Posts Tagged ‘open’

Surrendering our need to know

July 9, 2016

                                                                                           Pentecost 8 – 2016

                                                                                                 Luke 10:25-37

Marian Free

In the name of God who stretches, challenges and inspires. Amen.

There is a wonderful movie out of Kenya called ‘The First Grader’. It recounts the true story of an old man who, on learning that the government is offering ‘free education for all’ presents himself at the local school. The first day he is refused admission by one of the teachers on the basis of his age. Undeterred, he returns the next day, only to be told that he requires a uniform. On the third day he arrives in cut off trousers, long socks and sandals only to be told that there are simply not enough desks and that he must go home. However, his determination pays off when the head teacher allows him to join the class. Conditions are basic. The classes are large and at least one child has to sit on the floor to accommodate Maruge. The teacher is enthusiastic and passionate which is some compensation for the lack of space and equipment.

Two scenes stand out. One is that of a small boy who is asked to come to the front of the class and draw the number five on the blackboard. He does so, but writes it backwards and the other children laugh at him. The other is that of Maruge who, refusing to believe that the boy is stupid, makes a ‘story’ about the number five having a fat belly and a hat. Because the information was presented to the child in a different way by someone whose starting point was that he could learn, the boy was able to imprint the information on his memory.

All of us learn in different ways and have different ways of receiving and processing information. At its best education harnesses those abilities, develops and enhances inquisitiveness and creates a desire to continue to learn. At their best our educational institutions create not individuals who know everything but people who realise how much there is still to know. At their worst they create individuals who are locked into only one way of knowing and who believe that what they have been taught is not only all that they need to know, but that what they know remains true forever.

A similar argument could be made for spiritual education – that is, ideally it creates an openness, an humility, a sense of awe and above all the realisation that there is so much more to know. Sadly this is not the reality for many. Instead of having their minds and spirits expanded through a growing awareness of the utterly other, they are taught rules and regulations, ‘facts’ about God. They are given the impression that faith is about what God expects of us and what we can expect of God. In those instances becomes a closed and limited phenomenon rather than an experience that is unbounded and endlessly open.

It is this latter form of spiritual education that results in fundamentalism and in the sort of arrogance that asserts that there is only way of believing and living and that this way should be imposed on both the willing and unwilling alike. It leads to judgementalism and narrowness and a belief that it is possible to determine who is good and who is bad by the degree to which people conform to established modes of conduct. The end result of such an approach is the opposite of its intent – it leads not to a healthy relationship with the divine, but to a life in which God is no longer required to provide direction or guidance.

Over and over again the Christian scriptures challenge the view that it is possible to know everything there is to know and certainly that it is impossible to know even a fraction of all a there is to know about God. Perhaps the finest example of this is God’s response in the Book of Job. God is taunting Job, challenging him to prove his wisdom and understanding in comparison with that of God. Paul confronts the arrogance of the Roman community when he reminds them that the foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of humans and Jesus consistently points out the limited understanding of those who would challenge him in debate.

Today’s gospel is one such example. The lawyer asks a question, not because he wants to know the answer, but because a he wants to test Jesus. Jesus turns the question back on the enquirer, who responds with another question. Jesus’ response is to tell a parable which, with its shock conclusion, exposes the self-satisfaction of the lawyer and his narrow view of God. The lawyer, like so many of those who opposed Jesus, appears to have a fixed and legalistic view of God and of faith. They seem to believe that they know exactly what is expected of them and of others. As a result they believe that they are in a position to judge and that they can determine who is in and who is out. Their faith has been reduced to a number of pre-determined precepts and they do not have the flexibility to see beyond what they believe they know to understand what it is that they do not know.

Today’s parable is one that many of us have learned in Sunday School. It is so familiar to us that we no longer appreciate the challenge it presents and are happy to accept the conventional view that it is about doing good deeds or helping others. If we listen/read carefully, we will see that Jesus does not answer the lawyer’s question. Instead of describing a person to whom one should be neighbour, Jesus challenges the lawyer to consider neighbourliness from a surprising and unexpected quarter – the reviled and despised Samaritan. Being a neighbour, accepting neighbourliness is not something that can be confined to definition, but is a concept that continually expands as we learn more about the world and about God’s inclusive love.

In this and other ways, Jesus was constantly stretching and expanding the established view, pushing people beyond conventional ways of understanding and insisting that they rely on God and the movement of the Spirit and not on their own limited understanding.

Contrary to popular understanding, faith is not something that is fixed and delimited for all time. It is a journey from certainty to uncertainty, from independence to dependence and from self-confidence to confidence in God. It is not a matter of having or needing to have all the answers but of surrendering ourselves to the infinite wisdom of God and of finding peace in not knowing and not needing to know.

The lawyer wanted to secure faith and knowledge in a concise, limited and defined format. Jesus challenges him, and therefore us, to understand that it is only possible to be truly secure when we throw ourselves on the mercy of God and trust in God to reveal all that we need to know.

