain by social interaction and historical development). Ironically the Christian worldview and faith has catered for such all along but it has been our own lack of understanding / appreciation that has served to limit our knowledge / experience of such richness. Herein lies another irony. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that other cultures / worldviews, ones traditionally regarded as being outside that of the “Christian” perspective, have understood and lived out this deeper reality of our fundamental connectedness. It is a little like the triumphant sound of the early explorer who believes that he has discovered a “new land” only to find others for whom that place has been home for quite some time! In this regard there is much we can learn from cultures such as the Native Americans (the Circle of Courage), the Japanese (the concept of „Kyosei‟) or in our own context, from the spirit of “ubuntu” as it is interpreted and

    practiced by different groupings. There is a common nervous system we all share. There is a Zulu proverb that states, “When a thorn is stuck in the foot, the whole body stoops to pick it up”.

Report this document

For any questions or suggestions please email
cust-service@docsford.com