tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7187573090343842338.post9022651979691868751..comments2020-03-19T08:55:22.077-04:00Comments on A Word from the Rector: April 22, 2008 (2)Noelle York-Simmonshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12735603975530615886noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7187573090343842338.post-2022721988466410292008-04-25T09:19:00.000-04:002008-04-25T09:19:00.000-04:00Mark -- There clearly is: 1) you integrate if and ...Mark -- There clearly is: 1) you integrate if and only if possible and 2) You add new people and then re-covenant, but the second approach has psychological dynamic issues, especially the continuation of intimacy. It doesn't bother me personally, but it can impact someone who is either emotional fragile or self-consumed and closed or has real 'trust' issues. <BR/>But then that person probably needs intensive therapy, which is not the primary aim of GIFTS,. Warm regards, David W. Foerster, Jr. <BR/><BR/>P.S. I believe Geoffrey+ & Elizabeth+ have some very good ideas about how to move forwardAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7187573090343842338.post-5054637958865252352008-04-24T12:47:00.000-04:002008-04-24T12:47:00.000-04:00Geoffrey:I have found the GIFT program amazing. T...Geoffrey:<BR/><BR/>I have found the GIFT program amazing. The intimacy that develops in the group enables each person to minister to and be ministered by others -- remarkable.<BR/><BR/>Because of completely legitimate and understandable family, work, and other pressures, the particular GIFT group I was part of consistently fell below the suggested size of six to eight people. As such, we all agreed to lovingly bring the group to a close. <BR/><BR/>There surely must be a way for a group smaller than six or eight to continue as a group. I think this is an idea worth exploring.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7187573090343842338.post-22552234341144813662008-04-24T01:47:00.000-04:002008-04-24T01:47:00.000-04:00While I appreciate both your blog on this subject ...While I appreciate both your blog on this subject and Joshua's response, my experience in running such groups as the "lead" participant tells me that growth in numbers is not all that essential. When even two or three are gathered in our Lord;s name remarkable things--especially abiding and steadfast intimacy emerges. Yes you are correct, a lasting and binding commitment is required. GIFTS is not a casual endeavor nor, properly employed an environment for momentary and casual relief from one's troubles or concerns. Keep writing. David W. Foerster, Jr.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7187573090343842338.post-28642493030529093502008-04-23T05:42:00.000-04:002008-04-23T05:42:00.000-04:00+Geoffrey-Thanks again for sharing. One of the thi...+Geoffrey-<BR/><BR/>Thanks again for sharing. One of the things which may be interesting to consider might be to make the 'covenant groups' limited in duration with a focus towards multiplication (or expanding care). <BR/><BR/>If people know that they can be together in covenant for say 12-18 months, but are then expected to move on and enable the 'convenanting' of others it could be interesting. <BR/><BR/>We've tried it in a few communities i have been a part of and have found that while people enjoy the groups they have been a part of, they also understand the way that compassionate care can spread by giving others the opportunity to "join in" by creating two or three groups out of one. <BR/><BR/>If you had core groups of 12, you could then "multiply" them into four groups of three and so on. If these core people still wanted to meet, they could come together for encouragement, sharing, training less frequently. In fact, I'd encourage this to happen. <BR/><BR/>Make sense? Sound like what you are processing?<BR/><BR/>joshua caseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com