Categories: uncategorized
Date: 02 May 2009 07:35:55
I invite you to pull up a chair, get yourself a drink, (may be a vanilla latte or a hot chocolate with the works), settle down and get ready to listen to or even join in with an interesting conversation. It's a conversation which has emerged between a myself and a good friend. We're both Christians but are coming from v. different theological positions. He is a conservative evangelical and I would describe myself as a radical, biblical post-feminist in terms of my theology.
Last Sunday he preached a somewhat controversial sermon on 1 Timothy Chapter Two. I heard pretty quickly from the south about the content, and so was interested to hear it. When I did I was challenged on several levels. I also responded with a set of questions to engage him in conversation about it. Note the aim was/ is v. def engaging in conversation not trying to change him or points score. We are both clear what we think, but sometimes it is useful to refine and think through in light of chatting through with others. Anyway it appears that yesterday the conversation went public and my friend is using his blog for the next part the conversation. Obviously he's a v. busy bloke and so the conversation is going to build up bit by bit.
First thing that challenged me was thinking about my own reaction. Had I been sitting "back home" I would have reacted. I'm not sure whether I would have legged it out part way through, exploded part way through the sermon, or waited until the end and then launched into one. All would have been v. human reactions, and in many ways understandable. Yet, from this distance I realised that the best reaction is actually to listen to what is being said and take it point by point identifying where I agree and where I have questions. In listening and then asking questions several things happen:
1) You listen more clearly to what is actually said
2) You are not being percieved as aggressive
3) You are able to engage with the person speaking more.
The second thing that challenged me was the way my friend had shown courage in giving that sermon. Now I have to admit that wasn't my first reaction.... but as I reflected on it I realised that so often in our PC society people are so scared of giving offence they don't say what they actually think. If conversations on difficult issues are to take place there is a need for honesty. Although, for a conversation to take place there also needs to be space for response. That's why I think for issues like this the traditional service / sermon may not be the best context.
The third challange came when I realised that in working out how to process and deal with content I personally find quite difficult I was coming face to face with "the other". In this situation my friend had stood up and basically said this is who I am and what I believe. It meant coming off the fence and refusing to engage in silences anymore. Thus my friend was going through a kind of "coming out" process as a very conservative evangelical to anybody who wasn't clear on who he was (in terms of his theological position). On a personal level I knew my friend and knew the general theological position he was coming from but I would never have imagined he actually held the views on women in ministry he does. Yet... he is still my friend, even though there is something about him I am now having to process. (You see where I'm going with this one..... inclusion means exactly that).
The forth challenge I was faced with was thinking through the points he was making. Rather than simply disagreeing I had to think quite carefully why I disagreed and whether my disagreement did mean I had been open to "spiritual disception" or cultural conditioning. This is where I went back to the Methodist Quadrilateral, (which I have recently become aware of), and looked at it in terms of using scripture, reason, tradition and experience. Now I know listening to my friends sermon he had been using a similar process and come to v. different conclusions. There may have been two reasons stemming from his reading on history and experience. Firstly regarding history and tradition. The dominant histories have been written by men. Increasingly I am becoming aware of alternative traditions and histories relating to women and what they have and haven't done at various points in history. The second relates to experience. I was in a church with a female associate minister when I was in my late teens / early twenties (infact she conducted my wedding) and am currently benefitting from the giftings of a variety of women in or training for ministry. These people have exhibited God's grace and a concern for biblical integrity in their work and lives. They are people I have no doubt have a genuine calling from God to serve their churches and communities in the way they are.
Anyway I invite you if you wish to join the conversation...... but to be aware this is v. def a conversation not an argument.