Tag: culture

Resilience in a Congregation – 5 signs

Resilience testers for a congregation

Sooner or later all congregations experience challenges. These challenges are often caused by different factors. Whatever the cause they can test our confidence that we can deal with them wisely. Our resilience can be tested!!

Perhaps your congregation has experienced one of these difficult situations:

  • Shifting realities force a decision between 2 choices such as moving forward in a new direction for ministry or returning to the ways of the past.
  • Dealing with differing views between 2 or more strong-willed individuals that often results in an escalating conflict.
  • Having a storm or freak act of nature destroy your church building and then having to work through grief in order to rebuild.
  • Losing a beloved Pastor who has led your congregation for many years, perhaps through death or moving to a new placement.
  • Realizing that your congregation is losing members and becoming smaller each year but you don’t know what to do about it.

How these situations are handled can test the resiliency of a congregation. They are an indicator of their ability to bounce back stronger.

What is Resilience?

Resilience is the ability of an organization to overcome challenges (hard choices, trauma, tragedy, crises, or simply life’s problems), and come through them stronger, wiser, and even more powerful. The ability to bounce back and make repairs after being stretched, compressed or almost destroyed is the hallmark of a resilient group.

Indicators of Resilience

Here are 5 signs that your group is resilient. Each of these signs describes the very heart and soul of your organization. These characteristics can be developed intentionally. However, they cannot be ignored if you are serious about the wellbeing of your congregation or group.

 1.  A Clear, Compelling Vision

When a congregation knows where it is headed and what is important to their very life and mission, there is energy and purpose. A clear vision draws people together. It points to the future that God intends for them. It fosters a commitment to meet God in the days to come in fresh, renewing methods that brings life.

In my work with congregations, I am often amazed at how many do not understand what pulls them together into the next stage of their ministry. Often, these congregations rely on things that they have done in the past. It is as though the world around them has not changed.

Sadly, there are congregations out there that act as if they wake up tomorrow and it’s 1950 – they are ready to reach that world! Sounds silly, right? Yet these congregations are putting a sincere effort into reaching a world that is no longer there. Why? Because the world is changing.

A good vision is based firmly in the reality of where you are located. Your context. When was the last time you looked at the demographics of your community to understand who lives near you? Do you honestly know what the needs of those groups are? Do you offer ministries that meet those needs? Are you proactive in offering new ways to disciple children, youth and adults or stuck in the methods that have worked in the past?

I once attended a church that wanted to offer a Vacation Bible School (VBS) in the summer for children in their community. (They had not offered this program in 15 years!) I watched them plan an event from 9 a.m. to noon that would last a week. Fliers were put out in the community gathering spots to advertise the theme and times. An excellent curriculum was chosen, teachers were trained, and finally, they were ready.  Imagine how disappointed they were on the first day when only 7 children attended (and, they were grandchildren of the staff!)

What happened?

Would you believe the parents in that community worked during the day? So, they had enrolled their young children in daycare near where they were employed. In many households, both adults worked. A month after the VBS, we held a listening circle with some of these parents. There we learned that they would have attended an evening program or one held on a Saturday. Energy and resources were squandered just because they did not know who they were trying to reach! Resilience is being able to come back from that first disappointment!

2.  A Curious Sense of Humor

It’s true: a group that can laugh together has the attitude to weather all sorts of storms. Yes, life happens. People make mistakes. Yet, the power to be curious and look honestly at oneself offers a buoyancy that can help you rise above life’s challenges.

I have witnessed groups over the years get so tied up in a situation that they can not see God active in the midst of the situation. This robs them of the joy to weather life’s storms.

Having a sense of humour is not the same as laughing at everything or one another. The humour I look for in a group is the joy that explains their outlook: we’re on an adventure together seeking to follow God faithfully! There will be dips and bumps on the road but we will get through them together because we trust God.

3.  A Learning Heart

Yes, there are Pastors and Church staff out there that are well trained.  However, most of their education stopped with their ordination or initial employment.

Resilient leaders are curious to discover what works today to reach people for Christ. Therefore, they attend training, read books, or advance their continuing education with a mentor or coach. Specifically, they are able to empathize with visitors and newcomers. They can place themselves in their shoes to experience what the church feels like for others.

They assess ministry. Evaluate. Improve.

