3/13/2012

Guest blog piece: Living Bodies, Living Foods or You Are What You Eat



Grażyna and I are enjoying good health these days. A statement like this begs an explanation.
            A few years ago, somewhere around 2004, my physician suggested that in order to maintain quality of life, I should slow down. My heart would work better. Then, after having a comprehensive health check-up, it was determined that there is a need to deal with a prostate cancer. I did that.
            A careful change in lifestyle, taking care of quality nutrition, exercising, and taking a day at a time – in my case – was matched, and even encouraged by Grażyna’s passionate embrace of learning and adopting healthy living, including putting on our table organically grown foods.
            Thus the Dąbrowski household life of healthy choices was born and turned into a conscious modus operandi.
            What follows is a guest blog entry by … Grażyna. She is working in Client Care Services at Adventist Risk Management, Inc. Here is her article, "Living Bodies, Living Foods," published today, March 13, in her company’s Solutions Newsletter (See: http://bit.ly/wy95Im - Reprinted by permission).

What started as a personal experiment, turned into a seven-year passion as I have journeyed the road of discovering raw foods and their benefits. In the spring of 2005, along with a group of my close friends, I embarked on a 21-day juicing and cleansing diet.
            Each of us did this for different reasons. Some dreamed about getting into their swimsuit before a summer beach vacation. Others, feeling stressed and unable to cope with demands of everyday living, looked for the promised energy increase, improved sleep, clearer thinking, and better concentration. Yet others, dealing with a particular health challenge, hoped for a cure. Each of us had different reasons for staying on the program, and in some way we all benefited from the results.
            During the cleansing and follow-up portion of the diet, only organic fruits and vegetables are used to get a maximum of nutrients. Plenty of pure, living spring water is also a must, to ensure removal of toxins and products of metabolic waste. (You can find a free spring water supply in your area, by going to www.findaspring.com)
            I recall my friends who took part in that adventure proudly displaying their thinner bodies, glowing skin, feeling healthier, energetic, and with more positive attitude.
            Although many of us found it hard to stay on the program the entire 21 days, the diet enabled us to change our eating habits. Some of us never went back to the way we ate before. Some included more fruits and vegetables in their diet. Others may have fallen of the wagon, but have never forgotten how to go back and reclaim the feeling of well-being.
            During this process I felt compelled to find out more about superfoods (goji berries, noni fruit, mangosteen, maca root, cacao beans, sea vegetables, marine phytoplankton, coconut oil, spirulina) and superherbs such as holy basil, turmeric extract, mucuna, rosehips, horsetail, stinging nettles, gingko biloba. I wanted to share with others how to strengthen and beautify their bodies.
            In the winter of 2009, I enrolled in the David “Avocado” Wolfe’s Ultimate Raw Nutrition Certification program, offered by the BodyMind Institute in Alberta, Canada. In December of 2011 I completed the curriculum. I have learned how to live naturally, sustainably and successfully in this world.
            The Greek philosopher, Hippocrates, who is also referred to as the father of medicine, famously said, “Let food be thy medicine, and medicine be thy food.” A doctor-recommended five daily servings of fruits and vegetables might be hard to eat, but throwing it all in a blender, and drinking a nutritious green smoothie makes a much easier routine to follow.
            In my quest for staying healthy, I continue to be curious about how I can best nourish my body. Everyone knows the saying, “You are what you eat.” But how many of us take it seriously and make food choices that can affect us on the physical, emotional, and spiritual level? In all aspects of life – our work, exercise program, or nutrition – the little things add up. Health benefits are not achieved by something that is only done now and then. Consistency in healthy eating, exercise, and other choices is what makes the difference.
            An excellent customer service rule is based on three “C’s” – Consistency Creates Credibility. How about applying this golden rule to your living body? It will also lift your spirit up! –Grażyna Dąbrowska

NOTE: Be sure to consult your physician before making any changes to your regular diet or health care program.


