Life vs. Choice. Evolution vs Creation. LGBT vs. Leviticus and Romans. Israel vs. Palestine. Global Warming vs. Big Oil. These are the big issues of our time in our churches, although most don't see it that way. To most people, the argument is already settled. All they have to do is convince everyone else that they're right.
So the weapons of debate are fashioned and reinforced. We've got scientific data to contradict your scientific data. We've got scriptures to trump your scriptures. We've got anecdotal evidence that's far more emotionally gripping than your anecdotal evidence. We will force votes, enact laws, lobby for reform, make pilgrimages, hire strategists and do our level best to make sure you understand why we're right and you're wrong.
It's a great day for freedom of speech. It's a sad day for mature dialogue.
Honestly, it doesn't really matter what the issue is. The process is the same. Side A gets all up in arms about their platform and works dilligently to convince the rest of the world that they're right. Side B gets all up in arms and works dilligently to convince the rest of the world that they're right. Launch the attack ads and lawsuits. Hire the lobbyists and raise ridiculous amounts of money. Coordinate an editorial campaign and exploit the other's weaknesses. Tell compelling stories in movies and music. Tap into the power of celebrity and opinion makers. Drive that wedge issue home!
This is not about reconciling. This is about winning. This is not about relationship. This is about demonizing the other. This is not about unity, purity and peace. This is about trying to create safety through sameness.
It doesn't work. It never has, at least when humans are involved. From failed attempts at utopian societies to the rise and fall of the Third Reich and from papal bulls to dictatorial regimes, from the Roman Empire to the Mayans to the Dynasties of the far east, there has not been one single attempt at creating safety through sameness that has succeeded. Even if you dial it down from an international scale to what, in the grand scheme of world events, was a piddling little dispute between Peter and Paul over whether Gentiles had to be circumcised to be Christians, the push to require conformity has never worked.
Reconciliation does not mean to make things the same, to homogenize. Reconciliation means to settle, to resolve. There are countless issues that will never be resolved so long as we continually accept the false idea that resolution equals sameness. However, if we apply enough resources, creativity, time, patience, prayer and understanding and there can be a reconciliation, a settling of the matter, a resolution.
That takes maturity, a commodity we are grossly lacking. Anyone can scream their position and draw lines in the sand and alienate all the others who don't agree with them. That takes no more maturity than a five year old already possesses, and we have a plethora of highly educated and/or elected and/or ordained and/or public figureheads shouting like five year olds from the tops of their idealogical spectra at all the lesser thans who don't agree with them. What we don't have nearly enough of are the folks who disagree yet are willing to actually reconcile without bullying.
And I personally can't stand it when people use the Bible as their main bullying tool, as if their self-assured pride in having figured it all out means no one else could possibly have a valid Biblical point to make.
As a Christian, I take wholeheartedly the idea that, because I have been reconciled to God through Christ, I now bear the responsibility of being a minister of reconciliation. To me, that means far more than just learning how to tell the story of my relationship with Jesus. It also means nurturing humility and a servant's heart after Christ's example as Paul so eloquently expresses in Philippians 2. It means finding a way to come alongside those with whom I disagree, not to cajole or coerce, but to love and to serve and to try to understand.
It also means I have to learn to live with tension. Not that I get all worked up and anxious because of unresolved issues, but that I recognize the differing points of view without being immobilized. To some, that comes across like I'm indecisive. On the contrary, I've decided to let differences exist in tension with each other. I certainly do have positions on all of the above and reasons to back them up. But to me, it is more important to maintain both personal integrity and interpersonal relationships than to alienate those whose opinions and rationales differ from my own.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Friday, May 13, 2011
The Straight and Narrow (But Not What You Expect)
For thirty-three years the PC(USA) has been debating the ordination of gay and lesbian people to offices of elder, deacon and pastor. Over the past five years, according to a NYT article found at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/us/11presbyterian.html?_r=2, the PC(USA) has lost 100 churches to more conservative denominations, primarily because of this debate. It's not that those churches have ceased to exist. They've just moved on.
