diversity | Waco Pastor

Tag Archives: diversity

March 2, 2015 · 9:39 pm

Interdependence Day

On the day we celebrate the rich history of Texas and its independence, I thought I might take a little time to celebrate some great interdependence. Last night almost 40 congregants arrived to the Fellowship Hall of First Presbyterian Church in Waco in order to discuss Jack Haberer’s book GodViews. Haberer provides a wonderful tour through the various types of Theo-Ideological Impulses (34)….or for simplicity’s sake, GodViews. These GodViews describe at least five ways that individuals perceive God’s call upon their lives. Here is the briefest summary:

The Confessionalist is an individual who understands, through careful attention to the scriptures, a truth that must be proclaimed, shared and protected.
The Devotionalist is an individual who understands that prayer, contemplation and quiet time with God is an essential expression of faith.
The Ecclesialist is an individual who understands the building of the local church and its ecumenical relationships to be what God calls them to do .
The Altruist is an individual who perceives the call to help the “least among us” and to respond to God’s call by “feeding His sheep”.
The Activist is an individual who understand that God’s call upon their lives is to participate in social transformation, breaking down systemic evils to realize peace, justice and mercy.

In his nuanced and sympathetic approach, articulating our distinctions, Haberer pushes further. Even existing within a a similiar GodView does not mean that you will share a same mind or opinion. There can be, within each GodView, sharp disagreements. If any GodView lives alone too long, there may be a propensity to self destruct. The Confessionalist becomes Judgmentalist. The Devotionalist becomes an Isolationist. The Altruist becomes a sort of Secularist. The Activst morphs into an Elitist. Lest we secede from one another, Haberer seals his effort with an argument for interdependence, stating that that no one GodView can exist well or mature to its finer place without influence of all the others.

The participants in last night’s gathering knew this well and instinctively. Again and again as they sat in the GodView “most indicative of them”, they could recognize good friends who were better indicated by a different GodView across the room. Many voices rose up to identify friendships in those other GodViews. One person declared, “Our parts make us whole!” Another remarked, “When we are cognizant of each GodView, we are less likely to be blindsided by our own thinking, believing and behavior.” Finally, another said, “We all need each other even when we disagree.”

Today, Texas celebrates its historic courage in declaring its independence. Then in its young and formative years, we might imagine the state as we do a young person, bravely differentiating in order to become a strong adult. Today, our state is no longer young but well into its adulthood. We celebrate the historic move to declare independence even as we strive to be interdependent in the USA today. In the passage of time, there is a celebrate of our distinctiveness as a state and our place among the many. So, too, in the maturation of faith.

We each, having necessarily distinguished ourselves from one another, bring our strength back to task of mission, ministry and Christian Education that we might be radically interdependent. What a privilege it was to watch a portion of the congregation do their work last night. Together they laid a strong foundation for more difficult conversations. Our next gathering, on Thursday March 5th at 7:00 p.m., will discuss the marriage amendment to our Directory of Worship. The demands of healthy marriage require that the work of individuation has been completed. A healthy marriage requires radical interdependence. This may be true whether we are doing marriage as individuals or talking about marriage as the Body of Christ.

Breaking Camp(s)

From his 2001 book GodViews: Convictions that Drive and Divide Us, Jack Haberer arrives into 2015 as a prophet. The fourteen year old book is a call to attend to denominational differences that, today, are brimming over. The book is relevant and powerful. On March 1st from 4-6 p.m. we will be reviewing the book as we prepare to discuss proposed amendment changes to our denomination’s constitution on Thursday March 5th at 7 p.m. Our Presbytery, Grace, votes on those amendments on its Saturday meeting scheduled for March 7th.

In the beginning of his book, Haberer notes the dynamics, or lack there of, found in binary thinking. Not unlike the dominant two party system of our national government, folks in America are prone to binary thinking. It’s “us” or “them” on any number of matters. This, Haberer notes, is true in our denominational culture as well. In fact, he remembers an action of the 2000 General Assembly, the national gathering of our denomination. This action, initiated by Evangelical Christians within our denomination sought to declare an impasse. The impasse was understood to have been created by contrasting theological and ethical beliefs between two camps within our denomination, “liberals” and “conservatives”. The proposed resolution to the impasse was that “liberals” might leave the denomination. Ironically and sadly, today, we have witnessed a exodus of the church, not of “liberal voices” but of “conservative voices”.

The question is still clearly before us, “Is our denomination, PC(USA) at an impasse in terms of theology and ethics? How will a perceived impasse affect our local congregations? Haberer encourages our questions but challenges the idea of impasse in the following ways:

The idea of an impasse declares “…that today’s church is much more divided than were churches in the apostolic era…” (24, GodViews). When, in fact, the evidence is that divisions plagued the ancient church in places like Corinth.(1 Corinthians 1:13).
The thesis of the impasse was “that some believe that ‘the Bible is accurate and the Word of God speaks to entire Church with absolute authority.’ while others believe that ‘biblical authority is determined by personal feelings or various academic disciplines.'” (26) Haberer notes that most all Christians have preferred selections of scripture and that most all Christians appreciate the academy’s informing influence upon our texts.
The impasse goes too far in characterizing camps of people. One camp might be characterized by theological grounding in the Five Solae of the Protestant Reformation. The other camp might be characterized by the ethics of love and justice as proclaimed by Jesus and the prophets. Haberer asks us, if these two camps can be successfully excluded from one another and faithfully reflect the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Finally, Haberer notes that two party thinking not only contributes to gross oversimplifications but it also paralyzes “the very communication that could help correct misrepresentations.” (26)

We gather on March 1st to more fully consider the way that Haberer suggests we understand one another in order to move beyond paralysis. This will be a fun and interactive meeting with an purpose around our ultimate concerns. Is our denomination forever lopsided toward one camp or the other? Does our denomination leave no room for a multiplicity of voices to be heard with integrity?