3/04/2012

Democratically sanctioned flip-flopping



Like it or nor, anything you say or wear makes a political statement. Ever-since the fig leaf, one’s attire could be regarded as proper, elegant, avant-garde or sloppy, dependent on whatever occasion. These days you do not have to be a politician or an artist to make political statements. Just being on Facebook or tweeting your random thoughts is enough to become a subject of public notoriety.
            For some of us, it's our face that creates a commentary. In a sense, as the Polish writer, Witold Gombrowicz, mused, that you cannot escape from the face you already have.
            A few years ago, I recall, as I walked into our corporate office one humid August day, the security guard offered a comment, "On holiday, are we?" I happened not to be wearing a tie. These days, wearing a tie to work is an option. So, you were somebody, and it was expected you behaved in agreed way. If you didn't, someone felt obliged to offer a corrective reminder.
            In mid-February, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, one of Maryland’s Republican politicians running for another term propped-up his election notoriety by allowing his office release information that appeared to support a legislation for a tax break for those who are sporting mustaches. If your political platform does not offer quality of public service, you opt for raising your profile in a PR fashion.
            Recognizable by his ever-present mustache, Bartlett – through his office - declared a denial: I didn’t do it. But his press secretary affirmed that the congressman is “Pro-Stache.” She looked at a legislation proposal sent by The American Mustache Institute, thought of it as a joke, yet for fun and without further endorsement from her boss she passed it up the congressional food chain.
            There must have been something to it, right? Far from a political endorsement, I tweeted that I am in support of a tax break for my mustache! My reasoning: tax breaks are good for at least 1% of the wealthy citizens!
            These days, there seems to be a common agreement that some politicians seem exempt from telling the truth, and prefer flip-flopping on their positions as their modus operandi. It is said that flip-flopping dates back to mid-1600s. A contemporary version of a flip-flop moment can now be measured in romneys, a designation offered by Jon Stewart of the Daily Show last week. According to him, a romney is a time-measure unit (3.5 hours) needed by a presidential aspirant Mitt Romney to change his view or position on a given topic.
            If politicians change their minds they seem to be exempt from being called liars. These days one can change a public stance on a moment's notice, based on one’s ability to have honesty or memory lapses. So, we – the public - forgive and forget. We accept the confusion as par for the course.
            Observing the presidential race of 2012 in the United States, we feel being fed with a reality of confusion and dis-functionality in which authenticity is at a premium. The candidates often serve us with their declared beliefs as being authentic and destined to receive democratic sanctioning.
            Traversing between my ancestral Polish pedigree and my current US reality, I note a common discomfort with the way political discourse in Poland is conducted. Many a citizen feels being pushed into making choices between two or more ugly realities. Whether here or there, we resolve to support the lesser option of what we would wish to have.
            My communication experience invites me to appreciate those who know how to make us believe in ... make-believe. Some of them are masters in making us “imagine as in play,” as by one definition.
            Take Janusz Palikot, a wunderkind of the Polish political milieu, a master of political PR. In a recent interview in Polityka weekly (Feb 29, 2012), he commented that no matter what he does, he lands with some kind of a face. "In a reality of politics, one cannot be authentic. One cannot be oneself to the fullest. I am at peace with it," he frankly stated.
            For Palikot, a leader of a movement that stunned the national scene with a huge parliamentary outcome for a movement named after his name, wearing a yellow jacket is just fine, and colors he uses have a theatrical dimension. So, he cuts his hair and puts on glasses, symbolically expressing a political change he noted in a political adversary, Jaroslaw Kaczynski after he lost his brother-president, Lech, in an air crush. 
            Mr. Kaczynski’s chameleon-like behavior issued a license to others to do likewise. Palikot said he "needed to disguise” himself in order to save his political chances and not become a sacrificial goat in someone else’s political play.
            We don’t have to imagine living among chameleons. We all play make-believe games with greater or smaller roles in them. Some of us excel in a Venetian carnival of masks. Wearing colorful, artsy masks, we hide behind a make-believe dance of pretense. Yet, when a failure comes along, it takes time to admit that it was so.
            Yet, we love the attention we get.
            My own romney-moment gets it’s hearing in a reality of my own, personal authenticity. It is far deeper than being seen in wearing Levis’ to a church service, or to opera, but in realizing that the cash I spend is play money.
            Jesus did not restrain himself in calling his hypocritical adversaries, who were the masters of moral make-believe of his time, by their own name: “You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside.” [Read: Matthew 23: 27 NIV].
            So, I pause. Will 3.5 hours be enough to recognize a need to change my mind about what I just wrote?
Pretense alive and kicking: Festival parade dancer wearing a Pinocchio-like mask in Cuzco, Peru.

