Increasingly, I am humbled by a truth. The truth is that where I stand, my perspectives, my religious beliefs, and my personal convictions within those religious beliefs are, in important ways, beyond my reasoned control. I have moments when I rage in argument against “the other side” or perspective. There are moments of frustration or even competitive despair. But I have noticed that I used to do more raging, I had more frustration and despair in the past than I do these days. Perhaps I am just getting older.
Increasingly my frustration and raging are replaced by a fascination with “the other side”. “The other side” of opinions, beliefs or inclinations does not always persuade me. For that reason, the fascination is strange. The fascination leaves me in a strange place. Even as I cannot control my perspectives or opinions, I find that I cannot help, at this point in my life, being so interested in the space between two arguments.
I stand, in the space between two arguments and on either side, I see individuals of such complexity and sensitivity that it sends me to a mystical place of contemplation. In that place of contemplation, there is a wish that each person could be recognized for their depth and celebrated for their particularity. The wish continues that no one would have to suffer.
Yet arguing and suffering are sure parts of the human experience. As they are unavoidable, suffering is the common experience to greater or lesser extent on both sides of an argument. How romantic it would be to be a revolutionary, a prophet even an activist! There are others who are carrying this energy well and I have to admit that I am a bit jealous. I believe that activist energy is part of who I am. But I stand in a primary energy that is quite different.
The energy is something like a leveraged pull. From the foothold of Reformed Christianity, I pull on polarities to see how long a venn of relationship might hold the overlap. Some of the overlap is generous, some is imperceptibly slight. But sometimes, in the acquaintance, those on two sides of an argument remember and find their way back to the venn.
Waco Pastor 
Well said, Leslie. Ever since the denominational issues meetings, I too have been fascinated by the “other side.” Indeed, it cultivated within me a rediscovered deep respect and compassion for the “other side.” I even made a new friend with someone from the “other side”!
I love that church can be like this. I never knew that it could. But after those meetings I felt a deep longing, as if this is the way it is truly meant to be. I can’t help but think that at the dinner table with the poor, the tax collectors, the decrepit, and the prostitutes that Jesus brought people from all (other) sides together because he hoped that by his example we might do the same.
LikeLike
Many times during his ministry, Jesus was confronted by scribes, Pharisees, lawyers etc. who challenged him with difficult “yes or no” questions. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar? Yes or no. Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath? Yes or no. Should we stone to death the woman caught in adultery? Yes or no. What about divorce? Just who is my neighbor? Jesus never took the bait. He always had an answer and it was never yes or no. “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”
Today, the church is always getting suckered into taking “yes or no” stands. The PC-USA is perhaps the worst offender because it’s governance requires that issues be raised; then debated for or against; then a yes or no vote be taken. An adversarial process never produces consensus. Taking a vote is no way to resolve conflicts, it only makes them worse. Reconciliation is difficult after the debate has ended and the vote is taken. Reconciliation is often not even attempted.
Leadership is not always about taking sides. Great leaders get those with opposing points of view to work together for the common good. Have you seen any great leadership in the church lately?
Today’s divisive issues are Israeli divestments and same sex marriage. Who knows what issues might divide the church in the future. Immigration? Death penalty? Income inequality? Physician assisted suicide? The fault lines are there just waiting to be cleaved.
Martin Luther once said, “I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God. Amen.” His stand, while without question courageous, created an historic split in the church. But why is it necessary to follow him and split the church at every opportunity? The Reformation by its very nature was guaranteed to produce division. No, it is not the issues that divide us, it’s our divisive way of dealing with them. I suppose it’s heresy to suggest that reformed traditions need radical reforming. But “Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God. Amen.”
LikeLike