Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Critique, Orthodoxy, Niceness
Need to pull some strings together here. First there is this post from GospelDrivenLife on arguing in blogs - his primary thesis? - "Pick your fights."
The battle I am specifically thinking of is the issue of homosexual ordination in the PC(USA) which comes before our ruling body this summer - AGAIN!. It's come up a lot in the last couple of decades, last time, they punted to a task force that has returned a report. I spent some time with the report this past weekend. Jollyblogger sums up the report unknowingly, in another post on blog debates with this line.
Which brings me back to Jollyblogger, and GDL to some extent. Both indicate a mutual exclusivity to niceness and orthodoxy, or truth. I consider this a false premise. We do not have to choose between being nice and being orthodox, we need to learn how to be nice WHILE being orthodox.
Now, from the outset, I want to grant you that such is a terribly difficult proposition. It is difficult largely because the unorthodox declare the holding of orthodoxy as "not nice" regardless of how one asserts it. We cannot allow such declarations to stand, and I am afraid we have, and we do by discussing choices between them.
I spent my time with the report over the weekend in preparation for teaching a class at church on the CS Lewis essay The Poison of Subjectivism. That essay ends with a "practical" look at the ramifications of subjective thought and I expanded that discussion by looking the homosexual ordination issue, and because the report itself is a masterwork of subjectivism. As the discussion continued in the class the key phrase was "speak the truth in love."
That's where it dawned on me - when those we oppose simply define opposite positions as "unloving" it is an entirely subjective statement, and if we let it stand, we grant subjectivism credence - something we cannot do or the debate is lost.
So how do we be nice and orthodox at the same time. Well, the best example I can think of is Jesus meeting the Samaritan woman at the well. Consider this small exchange from that story
Answer - because of Jesus' character. The woman understood instinctively that Christ's motivation was love and that He had her best interests at heart.
So, what does that say about us and our debates? Let's start with blogging. I think it says that Christian blogs should be self-revelatory - who we are needs to be apparent in our blogs so that our character is revealed and people know then the loving context of our words.
Now, what does this say about the church and blogging? It says that our first priority is to learn to be more Christ-like - getting back in some sense to the GDL post. In a sense we need to earn the right to enter such debate by progress in our own sanctification - our transformation into Christ-likeness. The key question is - does who you are communicate Christ's love? - not what you say, who you are! - More importantly WHO WE ARE. The church, as a body, must come to reflect Christlikeness, and, I think, in ways superior to what any one of us can do individually, we need to realize the promise of scripture when it comes to being the body of Christ.
Only in being Christ-like can we be nice and be orthodox. And only in that paradigm can we fix the problems that confront the church today.
Cross-posted on How To Be A Christian And Still Go To Church
Related Tags: orthodox, nice, homosexual ordination, Godblogging, blog debate, transformation, Christ-like
My problem is always my pride. I tend to assume a mantle God has not placed on my shoulders -- I am the new Elijah! What God has taught me is that there are a few battles to be fought...Reasonable approach, but some battles MUST be fought, so let's just address those.
The battle I am specifically thinking of is the issue of homosexual ordination in the PC(USA) which comes before our ruling body this summer - AGAIN!. It's come up a lot in the last couple of decades, last time, they punted to a task force that has returned a report. I spent some time with the report this past weekend. Jollyblogger sums up the report unknowingly, in another post on blog debates with this line.
We live at a time when being nice is far more important than being orthodox.The report is nice, but says nothing. It is written in a sort of communal first person that indicates there was no effort whatsoever to reach truth, simply a consensus, and those, unfortunately, can be radically different things.
Which brings me back to Jollyblogger, and GDL to some extent. Both indicate a mutual exclusivity to niceness and orthodoxy, or truth. I consider this a false premise. We do not have to choose between being nice and being orthodox, we need to learn how to be nice WHILE being orthodox.
Now, from the outset, I want to grant you that such is a terribly difficult proposition. It is difficult largely because the unorthodox declare the holding of orthodoxy as "not nice" regardless of how one asserts it. We cannot allow such declarations to stand, and I am afraid we have, and we do by discussing choices between them.
I spent my time with the report over the weekend in preparation for teaching a class at church on the CS Lewis essay The Poison of Subjectivism. That essay ends with a "practical" look at the ramifications of subjective thought and I expanded that discussion by looking the homosexual ordination issue, and because the report itself is a masterwork of subjectivism. As the discussion continued in the class the key phrase was "speak the truth in love."
That's where it dawned on me - when those we oppose simply define opposite positions as "unloving" it is an entirely subjective statement, and if we let it stand, we grant subjectivism credence - something we cannot do or the debate is lost.
So how do we be nice and orthodox at the same time. Well, the best example I can think of is Jesus meeting the Samaritan woman at the well. Consider this small exchange from that story
He told her, "Go, call your husband and come back."Consider such an exchange today, do you not readily picture the woman responding with "How dare you condemn me for my marriage practice?..." So how, did Jesus get away with this? I read the story, His words are very straighforward - there are no rhetorical flourishes to soften the blow, no conditionals to make the bitter pill easier to swallow. How come the woman has no indignation at Christ's direct assertion that she is a 'ho?
"I have no husband," she replied.
Jesus said to her, "You are right when you say you have no husband. The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true."
Answer - because of Jesus' character. The woman understood instinctively that Christ's motivation was love and that He had her best interests at heart.
So, what does that say about us and our debates? Let's start with blogging. I think it says that Christian blogs should be self-revelatory - who we are needs to be apparent in our blogs so that our character is revealed and people know then the loving context of our words.
Now, what does this say about the church and blogging? It says that our first priority is to learn to be more Christ-like - getting back in some sense to the GDL post. In a sense we need to earn the right to enter such debate by progress in our own sanctification - our transformation into Christ-likeness. The key question is - does who you are communicate Christ's love? - not what you say, who you are! - More importantly WHO WE ARE. The church, as a body, must come to reflect Christlikeness, and, I think, in ways superior to what any one of us can do individually, we need to realize the promise of scripture when it comes to being the body of Christ.
Only in being Christ-like can we be nice and be orthodox. And only in that paradigm can we fix the problems that confront the church today.
Cross-posted on How To Be A Christian And Still Go To Church
Related Tags: orthodox, nice, homosexual ordination, Godblogging, blog debate, transformation, Christ-like