2/27/2012

Measured generosity



Judging by how religion is covered in the media these days (is it any different from the past?), how it is “sold and bought” on the market, I ask: What is normal these days? What is normal about religion that requires stilts of public relations to make it look powerful, attractive, and – to top it off – even fashionable? Is it my language, laced with a tsunami of religious words, that describes me as a serious believer?
            Regrettably, too many of us don’t view religion as good news these days.
            Not long ago I had a blast from the past. A few years back, as I experimented with “border crossing,” or “corner cutting,” or “over-sizing” my own experience in professional communication, a random encounter with my boss took me out of my comfort zone in an instant. Now, I appreciate that bit of realignment that took place just outside my office.
            I remember stopping him to brag about a PR achievement. It was his understated but a rather plain and direct manner that delivered a moment of continuous education of Rajmund Dabrowski.
            “Aren’t we wonderful, Ray!” he stated. He then went on his way.
            A reminder of that experience came recently with two stories. The first was a report in a church magazine, the Adventist Review, featuring two survivors from Costa Concordia, the Italian cruise ship, which sunk off the coast of Giglio, Italy. A month later I read a slightly different news story, reported by the Northern Star news agency from Australia.
            In a report of the tragic sinking of the Italian cruise ship on January 13, that it is believed to have claimed 32 lives, we are introduced to two survivors from Peru, Milton Paredes Paredes and his daughter Diana Meled, who “credit the faith they gained from reading the Bible and The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White, with sustaining them during the ordeal.”[See: Adventist Review, February 16, 2012].
            To its credit, the report added that, “another Peruvian, ship employee Elika Fani Soriamolina, is credited with saving many lives, as she directed passengers to lifeboats and gave away her own life jacket. Media reports indicated that her body was found on January 28.”
            The way it was reported, and given a full page with two pictures, made me wonder if such a singular treatment of the tragedy for thousands of people – believers or nor - was a good way to talk about such a tragic event?
            I am cognizant of the faith's influence in helping us to live beyond the ugliness of life, and that many a happy ending should remain as such. One’s faith is an important factor to being sustained during the moments of uncertainty, fear and tragedy. One is never right to belittle personal experiences and their meaning. 
            In the face of tragedy, in my view, there are no winners or losers. Everyone is a participant in the drama, including the public, religious faith notwithstanding.
            The Australia’s regional Northern Star news service published a story last week that was at once bad and good news - http://bit.ly/wQqcq6]. 
            One expects the media to peddle in the negative, the bad, the tragic, and the ugly. Such was a strike of lightning. It resulted in a fire at the Seventh-day Adventist Church complex in Mullumbimby, New South Wales.
            Any “bolt from the heavens” that starts a fire would be considered as bad news, right?
            Now, the good news. The media captured the expression of it in the words of a pastor who concluded that what actually happened was a sign that God exists as though there was a fire, not all was destroyed by it.
            In the words of Pastor Cranville Tooley, captured and reported by a Northern Star’s writer, it was good news that came in the same package: “It’s a wonderful blessing from God because only minor damage occurred and it could have been much worse.”
            As expected, the article received attention of several readers with every comment questioning the pastor’s conclusions. My own views on the subject are similar and some were expressed rather eloquently.  
            Yet, a different issue is when dubious theology makes religious belief a matter of convenience and expediency, including giving a reason to create a public relations moment out of it.
            How reasonable is my own religious expression, I ask myself? Is this even a good public question to ask since religion, its acceptance, and expression, are one’s private business? But, its essence and worth matters when it is lived out, not just talked about.
            In the end, as I consider my own personal experience, I don’t view and experience my God as The Father of measured generosity. 

1/01/2012

Mr. Lapushin is not confused. He knows whom to follow.