I know a Pastor who is retiring early because she no longer understands how to reach the people in her community. She truly thought that she learned everything she would ever need to know for her career at Seminary. Sadly, she stopped being curious about new methods to successfully make disciples.  For her, considering new options disrespected the past.

I get it: you may be thinking that there are tried and true ways of doing things and you simply don’t mess with these methods. Right? Wrong! We must remember that in changing environments like today, the leaders who excel are those who consider options wisely without feeling that they are disrespecting the past if they adjust.

In church seminars, I often talk about the things that endure in ministry:  our mission, values, and guiding principles/theology. These things never change – they are our backbone. Then I explain that there are also things that can change so the organization can endure with effectiveness: vision, goals and methods. These are our muscles to stretch and grow. Resilience comes from understanding what to hold on to and what to let go.

Congregations that have a curious heart for learning know how to honestly assess how well they are doing with their plans and make the necessary adjustments to stay on track. They spend time in meetings asking the vital question: did we accomplish our goals? What are we learning?

4.  A Forgiving Nature

Having the humility to acknowledge that we are only human and make mistakes is essential for resilient organizations. These groups understand that they are loved by God while acknowledging there is room for improvement.

In pastoral workshops, I often give participants a clean QTIP and tell them to “quit taking it personally” (QTIP). There are leaders who take criticism personally and beat themselves up over things that must be put in perspective. While I take ministry seriously, I stopped taking it personally a long time ago because I realized that I was not the Messiah. Further, that risen saviour reconciles me with God (warts and all).

I grow concerned when I work with a congregation that is really being rough on their leaders. Harsh words, disrespectful behaviour, and alienation reign in churches that do not show resilience. They actually foster competition for resources and demean innovation. Sound familiar?

The first step in turning this situation around is being authentic and saying: “I’m sorry” when you make a mistake. Doing this and asking for forgiveness is essential. Leaders that can do this with integrity also go one step further: they love people for who they are and not for what they can do for you. They are able to be compassionate and caring no matter what.

Do you have a forgiving nature?

5.  Living into God’s Blessings

This characteristic is simply the icing on the resilient cake. Whenever I find myself in difficult situations I count my blessings. Hopefully, this doesn’t sound corny to you. I sincerely get a piece of paper and write down all the good things that I see in the midst of crisis or challenge.

Resilient congregations frequently do an audit of their blessings in the midst of difficult situations. Therefore they list the many blessings that God has given them. It is an amazing act of faith in the midst of life’s challenges.

God embeds within each of us spiritual gifts and the fruit of the spirit that carries us through whatever we face. So, when I realize that I am blessed by God I’m able to face any situation. This carries me through difficulties with grace. I find that I often make my best choices and am even able to celebrate God’s goodness with dignity.

So it is with congregations showing resilience. They are able to take stock of the many assets that will get them beyond stressful times toward a new, brighter future.

This means that instead of trying to compete with a church down the street and copy their ministry, they discern a way to be faithful based on what they have to offer. However, resilient congregations are like treasure chests filled with God’s grace. Treasure is intended not to hoard unto themselves but to give away to a hurting world.

Be a blessing to others by generously giving of yourself to connect people to God in fresh ways (yes, even if it means to change!)

Conclusion

So, how resilient are you? After reading about the 5 factors that lead to a resilient organization, which characteristics do you practice well?  Where is there room for improvement?

At makingchurchdecisions.com we are available to coach leaders toward increasing their resilience factor.  Drop us an email and we can discuss coaching options that are affordable and accessible.

Values Trump Facts – Is Consensus-Building Possible?!?

Is there hope for consensus-building when the facts don’t overcome existing values / biases? According to some the answer is “NO!!!” I’m not so sure. Here’s why.

Why don’t facts seem to matter any more?

On May 8th, 2019 David Barker and Morgan  Marietta wrote a piece in Niemanlab. In the article they explored  the impact of the Mueller Report on US public opinion about the President of the USA. Mueller’s investigation into the Trump election campaign and the Russians found no collusion but  areas where there may have been an obstruction of justice by the President.
These two eminent political scientists concluded that the Mueller Report did not move the needle for the vast majority of people in the USA with respect to their attitude to the President. If people already thought that the President was engaged in illegal activities they were confirmed in that view. If they thought the President was innocent then Mueller confirmed it for them.

