Are You Facing a Problem or a Mystery?
I’ve been struck recently – recently as in the last 10 years or so! – by how frequently I hear people (and especially people in the church) name the challenges in front of us “problems.”
We have a problem in church attendance.
Biblical illiteracy is the problem.
The problem is that people have a poor understanding of stewardship.
Etc.
I understand this urge. Faced with a challenge – and even more a challenge that has at its heart a threat – we tend to turn to our problem solving skills. That makes sense: we are, I believe, by evolutionary disposition and experience very capable problem-solvers. (Evolution definitely favors the species that can identify, solve, and overcome threatening problems!)
But sometimes the challenge in front of us is not a problem, but a mystery.
Let me explain. A problem, according to this point of view, is a challenge or need that has a recognized context, set limits and variables, and presents itself for solution. Typically, the key task in solving problems is amassing more information and, based on careful analysis of that information, making changes at the level of technique or practice.
But sometimes the context has changed and so the limits and variables involved are unknown. In short, sometimes the rules of the very game we are playing change, and in this situation more information not only doesn’t help us but sometimes actually confuses us by inducing us to operate by the rules of the old game and context rather than take seriously the foreign terrain in which we find ourselves. These types of challenges are better termed mysteries.
What’s challenging about all of this is that mysteries – at least of the non-who-dunnit-type – can’t be solved. Rather, mysteries can only be embraced. They don’t require more information, but rather a curious and open heart, a willingness to suspend past assumptions and judgments in order to be surprised by what manifests itself in this new context and world. Which is just what makes mysteries so vexing – to the degree that we are wed to past practices that succeeded in a different context, a mystery makes us feel either frustrated or incompetent, and all too often a bit of both.
So is church attendance a problem? Or are changing attitudes about church participation and the spiritual life more generally a mystery?
Is biblical illiteracy the problem? Or is living in a world with multiple meaning-making stories a mystery that we haven’t faced before (at least not for about 1500 years!)?
Is the problem that we don’t understand stewardship? Or is the fact that more and more of us want to give money not because we feel like we ought to, but because the organization we’re supporting makes a tangible difference a mystery worthy of our attention?
Depending on how you answer those questions, your response will vary greatly. If you see these things as problems, likely you will think hard about the techniques and practices successfully embraced by the last generation and apply them harder and hopefully better. If you believe, instead, that the context has changed and we are confronted by a mystery, you will want to talk with people, ask lots of questions, see if you can figure out what values and stories are motivating and moving people, and in general try to describe, understand, and embrace this brave new world as fully as possible.
Which is another thing that makes mysteries challenging. The first step can feel like you’re not doing that much. Asking questions and trying to understand a context doesn’t fit the normal list of things “to do” that can be checked off.
But here’s the thing: if the context really has changed, then the practices honed and refined and employed with such success in the previous context won’t work, and while you’re busy checking off your list of things to do, you’re likely also burning yourself out as none of your hard work seems to change your essential situation.
Mysteries, therefore, require not only a curious and open heart, but also a modicum of courage and faith, trusting that if we embrace this context and world – a context and world still beloved and embraced by God – then appropriate ways of being and acting (including lots of things to do :)) will eventually suggest themselves.
So the next time you have a problem, ask yourself: Is this a problem to be solved, or a mystery to be engaged and embraced? The way you answer that question – heck, even asking it in the first place – might just make all the difference.
I really like the way you framed this! Very helpful
David, your remarks are spot on. Your work and that of colleagues seems like it’s leading us into embracing mystery with a sense of genuine hopefulness. Maybe a broader community is emerging via judicious use of technology? As one who is not adept with “gadgets” I am glad to see people connecting in meaningful ways as you are doing here and with the Website Working Preacher.
I sent a link to this article to a couple of friends and immediately received a reply that it came at just the right moment. Thank you for him. Than you for me. Thank you for all your readers.
Yes! Some years ago, when people in Zimbabwe experienced very difficult political and economical circumstances, I asked a Christian from Zimbabwe: How do you manage to keep going with all the problems you are facing? She replied: actually we do not have so many problems. But we do have many faith-challenges.
You are right that naming a challenge a problem is a modernistic way of thinking. And I hear in your naming it a mystery a choice for a biblical frame of mind. There are many more questions to be asked from this frame of mind, for example: where is God in this situation and what is He already doing?
But then again, I default so easily to seeing only the problems I have to solve.
David, your distinction between a problem to be solved and a mystery to be engaged reminds me of Ronald Heifetz’ helpful distinction between a “technical problem” in any organization for which we can find solutions, and “adaptive challenges” that can only be managed, not solved. Or, more correctly, in which we can only manage ourselves and our reactions.Your calling them a “mystery” is also helpful.
I think that’s exactly what Heifetz is talking about and thought about adding that distinction, but ended up keeping it shorter for the sake of the post. 🙂 I think it’s a critical distinction that helps us think about changing what we do (technical) to changing how we even think about what we do (adaptive). And there’s no question we’re at a time where recognizing the difference is key. Thanks for writing!