However, during some of the exercises I thought I was being punished for something it was so bad. These were exercises that when I was healthy would have have been so hard but for me now they were just horrendously difficult. One of the worst ones was leaning against the wall squatting with your legs out in front, knees spread apart, so that your legs are bent at about a 90 degree angle and holding it for 1 minute; doing it 3 times. After about 30 seconds it would start to get bad, by 45 seconds I was ready to throw in the towel and the last 15 seconds I was wimpering like a puppy dog the whole time just gritting my teeth just barely holding. Then I'd just collapse on the chair under me.
They did do a pretty good job of improving my walking, although I hate to think I have to do all that to maintain my walking. Anyway, I still do have trouble walking.
I'm still trying to get the migrain taken care of too. The migrain has not been well managed/under control for a couple months approximately now, so it's making things a bit rough too. I have a botox injection scheduled for April 3, but I was hoping to have it done sooner, but at this point it looks like it won't be.
***
The other thing that's happened is regarding taxes. I saw my tax cnsultant earlier this week and she needs some more documents, but she's also working on some things from her end too. We're trying to figure out if I owe tax on one big ticket item. But I also can't find a couple important 1-99 forms. I feel like I've looked everywhere, or at least everywhere logital. But then the 2010 tax file was found in completely the wrong drawer. So I'm really frustrated about this. The thing is that this is, I think, directly related to the fact that my migrain has not been managed recently, so I've been more prone to making mistakes. It's very frustrating and it means that I'm spending time on it to the neglect of other things, which is just all the more frustrating and discouraging.Back to the text....
***
This is the last section under "Part I: The Nature of Citizenship."
"Citizenship Responsibilities...
Obedience...Citizens are responsibile for obeying existing laws...
Loyalty. The second category of citizen responsibilities concerns the expansion of individual welfare functions to include the interests of others, the state as a whole, and the values it embodies.citizenship behaviors in this category include uncompensated contributions of effort, money, or property; protecting and/or enhancing a state's good reputation in the eyes of outsiders; and cooperating with others to serve the common interest, rather than seeking a free ride." (p. 254)
There is one more responsibility and then Graham takes these and applies them to the workplace, but, since the Vienna mission wasn't your tyical workplace anyway, I'm also going to discuss these "geopolitical arena" versions of citizenship responsibilities.
"Laws" in the Vienna mission context was an illusive concept, which was very handy because one could never write home and say the rules were very strict, because technically there were practically no rules. And the ambiguity could be very frustrating until you were socialized, became a trusted member and began to understand how the system worked. (Remember the policy manual seemed to have no affect as the only 2 teimes I made reference to it at the beginning were quickly snubbed by management).
So the issue of WHAT to obey was something I grappled with my whole time in Vienna and I never could quite figure it out completely although I'm sure it was dependent on my submitting wholeheartedly to them, which I never could do because I didn't trust them.
As far as loyalty goes, missionaries generally are used to putting forth uncompensated effort. I resented the focus on my boss' family though. I put forth an effort though, but that felt sexist and stereotypical and also it made me feel like maybe my boss's wife didn't trust me working with her husband or something. If that were so we just needed to deal with it straight up instead of beating around the bush.
***
"Participation... [C]itizenship behavior includes devoting time and effort to the responsibilities of governance, keeping well informed, sharing information and ideas with others, engaging in discussions about controversial issues, voting in whatever manner is provided under the law, and encouraging others to do likewise." (p. 254)
In the Vienna mission this assumes that the management liked an involved staff. First of all, they did NOT like controversies, any voting that might have existed would only have been in the board room, and those in appropriate formal or informal or informal positions to know something would be told - although upon return from an absence they might have to inquire about about missed information. The point is that, there wasn't a lot of room for anything out of the expected, out of the hierarchy, etc. to happen and if you were in a position to know or do something you'd get the information or have the opportunity to do it (if possible). This was not a democratic system, which I've mentioned before. I, for example, didn't have any of these, although for a while when I actually did act as the secretary of the assistant director I might have had some responsibility for encouraging others (e.g., department directors) to do one or more of these things (but only in the name of my boss; I couldn't have done this on my own). So I would just have been a conduit for my boss... does that count as participation?
***
"The three categories of citizenship responsibilities described above... can be used in organizational settings...
Organizational Obedience. An orientation toward organizational structure, job descriptions, and personnel policies that recognizes and accepts the necessity and desirability of a rational structure of rules and regulation. Obedientce may be demonstrated by respect for rules and instructions, punctuality in attendance and task completion, and stewardship of organizational resources." (p. 255)
I don't think I ever had a problem with organizational structure and made a lot of sense. I did and still do have a proble with the lack of grievance procedure, which might be sort of considered part of the organizational structure (i.e., complain up the structure, to my sending mission, etc.). But since they were all in cahoots, there was no one to complain to.