Values count more than the data

Why does this happen? According to Barker and Marietta it comes down to this. “We found that voters see the world in ways that reinforce their values and identities. If they start with a particular set of values then everything they receive by way of information is interpreted as support of those values. In such a context “fact checking” or hearing “the other side’s point of view” has no impact on changing the mind of people.”
An interesting illustration of this phenomenon is the attitude of Americans about whether there is racism in the USA. Quoting from the article: “… according to our data from five years of national surveys from 2013 to 2017, the most important predictor of whether a person views racism as highly prevalent and influential is not her partisan identification. It is not her general ideological outlook. It is not the amount or type of media that she consumes. It isn’t even her own race. It is the degree to which she prioritizes compassion as a public virtue, relative to other things like rugged individualism.”

What does this mean for consensus-building?

The pessimistic view of the authors is that “Perhaps the most disappointing finding from our studies … is that there are no known fixes to this problem.” Well that’s all a bit disheartening!!! I disagree with them.

The first things that it means for a consensus-building approach are not to try and ram “the facts” down a person’s throat; and secondly do not be disparaging of others as bigots and closed minded.

Findings like those is this article are greatly encouraging to the people who understand consensus based discernment or decision-making. Why? Because it affirms how important it is to get behind the presenting words and feelings. It compels us to look past the first things that people say, and instead attempt to understand what is important to them. Consensus-building processes know that people act out of their values – fears, hopes, identity, world view. These processes want to hear about these things from people. Consensus-building processes take values and identity seriously and respect them.

Where values differ these need to be explored. However, it is a much richer and respectful conversation if we invite others to tell us what is important to them. This is a much healthier and more constructive approach than seeking to persuade them about “the facts”.

The great failure of the parliamentary style of debate and decision-making is that it gets into this world of duelling facts. Then when the debate is over and the vote is taken there is a decision. But in the world we live in today the divisions remain because the values have not changed.

What can be done?

Here are some attitudes and strategies that can be used in a consensus-building context to help avoid the stalemate that comes when facts reinforce values.

  • Get the agreed facts out on the table (even the ones that you don’t like!)
  • Ask people what they conclude from / make of this information.
  • Take a step back and find a way to talk about our values or the things that shape what is important for us. In the church this can include significant faith stories.
  • Speak about our understanding of God and God’s hope for the world.
  • Seek out common values and affirm the common ground. Note that people have many values and some will have precedence at different times. Some we may disagree with, yet many we will share.
  • Explore, with respect and humility, how the options / actions that we are discussing support our shared values.

Optimism can be found for the Christian community in that when we go deep enough we do have a common narrative /vision / hope. Many societies can find this common ground too – if they are prepared to work to find it.

However the great advantage that Christians have is that they have at their foundation the community that God has created through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This common ground is not their choice it is the will of God and our responsibility is to live into that reality. As the Apostle Paul noted there is one faith, one Lord one baptism – one God and Father of us all (Ephesians 4: 5,6).

Conclusion

Of course we have to deal with reality. There are not really ‘alternative facts”.

However we need to understand that it is our values that give meaning to the things that we see. If we are going to get past “duelling facts” and name calling them we have to explore values.  Consensus building processes understand this. They foster this deeper and respectful engagement, and provide the tools for discovering shared hopes and then actions.

Politics and Consensus

politicsPolitics and Consensus

Politics is full of conflict. Observers call out for greater collaboration rather than political point scoring. People understand that as a society we have too many shared problems to enjoy the luxury of opposing the ideas of others for no good reason. Most people long for our leaders to constructively engage together in a search for shared solutions.

I am often asked if consensus decision-making processes can work in a political environment. Well, it depends!! The first observation that I make is that consensus can only be built if there are shared values. That usually get a knowing laugh and the assumption that consensus processes cannot work in politics.

In Australia, it is very difficult to see shared values between our political parties. Maybe it is because we are in a national election campaign that makes the aggressive rejection of each other’s ideas more strident. The “necessity” to create a product differentiation between the policies of the different parties in order to attract votes at elections brings out the worst in our politicians.

If we understand the political process as the pursuit of power then clearly there can be no shared values. In that context, there has to be a winner and a loser. So is consensus building doomed to be relegated to the fringes of society? Or is there a chance that it could take over the central power centres of our society?