What if nothing has changed? Photo by Rajmund Dabrowski

Just as we were about to engage in celebrations seeing the annus horribilis of 2011 departing from our sight and experience, a piece of news came from the islands of Samoa in the Pacific Ocean. The island nations, located between Hawaii and New Zealand, usually make the news as nations destined by their dateline designation to be first to light their fireworks.
The passage of 2011 into 2012 made some of the Samoan citizens celebrate calendar newness with trepidation. On December 29, the islands of Samoa and Tokelau repositioned the international dateline on - as was planned - reallocating the days of the week so that the seventh day of the week would fall on Sunday instead of Saturday as usual. For Seventh-day Adventists and for Jews it meant that Sunday was to become their religiously held Sabbath.
This in itself caused a dilemma for Seventh-day Adventist believers. All of a sudden ceasing to be distinct from other Christians? News reports indicated that not all believers on Samoan islands are in sync with each other. Whilst some congregations accepted Sunday as their new Sabbath, Seventh-day Adventists in American Samoa said: No. They would not tamper continuity of their day of worship.
As many - including believers from far, far distant lands -  began arguing who is right, what is wrong, which calendar option was more correct, and that it all bids not too well for the future of theological correctness, another item caught my attention. While many believers are eagerly awaiting what the official stance would be on the issue, a report in JTA, a Global News service for the Jewish People, see: http://bit.ly/v94w2f, sounded a concern regarding the jump “straight from Thursday to Saturday,” forfeiting the last Friday of 2011.
The report featured a resident Samoan Jew, Max Lapushin, concerned about a 49-hour Sabbath in Apia, the Samoan capital. “Lapushin, a 25-year-old American citizen, lives in Apia and has called the Pacific island nation home for nearly four years. A Jewish day school graduate from Atlanta, Lapushin first arrived in Samoa as a Peace Corps volunteer in October 2007 to teach computer classes. He was on the ground when the devastating 2009 earthquake and tsunami hit, killing more that 180 people. Lapushin recently returned to Samoa after a few months overseas to work as a computer consultant.”
The JTA report continued that, Lapushin only knows of two other Samoan Jews -- both Peace Corps volunteers -- who were on vacation the pre-New Year week.  But, “If he's correct, it would make him the only Jew present on the Samoan mainland when the island nation turned the clock forward.” 
With some indication – correctly or not – that Sunday-Sabbath could be an OK for some Seventh-day Adventist Samoans, Mr. Lapuskin reportedly said that, he “will follow their lead and light Shabbos candles on Saturday night.”
“When you talk about being Jewish," Lapushin explained, "people say, 'Oh, you're Seventh Day Adventist!'”
Whether or not Seventh-day Adventists will ever resolve their identity distinctiveness from their fellow Mormon or Jehovah Witness believers (see my previous blog text), they can safely rest their case when identity confusion connects them with their Jewish pedigree. Sabbath-candles notwithstanding, and theologically-speaking of course.

12/14/2011

Adventist present [media] truth—a vision to be realized



John Hunt is a recognized author and advertising guru.* His claim to fame is being a co-creator of a partner company with the TBWA advertising agency whose international success is driven by the mantra, “Life’s to short to be mediocre.” What he has to say seems at once poignant and challenging to many a Seventh-day Adventist church member, leader and communicator (in that order): “We don’t know what we don't know until we do what we don’t usually do.” (1)
            Mr. Hunt’s comment brings me to an unrealized vision from more than a decade ago, from which some of us are yet to wake up. The vision has to do with an intentional focus (one would hope and assume) on improving the public perception of our church.
            This was rekindled in my mind by the current Mormon public image perception campaign. The thoughts I wish to share are aimed at creating a teaser for a conversation. What may emerge will hopefully assist in self-assessment as to how to approach a need to be seen and experienced as a people who are worth getting to know. The result—the Good News about Jesus Christ will be better known.

Are we actually in the marketplace?

            Seventh-day Adventists may not be as rich as the Mormons, but we seem to be doing rather well in our splendid isolation, seeing some growth in mission, while resorting to moaning about our poor public perception.
            Don’t you cringe when someone mixes your religious affiliation with that of someone else?
            Adventists are nearly absent where others are present in engaging the public with their causes. To start with, by clinging largely on to a view and the urgency that this world will soon end, we are equally timid at considering “shouting from the rooftops.”
            As members of society, all of us have similar communication tools at our disposal. These methods are actually neither sacred nor secular. The content and what propels our communication is different. For Seventh-day Adventists, the apocalyptic in its varied expressions, we argue, is the coin to spend. Yet our communication efforts and the attractive and persuasive messaging required are relegated to the all too often “tried and true” methods that worked before, but are effective no longer. The world and its marketplace continue to move on and old ways of communication are left behind. But how ready is the church to jump into a required notoriety created by contemporary media?
            You and I are participants (or at least observers) in the era of new communication and its technological advancement. Religious words that once were carefully considered, and the name of God, which was held in reverence, now seem to be at best—ignored. The church, when it speaks, is hardly listened to. Religious verbiage is not understood and the fact that one uses many religious words does not mean one is held in awe. Religious media is craving to be relevant, yet, today’s audience says it simply—show me what you believe, but don’t overwhelm me with your talk.
            What is actually needed is to step forward, forsaking timidity and engage with content development with a clear identity and messaging focused on the future. The media is already there. In the marketplace. He who is not present, a proverb says, is not right.