Google "PC(USA)" and "gay ordination" and you'll find most of the pages announce the death of the church. The theme is that the whole "gay issue" will drive membership away, create unquenchable conflict and draw down the wrath of God on the denomination, its pastors and its members.
I wonder when Westboro Baptist will start picketing PC(USA) funerals. (BTW - I couldn't remember their name so I googled "crazy baptist" and, no joke, it was the first hit via Wikipedia.)
This may very well damage this church, but it won't be for the reasons being trumpeted. It will be because the denomination is homogenizing over social issues and losing the breadth of perspectives that enable them to discern, imagine and implement effective ministries.
In my limited experience, this is pretty typical of liberal movements. There's plenty of room for everybody but conservatives.
A by-product of this homogenization is the conflict that goes along with it. Those who seek holier ground on the other side of the denominational fence rarely go with hugs and kisses. They go with bitterness, disappointment, and even maybe a degree of pride. And then there are those in the denomination who aren't helping matters at all with their "don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya" attitude.
Some middle governing bodies (like the Presbytery of Donegal) are trying to find a friendly way to let churches leave in order to honor their continuing labor in the work of the Kingdom. It is a gracious way part amicably. It's like honey coated schism. Time will tell if the result will be reconciliation and renewed partnership across denominational fences.
A couple of weeks ago a friend of mine, also a pastor, needed to visit a church in some degree of turmoil. He came back to his own church in time to eat lunch with a visiting high school choir. One of the boys admitted he doesn't go to church at all and then said, "It just seems like you all are at war with each other."
Indeed.
Who in their right mind would believe that this is an institution founded on and grounded in the love of God? Who would ever take us seriously when we talk about the need to forgive one another as Christ forgives us, or to love one another as Christ loves us?
Now I do understand and empathize, even deeply, with those who say that leaving the denomination isn't about the gay issue but about scriptural authority. I know that there is a huge difference between confessing that you are "obedient to" scripture versus confessing that you are "guided by" scripture.* To say "guided by" is way too wishy-washy, as if the Bible only offers suggestions and not commandments, advice and not wisdom, convenience and not commitment. To be "guided by" leads to a 'pick and choose' approach to scriptural authority. You've got a point, and a very good point. The dilution of scriptural authority is a serious, serious issue.
At the same time, there needs to be some ground given on what it means to be "obedient to" scripture. I have yet to meet a Christian who upholds all the household codes in Leviticus despite the fact that they read like commands. The argument excusing obedience is that these folks are under a new covenant in Christ so the old rules don't apply. But at the same time the Levitical code condemning homosexuality still has traction. Isn't that also 'pick and choose?'
So while some churches look for straight pastors and narrow biblical interpretive standards, they've got to wrestle with what scriptural authority really means. They've got to come to terms with their own lack of a consistent approach to reading and interpreting scripture. It's an issue with which every church suffers. None of us hold the Interpretive Key to the Mind of God.
These fellowships also need to consider what withdrawal from the denomination might mean in the bigger picture. What does it say about the way we love, forigve and reconcile in Jesus' name? What if withdrawal signals to homophobes that they now have a safe place to congregate and celebrate their hate?
And then what about the next issue? When a church decides to separate rather than reconcile, then that becomes a more ready option the next time around. It becomes a more valid option for discontented members to find a new home when trouble pops up. It becomes a metaphor to pave the way for members to cut off their own relationships. It could undermine a pastoral objective to preserve and strengthen marriages and families.
Am I just spouting off, or is there evidence for this? Schism is part of our American spiritual heritage. We wouldn't have had pilgrims settling this continent if they could have worked things out at home. With that heritage, we break up over non-essential issues far more readily than we're able to come together through shared essential common ground. Splitting up is what we do.
Here's how it works. A Divisive Issue arises. People focus on the Divisive Issue. They rally around the Divisive Issue, draw their lines in the sand over the Divisive Issue and start calling whomever is on the other side whatever name might smear them best. There are those who call for civility, but their soundbites don't get picked up by the media.