Options for Politicians and Consensus

In the United States until the last 15 to 20 years there was often the capacity for bipartisan solutions to issues. The phrase ‘working across the aisle’ was the real experience of US political life. This is in stark contrast to the Westminster system of government that arose in England and is used throughout its former colonies. In that system parties always vote as a bloc and if a member of a party votes with the other side they can be thrown out of their party.

So in the US, and probably other countries too, there have been experiences of parties working together to achieve shared goals. In countries where this is the experience then there is a history and practices to draw upon which support seeking after consensus.

Even though the Westminster system has built into it the requirement to be oppositional to the other side, not everything is so black and white. There are many things on which all the major political parties in Australia agree. Foreign policy is not a seriously disputed space, opposition to the death penalty is unquestioned, none of the major parties opposes access to free health care and to cheap prescription drugs, and the list could go on. So another ground that might encourage consensus seeking is to recognise those areas where there had once been a difference and now there is general agreement. What lessons can be learned from the past that can encourage us into the future?

In addition to these things, there is also a place for pragmatism as a driver for seeking consensus. Sometimes opponents can agree to work of a common project because it matters to them for different reasons. In the United States, an area where there is an increasing willingness to co-operate across the political divide is in reducing the size of the prison population. For one side the cost of incarcerating millions of people is a burden on the budget. For the other side, they don’t want to see people going to jail for extended periods of time for minor offences. So the shared interest is reducing the size of the prison population. By working together on this project it is possible for people to understand the perspective and concerns of the other side. From this understanding arise strategies that will meet their needs and so help to keep the prison population lower over time.

So, three things that can help

  • Remember when co-operation has been possible in the past and learn from this. What made it possible? Perhaps there was a crisis (eg war or natural disaster) that meant other things became less important, or there were genuine goodwill and relationships that enhanced co-operation. Learn from positive experiences.
  • Recall where over time, issues that were once contested are now agreed. How have these positions been appropriated into the values system of the “different sides”? What made it possible to move? Why are they not contested now and can we find other issues where collaboration makes more sense than contesting?
  • Identify the big issues on which collaboration will be required for both sides to get what they want. What are the things that have to get done or both sides will continue to lose what is important to them?

Lessons for Churches

As you have been reading this post have you been thinking “what has this got to do with the church?” I think that in many places we are in the same situation as the political climate of our times. Many churches are split along ideological lines and in many places co-operation with those who think differently has stopped.

Can consensus work in churches where there is a lack of shared values? No! However, I do not believe that such churches exist. There are always some shared values. There are always some things on which even the most divided Christians can agree. There will always be something to work on together for the benefit of all sides. But we have to be prepared to look for it.

For conflicted churches or denominations I have the same advice as I offered above.

  • Remember when co-operation has been possible in the past and learn from this. What made it possible?
  • Recall where over time, issues that were once contested are now agreed. How have these positions been appropriated into the values system of the “different sides”? What made it possible to move?
  • Identify the big issues on which collaboration will be required for both sides to get what they want. What are the things that have to get done or both sides will continue to lose what is important to them?

The reason that ideologically and high conflict churches cannot use consensus-building processes is because they just don’t want to co-operate. For reasons of power and control, fear, or disrespect of their brothers and sisters in Christ too many Christians will not work together.

Yes, sometimes they cannot work together because of previously unresolved hurt that has been done to them. But good consensus processes include building safe places and dealing with those experiences.

Co-operation is not optional for Christians

Christ has called all Christians into one body. We have to learn to deal with it! We are one as Jesus and the Father are one. To refuse to live out of that reality is to refuse to live out of the identity that we have been given in Jesus Christ. Not good!!

There is insufficient space here to outline the many and effective strategies for seeking consensus in conflicted churches. Feel free to browse the blog posts for where some aspects of this have been addressed in the past. For example: Uniting the Church – Is it Possible?

However, for the present, I just want to challenge you to look for the ways that consensus building can be encouraged. Please do this in even the hardest places for the sake of the witness of the church. In these times more than any other it is an evangelical imperative to seek common ground among Christians. For as Jesus observed, it is through our unity that the mission of the church will be advanced (John 17:21).

Culture and Consensus

Culture – help or a hindrance?