Now, a Mormon story.

            The Mormons support their missionary efforts with ample investment in communication and branding. A recent Mormon communication approach was presented in a well-researched article in the New York Times.(2) The article explained the focus and intentionality of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints in launching a media campaign, which connects to the current U.S. Presidential race with two Republican candidates, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman who are also well-respected members of the LDS Church.
            Unlike with Adventists, for the LDS Church it’s not the second coming of Jesus that is at stake here. There may be varied outcomes they are aiming at, among them a need to be known as an OK religious group —“nothing to be afraid of”—but also to be recognized for “whom” they wish to be recognized as.
            I am in support of their campaign. Perhaps at last my church will not be mistaken for being a community of Latter-day Saints!
            Going back a few decades, I recall a meeting in the office of an ambassador whose windows were overlooking St. Peter’s Square. At some point in our conversation he pointed to a difference between the Catholics and the Adventists. He said “Catholics are largely steeped in the past, and with a predictable presence enhanced by the ‘communication Pope.’ But, I see you as a contemporary Christian community with a message the world is searching for. We are all dealing with issues of living safer, better, healthier lives, and we all need hope.”
            Then he added, “But, you are timid about it. Why?” 
            Such was his opinion about a people of hope, which we are claiming to be. His values, which Seventh-day Adventists hold as true and lasting. Among the lessons from that conversation was also that we might just have a problem with our own identity. Moreover, what we have we are largely keeping to ourselves.

Our identity is increasinly beyond Millerite.

            Designating Adventism as a homemade variety of Christianity in America, Paul K. Conkin, professor of history at Vanderbilt University recognizes a tension in knowing who we are. He writes rather favorably about the church’s growth and mission. Writing about our beliefs, he states that Seventh-day Adventists “seem very close to the Christians Paul addressed in Thessalonica in the early days of Christianity, and close to the apocalyptic expectations of Jesus and his disciples.” (3) But, in his well-researched thesis, American Originals, he describes struggles of the church’s founders to establish Seventh-day Adventism’s distinct identity. He writes, “One tension that has been most basic and enduring involves Seventh-day Adventist identity” (4).
            Far from being conclusive about one’s evaluations, this very issue seems quite enduring for Adventist communicators. Many a church functionary is more eager to connect our identity with what was before us—the Millerites. They do this at the cost of defining us today. In dealing with such questions as “Who are you?” many a communicator will roll out a list of comparisons or differences with other religious groups, thus giving a license to declare that in this or that we are special, unique or distinct. Somehow this distinctiveness has yet to release dividends in image clarity or more interest.
            It is hardly useful to generalize. There are many examples of individuals and communities making a difference, creating change, and responding well to the mission objectives of Adventism. In the area of name recognition and public relations, there are parts of our globe where Seventh-day Adventists go about improving the church’s public perception and they seem to know how it works.
In Australia, we know how to enter the PR game and we begin by engaging with communication experts, as well as by identifying our audience for specific communication. It can be explained that if communication is taken seriously, image building will become an asset to all else we do, like in Poland in the 1980s, when the public-interest issues of social pathologies were taken on board and executed with a communication intentionality required to make these approaches viable and outcome-rich. 
            Just a few years ago in Romania, the church took a topic of a rather poor Bible awareness in this Christian country and used the traffic-heavy streets to invite citizens to discover what the Holy Bible is. Ads were everywhere.
            A somewhat different story comes from Jamaica. There, the church is challenged by the national media to be on top of the game (read: PR game) of being prominent. A known newspaper publisher-editor stated that Seventh-day Adventists graduated from a minority to the largest faith group on the island. “What are you going to do about it?” he asked. “You are now in the driver’s seat and we will be looking toward you to be a leading moral voice,” he added.
            Apart from stressing the apocalyptic themes throughout our history, Conkin noted: “It is worth noting that no other American-based denomination has ever attempted to transform itself so fully into a worldwide fellowship. No other American-based denomination has turned so fully to modern communication technology, including the use of the Internet.” (5)

One thing is to recognize our own importance ourselves, another, when others offer their appraisal of how they see us.