Finally the anxiety level is so high that there can be no creative solution to this Divisive Issue but to divide. One side blames the other for creating a problem. The only resolution, they argue, is to be rid of the ones who are to blame. It doesn't matter if they oust the blame agent or ouster themselves. The point is that cut-off appears to be the only path available to give them relief.
But then the next Divisive Issue comes along. And then the next. And then the next. It's about universal savlation or civil rights or women holding office or immigration or flags in sanctuary or gay ordination or, as in the case of the split between the Christian Reformed Church and the True Christian Reformed Church , a dispute over serving meat vs. fish on Fridays during Lent. And in every single case we have failed to work it out.
This self-amplifying cycle of anxiety ends with the dissolution of relationship, the breaking of covenant, the narrowing of perspectives to the remaining like-minded folks, the name calling and the high school choir member who's never been to church observing that we're always at war with each other.
We need a better way to deal with whatever Divisive Issue comes our way.** This pattern ain't working. It's insane that we keep doing the same thing hoping for a different result. The hand can't say to the foot that you don't matter because you're not a hand, but that's what we do over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
If we, who are the Body of Christ, keep up with this self-amputation, our own metanoia as a church will not resemble Jesus which is trusted with "the ministry of reconciliation."
Here's my Occam's Razor solution, which really isn't mine at all, but the wisdom of someone way smarter - "Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ forgave you," (Eph. 4:13, NIV). Here's another - "Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity," (Col. 3:13-15, NIV).
May the straight and narrow path we seek be one that balances on reconciliation and forgiveness as we pursue our life together as the Body of Christ.
*For the uninitiated - the new language that makes room for gay ordination says that the church will be "guided by" the scriptures as opposed to being "obedient to" the scriptures as the old language stated.
**There is a creative idea floating about where the conservative end of the church would form it's own non-locative Presbytery with the stated purpose to dislodge existing Presbyteries. This is not a move toward reconciliation. It's more like how a wasp kills other bugs. The wasp lays it's eggs in the larvae of the bug so that, when they hatch, they eat the larvae from the inside out.
Google "PC(USA)" and "gay ordination" and you'll find most of the pages announce the death of the church. The theme is that the whole "gay issue" will drive membership away, create unquenchable conflict and draw down the wrath of God on the denomination, its pastors and its members.
I wonder when Westboro Baptist will start picketing PC(USA) funerals. (BTW - I couldn't remember their name so I googled "crazy baptist" and, no joke, it was the first hit via Wikipedia.)
This may very well damage this church, but it won't be for the reasons being trumpeted. It will be because the denomination is homogenizing over social issues and losing the breadth of perspectives that enable them to discern, imagine and implement effective ministries.
In my limited experience, this is pretty typical of liberal movements. There's plenty of room for everybody but conservatives.
A by-product of this homogenization is the conflict that goes along with it. Those who seek holier ground on the other side of the denominational fence rarely go with hugs and kisses. They go with bitterness, disappointment, and even maybe a degree of pride. And then there are those in the denomination who aren't helping matters at all with their "don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya" attitude.
Some middle governing bodies (like the Presbytery of Donegal) are trying to find a friendly way to let churches leave in order to honor their continuing labor in the work of the Kingdom. It is a gracious way part amicably. It's like honey coated schism. Time will tell if the result will be reconciliation and renewed partnership across denominational fences.
A couple of weeks ago a friend of mine, also a pastor, needed to visit a church in some degree of turmoil. He came back to his own church in time to eat lunch with a visiting high school choir. One of the boys admitted he doesn't go to church at all and then said, "It just seems like you all are at war with each other."
Indeed.
Who in their right mind would believe that this is an institution founded on and grounded in the love of God? Who would ever take us seriously when we talk about the need to forgive one another as Christ forgives us, or to love one another as Christ loves us?
Now I do understand and empathize, even deeply, with those who say that leaving the denomination isn't about the gay issue but about scriptural authority. I know that there is a huge difference between confessing that you are "obedient to" scripture versus confessing that you are "guided by" scripture.* To say "guided by" is way too wishy-washy, as if the Bible only offers suggestions and not commandments, advice and not wisdom, convenience and not commitment. To be "guided by" leads to a 'pick and choose' approach to scriptural authority. You've got a point, and a very good point. The dilution of scriptural authority is a serious, serious issue.