Can culture make it impossible for consensus building discernment to work? Yes, sadly it is the case that some cultures cannot use consensus. Obvious examples of a culture that prevents collaboration, respect for all voices and a willingness to change include:

  • rigid hierarchies with one or two leaders at the top
  • conservative cultures where preservation of the status quo is the highest priority
  • groups where relationships are defined by power or status and this reduces capacity for all to be involved

When the right to participate in decision-making is determined by status/rights or power then it cannot include all the voices. Where a community do not respect all its members then leaders will not listen and learn from others. If a group goal is to preserve what already exists then there is really nothing to talk about at all.

Gillette and lessons about culture

On January 13th this year Gillette released an advertisement with the tag line “We believe: the best that men can be.”  At the time of writing it has received over 30 million views.

The goal of the advertisement was to draw attention to the behaviours of some men.  In particular, the advertisement drew attention to sexism, tolerance of violence as a way of resolving problems, sexual harassment, and bullying. This type of behaviour was criticised because it is not being the best that a man can be.

At face value, it seems like a no brainer to name and shame these types of behaviour! In the advertisement, there were examples of men who did not accept these things as normative for men and did something to prevent it. Who could object to encouraging men to respect women, to reject violence and to stand up for people who are being picked on?

Apparently millions of people can object!! To date, 1.4 million people who have viewed the YouTube post have given it the thumbs down. 422,986 comments have been made on the post and most were hypercritical and threatened to never buy their products again. Cable channels in the US went off the charts in criticising the advertisement. So what does that say?

No doubt some will say that not every person who criticised the advertisement supports the behaviour that is denounced in it. The argument goes that some men just object to being tarred with the same brush as all those bad guys – just because they are a man. Somehow they fear that – as men – they are guilty by association. Why should they be judged as being a bad person just because some men do bad things?

What I find interesting about this line of reasoning, and it is present in the comments and media, is that these men don’t identify with the good guys in the clip. How come they don’t puff up with pride at seeing their constructive and healthy behaviour being affirmed before more than 30 million viewers? Hmm? Maybe because they have more in common with the attitudes of the “villains” in the plot than the heroes.

The hugely negative reaction to the Gillette advertisement tells us that there is a deep and wide culture of toxic masculinity in the USA.

Toxic masculinity and consensus discernment

The culture of toxic masculinity is a threat to the operation of consensus-based discernment. The markers of this kind of masculinity include demeaning and commodifying women, using violence to achieve one’s goals, and intimidating those who are different. What happens if the men in your church or group buy into that culture? How can you run a process that hears and respects every voice, welcomes difference and embraces those who have different opinions as gifts from God?

Using the phrase “toxic masculinity” is meant to show that these behaviours are not inherent to being a man. One can be masculine and respect women, refuse to use violence and accept and appreciate those who are different. However, the culture in many western societies has not defined being a man as living in this way. Sadly to be a man in western culture has traditionally been seen as to be strong, not to give in, take what is yours and protect your group, with a good dose of patriarchy and misogyny as the overlay.

Culture can help or hinder the use of consensus-based discernment processes. Sadly, there are many men in the USA and elsewhere who have taken in the dominant culture of toxic masculinity.

Churches and unhealthy male culture

Don’t you believe me? Do you think that churches are only filled with men who have sidestepped the values of toxic masculinity? If you think so then I suggest that you start by talking to women and minorities in your church. Ask them if they have ever experienced sexism, harassment, belittling disrespect or felt pressured to accept what they did not believe by the men in power.

However, the evidence is there for all who have the eyes to see. In the majority of churches, women are denied a voice in the major decision-making processes. Our mind quickly turns to the Catholic, Orthodox and many Anglican communions. But what about those churches that claim to accept women in leadership? How many women leaders are there in reality? How many mega-churches or larger congregations of any theological type can you name where a woman is the lead pastor? If you can name a few I can be sure that as a percentage of leaders it will be very small.

I have been to many church meetings around the world. It has always been the men who shout at others, talk over the top of women, and act as though they have a right to be heard and have their way. Not all men – but plenty of them.

When I visited a very significant church meeting in the USA it was the only church meeting that I have ever attended where I had to put my bags through a metal detector. Violence takes many forms and not all of them are picked up by a metal detector!

How to respond to harmful cultures

First of all, recognise that it exists. Do not be naive and think that you can easily run an effective discernment process when the culture is against you.

Where a culture works against a consensus discernment methodology recognise that it may be the dominant culture but it isn’t the only perspective. Who are the other voices speaking up for an alternative way of living? What are they saying? How can they be encouraged and how can you help the dominant culture to hear them?