            On the eve of a 100th anniversary of Seventh-day Adventist corporate communication, it may be well, in my view, to recall Ellen G. White’s forceful communication counsel. She seemed to opt for newness in the way the church goes about its communication efforts. She commented that, the character and importance of our work are judged by the efforts made to bring it before the public.  When these efforts are so limited, the impression is given that the message we present is not worthy of notice.” (6)
            This founding leader of the church stressed the relevance and importance of how we should care about what we say, how we say it, and how we listen to the world. “We should remember that the world will judge us by what we appear to be.” (7)
            Our brand may be clear, however, our communication is timid, resulting in part from our lack of clarity over our identity. Our message lacks public relevance due to a preoccupation with communication that primarily focuses on discussing the past, and messaging geared mostly at addressing ourselves rather the general public.
Ellen White also wrote:
            Truth will be made so prominent that he who runs may read. Means will be devised to reach hearts.  Some of the methods used in this work will be different from the methods used in the work in the past; but let no one, because of this, block the way by criticism (8).
            In one of his books, Paul Arden of the Saatchi & Saatchi fame, wrote: “Your vision of where or who you want to be is the greatest asset you have.” (9) To translate his comment into Adventist mission, we could simply say—Adventism is the opportunity we already have.
            In Arden’s parlance, “When it can’t be done, do it. If you don’t do it, it doesn’t exist.” Today’s generation knows it. This generation is not bashful to articulate it. Just join or check what is on display in Facebook, Twitter or YouTube, those relational social communities. Those who “live” there also seem to be saying: If your present is expressed in the past, it will not be found in your future. 
            Whether a new communication strategy for the Adventist world church will replace the current one (11), there will continue to be a need to try out new creative approaches to improving church awareness in society, globally and locally. The vision statement the world church agreed on in 1995 seems to continue to offer a useful point of reference for any branding efforts or for relevant communication programs of our church: Seventh-day Adventists will communicate hope by focusing on the quality of life that is complete in Jesus Christ.

Our brand—hope.

            Principles of the Adventist faith notwithstanding, is there a present in Adventist identity? Or, is it locked in a formula, which perhaps was never intended to last forever? 
            In the words of Peter Gabriel - "As always, the rest is up to you."

*This essay was also published on the Spectrum Magazine blog. See: http://bit.ly/uX8rSd 

(1) John Hunt, The Art of the Idea, and How it Can Change Your Life, 2009; p. 115. 
(2)  Mormon’s Ad Campaign May PlayOut on the ’12 Campaign Trail” by Laurie Goodstein, November 17, 2011. 
(3)  Paul K. Conkin, American Originals, Homemade Varieties of Christianity, 1997; p. 145. 
(4) Ibid, p. 138. 
(5) Ibid, p. 144. 
(6) Evangelism, p. 128. 
(7) Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 397. 
(8) Evangelism, pp. 129, 130. 
(9) Paul Arden, It’s Not How Good You Are, It’s How Good You Want to Be, 2003; p. 4 
(10)  Ibid, p. 46 
(11) “Seventh-day Adventist World Communication Strategy—Report” was adopted at 1995 General Conference Session, Utrecht, Netherlands. Implementation of what was to be known as the Hope Strategy, it identified tasks for the church on all levels and through institutions.

11/03/2011

A leader should take you forward

Jan Paulsen, author of Where Are We Going?