At the same time, there needs to be some ground given on what it means to be "obedient to" scripture. I have yet to meet a Christian who upholds all the household codes in Leviticus despite the fact that they read like commands. The argument excusing obedience is that these folks are under a new covenant in Christ so the old rules don't apply. But at the same time the Levitical code condemning homosexuality still has traction. Isn't that also 'pick and choose?'
So while some churches look for straight pastors and narrow biblical interpretive standards, they've got to wrestle with what scriptural authority really means. They've got to come to terms with their own lack of a consistent approach to reading and interpreting scripture. It's an issue with which every church suffers. None of us hold the Interpretive Key to the Mind of God.
These fellowships also need to consider what withdrawal from the denomination might mean in the bigger picture. What does it say about the way we love, forigve and reconcile in Jesus' name? What if withdrawal signals to homophobes that they now have a safe place to congregate and celebrate their hate?
And then what about the next issue? When a church decides to separate rather than reconcile, then that becomes a more ready option the next time around. It becomes a more valid option for discontented members to find a new home when trouble pops up. It becomes a metaphor to pave the way for members to cut off their own relationships. It could undermine a pastoral objective to preserve and strengthen marriages and families.
Am I just spouting off, or is there evidence for this? Schism is part of our American spiritual heritage. We wouldn't have had pilgrims settling this continent if they could have worked things out at home. With that heritage, we break up over non-essential issues far more readily than we're able to come together through shared essential common ground. Splitting up is what we do.
Here's how it works. A Divisive Issue arises. People focus on the Divisive Issue. They rally around the Divisive Issue, draw their lines in the sand over the Divisive Issue and start calling whomever is on the other side whatever name might smear them best. There are those who call for civility, but their soundbites don't get picked up by the media.
Finally the anxiety level is so high that there can be no creative solution to this Divisive Issue but to divide. One side blames the other for creating a problem. The only resolution, they argue, is to be rid of the ones who are to blame. It doesn't matter if they oust the blame agent or ouster themselves. The point is that cut-off appears to be the only path available to give them relief.
But then the next Divisive Issue comes along. And then the next. And then the next. It's about universal savlation or civil rights or women holding office or immigration or flags in sanctuary or gay ordination or, as in the case of the split between the Christian Reformed Church and the True Christian Reformed Church , a dispute over serving meat vs. fish on Fridays during Lent. And in every single case we have failed to work it out.
This self-amplifying cycle of anxiety ends with the dissolution of relationship, the breaking of covenant, the narrowing of perspectives to the remaining like-minded folks, the name calling and the high school choir member who's never been to church observing that we're always at war with each other.
We need a better way to deal with whatever Divisive Issue comes our way.** This pattern ain't working. It's insane that we keep doing the same thing hoping for a different result. The hand can't say to the foot that you don't matter because you're not a hand, but that's what we do over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
If we, who are the Body of Christ, keep up with this self-amputation, our own metanoia as a church will not resemble Jesus which is trusted with "the ministry of reconciliation."
Here's my Occam's Razor solution, which really isn't mine at all, but the wisdom of someone way smarter - "Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ forgave you," (Eph. 4:13, NIV). Here's another - "Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity," (Col. 3:13-15, NIV).
May the straight and narrow path we seek be one that balances on reconciliation and forgiveness as we pursue our life together as the Body of Christ.
*For the uninitiated - the new language that makes room for gay ordination says that the church will be "guided by" the scriptures as opposed to being "obedient to" the scriptures as the old language stated.
**There is a creative idea floating about where the conservative end of the church would form it's own non-locative Presbytery with the stated purpose to dislodge existing Presbyteries. This is not a move toward reconciliation. It's more like how a wasp kills other bugs. The wasp lays it's eggs in the larvae of the bug so that, when they hatch, they eat the larvae from the inside out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)