Remind people that Christianity is a counter-cultural religion. We are not citizens of this earth but ambassadors for Christ. Teach people about Christian character and behaviour and how that critiques the dominant culture. Invite and challenge people to live out of a Christ centred culture and not the one into which they were born.

Don’t wait for everyone to agree before you start using consensus processes and values in your discernment!! Jesus came into a culture that had present in it the seeds of faithful obedience to the will of God. The majority of people were not on the right track. But Jesus didn’t wait until everyone had changed their mind before he began living in a counter-cultural way. He just got on with the job!

Recognising the challenges that we face as leaders is the key to implementing change. Do not underestimate the power of culture. But also, do not let it paralyse your leadership and faithfulness.

Culture and Consensus – an African story

Culture can be a significant factor in whether or not consensus building can be effective. Some cultures support community developed and own decisions. Others favour individuals and the exercise of power by a minority over the majority. In this post we have an honest interview with Rev Dr Paul Mpongo from the Presbyterian Church in Congo.

TC:       Paul please tell us about your role in the church.

PM:      I am Deputy Legal Representative of the Presbyterian Church in Congo living in Kinshasa. I am also pastoring a small church congregation and teaching as Professor of Ethics and Theology in three universities.

TC:       What are some of the particular challenges that face the country and church in the Congo?

PM:      The Democratic Republic of the Congo has a long and continuing history of civil war. Pervasive poverty means that 80% of its primary and secondary school buildings are in a very needy state. Poverty also prevents schools from providing books, desks, teacher training, equipment like chalkboards and scholarships for girls and orphans. Congo, currently ranks near the bottom of the United Nations Human Development Index. This is a measure of life expectancy, education and income per capita. Life is very difficult for many people and the churches try their best to improve the lives of people through education and health services.

TC:      You responded by email to me after a post about having the courage to move away from power to relationships. How do you see power operating in the churches in Africa?

PM:      Conflict in the African church is coming from the need for power, the love of money and tribalism. Power is the way that people get money, the way that they control things to get what they want.

In Africa tribal loyalties and hierarchy is very strong so people who have high standing expect power as their right. It goes against the dominant culture in tribal societies to give up power.

TC:       What other factors in Africa encourage people to cling to power?

MP:      Everyone wants to be bishop and a small god.

In Africa it is complicated to do consensus because democracy is not strong . Democracy does not have deep roots in Africa. Also much of the teaching that has been received, including in the churches, has emphasised the idea of strong leadership.

TC:       In a culture where there are many injustices, and power is the way of the world and the church, it must be very hard to talk about building consensus.

MP:      Many people in Africa – whether educated or illiterate – take over majority strategy as the way to deal with injustices and tribalism. This is what they know from their life experience. This is normal in our society. If people have power they get what they want. If they do not have power they often suffer.

Consensus has a great problem to fit with this mind. It is not a familiar idea in our culture.

TC:       Is change possible in the African context?

PM:      It is hard in Africa to come up to this mind.

We need more understanding from the perspective of God’s love than human rights and cultures. In the church we know that God’s ways are not like human ways. We need to look in the Scriptures and the witness of the early church to find encouragement and models for how to live without the power relationships of our human culture.

Church policy of consensus needs love and binding to others as members in the body of Christ. If we see each other as one body, serving the one cause of Jesus Christ we might change. Love and concern for all is the key.

TC:       Is it possible in Africa that people will give up power in favour of relationships?

PM:      The power of Jesus’ Spirit is strong and powerful to overcome our human limits.

We need courage to love each other and to accept each other. God calls us to love each other. We need to give this the highest priority. Exercising power over people must not be the first thing in our relationships in the church.

TC:       It sounds like it is very hard in the African church to deal with power.

PM:      Yes it is. But we must have the courage to be of a strong faith – which cannot go back and never fail because of hardship.

The courage required can also mean that the leader must have the will to leave the leadership post – even if people do not like you to quit.

TC:       Paul, do you have hope that relationships can take priority over the exercise of power in the churches in Africa?

MP:      I believe with the heart of love and humility, everything will be fine
in our churches.

A very special thanks to Dr Mpongo who has generously contacted me many times about our posts on this website. I encourage everyone to offer comments in the comments section at the end of every post.