I accepted my original job description, but it might have been the case that they wanted someone that would have been a career secretary, I'm not sure. In any case I was obedient to the other job descriptions I held, but I did not accept them in the same way as I did the original job description because I understood that these moves were some kind of punishment for my not responding adequately or correctly to their efforts to socialize me. I put forth my full effort at every job they gave me however, and I did not complain.
***
"Organizational Loyalty. Identification with and allegiance to organizational leaders and the organization as a whole, transcending the parochial interests of individuals, work groups, and departments. Representative behaviors include defending the organization against threats; contributing to its good reputation; and cooperating with others to serve the interests of the whole." (p. 255)
My organizational loyalty - using this definition - began to be tested very soon after my arrival in Vienna. But after the 5th month crisis event it took a definity dive forthe worst, and after that my loyalty was on the rocks. In Vienna no one could recognize this, but the Vienna mission began censoring my prayer letters and I suspect that it knew that not only was my attitude a risk but the very things I was experiencing they didn't want people back home to know about.
So for most of the time I was in Vienna I had negligible allegiance to the organizational leaders and the organizational as a whole. I never was in one position in a whole to worry about having "parochial interests." That being said, however, I didn't want the mission to be exposed to threats from the Communist countries and I did support the work of the ministry, the training of church leaders in "closed countries." But I thought there was too much about how they were doing it what was unscriptural that I thought they should be held accountable to Christians back home. But most Christians back home wouldn't have cared anyway, or would have been so anti-Communist that they would have thought it was all worth it. So that's why I lost trust in Christianity.
***
"Organizational Participation. Interest in organizational affairs guided by ideal standards of virtue, validated by keeping informed, and expressed through full and responsible involvement in organizational governance." (p. 255)
I don't have much else to say about this. Everyone attended the meetings we were supposed to and I can't imagine someone not attending a meeting. The rank and file workers only knew what pertained to their work and human interest stories and information that we could include in our prayer letters, or certain changes that might be happening in the future, like a ministry trip to China (a new field) or the like.
***
"Responsible citizenship requires a balance of obedience, loyalty, and participation, rather than focusing on one at the expense of the others. Consider the variety of ways citizens can be irresponsible: (1) One who obeys the letter of the law, but neither feels allegiance to the common good nor participates in governance, is indistinguishable from a resident alien or day laborer. (2) The loyal flag-waver who privately flouts the law for personal gain is a hypocrite, as is the nostalgic patriot who ignores emerging issues and refuses to participate in the political process to address them constructively, thereby allowing threats to the long-term viability of the state or oganization to fester. (3) The political activist who disrespects existing political structures and proceses, or who pursues parochial interests to the detriment of the long-term common good, is an anarchist." (p. 255)
As to (1) the letter of the law (i.e., the policy handbook) appeared to be irrelevant to the mission, as I soon learned, so it was up to me to try to learn by trial and error what the rules of the game were. I found this to be a moving target, so how could I be expected to obey them? Did I try? I think so! But I also think I it was very tiring and frustrating and I put forth a more than adequate effort in trying to figure them out. As to governance I was not anywhere near allowed a way in governance, so I couldn't have participated in it had I wanted to. So number 1 seems irrelevant to me.
As to (2) I didn't flout the law because I wasn't sure what it was. If I appeared to flout it it was only because I'd given up in frustration trying to figure out what the rules of play were. It's possible that might have appeared like flouting. But in any case, I don't think you could say I flouted them for personal gain. It's possible that they took issue with my working with Austrian, however, but before I left the USA I had told my sending mission about my sending mission about my intention to work with Austrians since I was a secretary and would have time in off hours and they'd told me they though that would be okay. But I struggled with the Vienna mission over that the whole time I was there and it's possible they took this as something I was flouting the law for personal gain (although I'm not sure which of their laws I'd be flouting here). However, I think they're just ethnocentric... although selectively so, because some of their members did attend Austrian churches.
Continuing with (2)... I dn't think I could have recognized an "emerging issue" if it jumped up and bit me in the nose. Such an issue would have had to have been announced at a large group meeting. And the thing is that such a mission-critical issue would not have brought to the group to decide or even for their input. Again, this was not a democracy.
***
"(3) The political activist who disrespects existing political structures and processes, or who pursues parochial interests to the detriment of the long-term common good, is an anarchist." (p. 255)
This can't be me because I didn't participate in any of aspecte of the governance of the mission.
That's it for Part I of this article and we'll pick up from here next time.
