This week is the second to the last month of my Doctors of Ministry class. And the first day started high.
Due to the lack of coordination, the conference room where we usually hold our class was occupied by another class, so we moved to another room. But there was no LCD available for our power point presentation in that room.
The next time I knew, our class decided to conduct the session in a higher venue, the condo unit of our professor in the 16th floor of Grandea Residences across Robinson's Mall, Ermita.
 |
| The Living Room as an instant classroom |
 |
| Comforting ourselves on a sofabed |
 |
| The most comfortable student |
 |
| The first presenter |
 |
| The next presenter |
 |
| Discussion after each presentation led by our professor |
After the two presentations, we paused for a snack. A high in fat Pizza Hut with high in sugar sodas were what we munched at, during the break.
 |
| We consumed four boxes of pizza |
 |
| And count the number of floors of the condos around us |
 |
| The usual tall buildings became small when one is up high from the ground |
Almost all of us were wishing high that afternoon. We were wishing that clergies would be housed in condo units too. Hehehehe!
After our first day of class was over, our professor toured us to the roof deck of the condo.
 |
| Sorry, the shot was against the light |
If the first day of class was high, the third day was low in terms of the presentations. And I belong to the third day. Hehehehehe!
My report was found wanting while another's was boring and still another's was irritating.
Our professor could not hide his disappointment for the turn out of the reports on the last day. He was expecting better reports but was met by low turn in.
The second day of class had descent presentations. But what made the second day lower than the third was not the presentation but the presentor. Let me explain about one distinction of the United Methodist Church system, itenerancy. This means clergies do not stay in one church the whole time. We are appointed from one church to another. But on how long a pastor should stay in a church depends on many factors. Thus, two of my classmates are my predecessor and my successor.
When my successor in my previous church appointment stood up to render his report, his opening statement was, there was no "program"
when he assumed his assignment in his present church. He was serious with his statement but the whole class pointed at me laughing. Being a non-reactive person that I am, it was my classmate beside me who reacted that the statement was "uncalled for" and that I was put in bad light.
Ironically, while he was reporting, he was enumerating a number of programs that I initiated in that church which are being implemented even under his term. Somehow, he was contradicting himself. His presentation could stand on its own without that "tactless" and "offending" remarks. It is just that in order for him to appear better, he had to discredit another person. After his presentation, our professor gave a similar reaction, that the opening statement was offensive.
And that confirmed that I was really insulted somehow. But the reporter didn't lift a finger to correct his statement or he just wished that people would just take it as a (malicious) joke.
The sadder part is, one does not do that to a fellow pastor and to a person you consider your friend.
His power point presentation was far better than mine but when my time to deliver my presentation came, I did not make myself cheap and LOW by putting down my predecessor. When our professor asked me if I will discredit my predecessor to vindicate myself, I answered, definitely not. And with that, I must say, I deserved to wear my elevator shoes. Hahahahahaha!
When my successor in my previous church appointment stood up to render his report, his opening statement was, there was no "program"
when he assumed his assignment in his present church. He was serious with his statement but the whole class pointed at me laughing. Being a non-reactive person that I am, it was my classmate beside me who reacted that the statement was "uncalled for" and that I was put in bad light.
Ironically, while he was reporting, he was enumerating a number of programs that I initiated in that church which are being implemented even under his term. Somehow, he was contradicting himself. His presentation could stand on its own without that "tactless" and "offending" remarks. It is just that in order for him to appear better, he had to discredit another person. After his presentation, our professor gave a similar reaction, that the opening statement was offensive.
And that confirmed that I was really insulted somehow. But the reporter didn't lift a finger to correct his statement or he just wished that people would just take it as a (malicious) joke.
The sadder part is, one does not do that to a fellow pastor and to a person you consider your friend.
His power point presentation was far better than mine but when my time to deliver my presentation came, I did not make myself cheap and LOW by putting down my predecessor. When our professor asked me if I will discredit my predecessor to vindicate myself, I answered, definitely not. And with that, I must say, I deserved to wear my elevator shoes. Hahahahahaha!