There is an anecdote Jan Paulsen, author of a newly published book, Where Are We Going?*, sometimes shares about Odd Jordal, a fellow Norwegian, church leader, and a missionary from decades ago. In a conversation about a challenge with preparation of so many new sermons, week after week, Pastor Jordal quipped, that after one preached the sermon for the third time to the same congregation, that the full benefit would be obtained.
            Odd Jordal’s comment came to mind as I read, underlined, and paused to re-read many a statement in Where Are We Going?
            Jan Paulsen, until last year the world leader of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, has written a 127-page volume of reflections and lessons from his lifetime of leadership of service.
            With book reviews still in the works, mine is a set of thoughts that resonate with me on my own, personal level. Having watched, read and heard Jan Paulsen over many years, I was wondering if the book would include some of his earlier memorable statements and concepts - some of which would have perhaps matured as time went by - that would be worth revisiting. I wasn’t disappointed.
            In short, the book is a timely and concise reminder of things on record, expanded, and continuously relevant.
            A blunt assertion could be made that in a faith community such as Seventh-day Adventists, softer, well-rehearsed topics are preferred, and as such are comfortably repeated again and again. There is safety and comfort in a quiet sameness. So, it is resolved to better not to touch uncomfortable issues. An image is created of a forbidden truth to be kept at bay and best untouched.
            However, Where Are We Going? is laced with themes that should never leave the leadership menu of Adventism. For many a reader, the book will be a welcome thought-stimuli. A book such as his gets attention even simply because it is authored by a world ecclesiastical leader. When leaders speak, we usually respond with some interest.
            Immediately after his election as the world church leader, Paulsen identified three main audiences for his particular attention – the youth and women (“two majorities often treated like minorities”), as well as church leadership. In his book, Paulsen spells out his concerns as to how the church nurtures these individuals and groups, how it responds to their particular needs and interests, and what course needs to be pursued. You will not find a “them” and “us” language in Where Are We Going? whether the author is dealing with the church members in their internal church setting, when in conversation with young people, or with adherents to other religions.
            In the realm of social media, Paulsen’s volume is a book of quotes suitably destined to populate the Facebook pages. Here is a sample: “Adventist ministers and leaders don’t have mysterious powers to assign people to heaven or hell” (p. 31). Again about leaders: “Outstanding Adventist leaders realize that they are not always right,” (p. 35).
            Another, “True communication takes place only in the absence of fear. Do our colleagues feel safe when they are talking to us?” (page 32). On the same page: “God will save people, not statements.”
            Speaking about “The Church and ‘Other People’,” the author writes: “Contamination is not a significant threat if we’re sure about who we are and who walks with us,” (p. 55).
            The book offers a metaphorical mirror into which we look and hopefully review the state each of us, and particularly church leaders. What do you see?
            Paulsen uses plain language when he speaks about a frequently recurring attitude of “I know it all.” Many a leader has fallen on such a self-sharpened sword. He writes, “I’d hate to spend my time surrounded only by people who think they have everything worked out just right. They become arrogant, clinical, and judgmental of those who still have a lot of growing to do.” (p. 107).
            Throughout the book, there are many what I would call as “Paulsenesque” phrases, with many a sentence understated - a manner of speaking one recognizes as his trademark. As one ponders on a context to each of those statements one glides into a deeper meaning.
            Where Are We Going? is a book of questions. Countless questions. Simply start with the book’s title. It opens with a question, and is an invitation to a conversation.
            Asking questions is an effective method for a teacher, whose interest is to make his students think and think for themselves. Paulsen invites the reader to consider a language of openness, “communication without fear,” as he puts it. He calls for more listening when relating to each other, with a language of civility and acts of generosity. As “our words matter,” what’s needed is that we “really listen,” he writes.
            In a chapter entitled “Living in Tension,” Paulsen challenges with a comment, “We tend not to like those who ask difficult questions. … Questions lead to a dialogue, which in turn contributes to the bonding between God’s people. And questions keep us alert.” And he continues, that “As an Adventist leader, don’t be afraid of questions. Instead, fear silence, for apathy is far more hazardous to the body of Christ than is critical thinking” (p. 110).
            It’s quite expected that many readers will appreciate what the book presents. Some may perhaps study it. Others will have mixed, even negative feeling about it. In any case, such is a destiny for all endeavors when thoughts are put into words, and are made public. Paulsen will smile and simply quip, that if there was no criticism, the author has failed.
            Indeed, in an ecclesiastical world of sameness and predictable, lofty declarations, some readers will find the author’s invitation to a healthy, civilized discourse about the church’s future as threatening. As I see it, the author is unapologetic when pointing at the values stated, and re-stated by Scripture, and the reality that “we have not arrived yet.”
            Considering the unfinished journey of a Christian pilgrim, one knows exactly what Paulsen means when he reminds himself, that “it’s impossible to walk backwards into the future with eyes fixed on how things used to be,” (p. 34). The book makes numerous assertions that for a Christian church, there is only a future to be considered. As one expected, page after page, Paulsen re-states a firm belief that the church’s mission is yet to be accomplished.
            Neither is God finished with me, he comments.
            Though offering plenty to chew on, the Where Are We Going? leaves one with wanting more.
            Until we hear again from Jan Paulsen, there is already plenty to reflect, reclaim, and … change. 
*Jan Paulsen, Where Are We Going?, Pacific Press Publishing Association, 2011.

Building the future through listening: Jan Paulsen in conversation with young people in New York City during one of 25 televised live, unscripted and unedited Let's Talk events.