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Luke's gospel, Uncategorized | Comments Off on Surrendering our need to know

Conflict resolution

September 6, 2014

Pentecost 13 – 2014

Matthew 18:10-20

Marian Free

In the name of God who models relationships that are authentic, open and honest. Amen.

No doubt there are a number of ways to look at conflict resolution. This was the topic at the Northern Region Clergy Conference led by Tim Dyer of John Mark ministries[1]. Tim began pointing out that people approach conflict in a variety of different ways that could be easily characterized by their similarities to different animals. For example some people deal with conflict head on, determined to win the battle. These are the bulls. Other people retreat into themselves and seek to avoid the conflict altogether thus leaving it unresolved. These are the turtles. Foxes are cunning and those who behave like foxes aim for compromise. They want a solution and will give way in order to get a result. Koalas are warm and cuddly. They are full of compassion for the other person in the dispute and so will often forgo their own needs and allow the other to “win”. Wise old owls are prepared to invest the time and energy required in order to find a solution that best suits all parties.

All of these approaches have something to offer because different situations demand different strategies to conflict resolution. There are times when an immediate decision is required (bull) and times when the most appropriate thing to do is to walk away (turtle). On some occasions compromise (fox) is the best way forward and on other occasions conceding ground is the best solution (koala). Most people have a preferred way of dealing with conflict – avoidance, confrontation, putting the other first. People in leadership positions can learn to operate in all of these modes though in difficult situations they might still revert to their preferred mode of operation.

Few people (except the bulls) relish conflict, and church communities tend to be particularly conflict averse. This is because we place a premium on love and forgiveness and as a result view conflict as failure, if not sin. Unfortunately a failure to acknowledge that there is a problem does not make it go away. In fact, ignoring a problem can lead to a situation that is worse than the original discord. If conflict is avoided or denied it can simmer below the surface and finally bubble up in ways that are much more serious and therefore much more damaging than the original conflict would have been had been allowed to be aired. By continually avoiding conflict, church communities become not more united but more fractured and by failing to recognise conflict as a part of community, church families are losing an opportunity to develop ways of dealing with conflict, of building bridges and of forming honest relationships.

The reality is that rather than achieving the ideal of being loving and forgiving, church communities have a tendency to be conflict prone if for no other reason than that they bring together a diverse range of people who are expected to know and share similar beliefs. Sometimes people who are damaged or hurt come to the church seeking healing and peace, however they are unable to let go of the baggage they have brought with them and unconsciously generate tensions with their demand to be loved. The fact that church communities are made up of volunteers rather than a paid workforce can lead to a sense of obligation towards those who give generously of their time and an unwillingness to tackle behaviour that would not be accepted elsewhere. (Again the desire to be loving and forgiving hampers rather than assists our ability to deal with conflict as it arises.) More than any other community, churches are like families – with all the expectations and disappointments and frictions that living in such close quarters can engender. Sources of conflict include a failure to communicate clearly, a need to control, a dislike of change, a past conflict that has not been properly dealt with and a tendency for people to congregate in sub-groups of people with similar interests (which in turn exclude others from belonging).

Conflict is a normal aspect of group life. For that reason it is important that churches develop strategies to deal with differences rather than to pretend that they do not exist.

The Bible does not suggest faith in God leads to a life in perfect harmony with other people of faith. In fact, apart from parts of Acts in which the early church is idealized, there nowhere in the New Testament is there a picture of a community that is free from conflict or disagreement. Paul’s letters describe communities that are experiencing real tensions between members and even the gospels show us that even among the disciples there is a degree of competition between the disciples. In fact chapter 18 of Matthew begins with the disciples asking Jesus who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. The New Testament does not gloss over the difficulties faced by those trying to become the church. Instead it provides an honest account of the tensions that arise as a normal part of community life, when people bring their different needs and expectations into a group situation. If the New Testament can acknowledge the difficulties of community life and the conflicts that arise in group situations, then today church would be wise to recognise that conflict is not a sign of failure, but just one aspect of our life together. Rather than ignoring it, we should find ways to address it and to work together to bring it to some sort of resolution.

Matthew’s gospel is sometimes called a Manual for the Church. It is Matthew more than any other gospel writer who provides specific instructions for community life. This is particularly clear in today’s gospel that addresses conflict resolution in the church. There is no suggestion here that conflict be avoided or swept under the carpet as if it didn’t exist. Instead disputes are to be brought out into the open so that everyone can help to bring about a positive result. If two people disagree, they are first of all to discuss the issue with each other. If they are still unable to resolve the issue, they are encouraged to enlist the help of two or three others. If that doesn’t have the desired effect then they are to take the matter before the whole church. As a last resort a trouble-maker might have to be considered as a Gentile or tax-collector (someone who hasn’t yet fully understood the gospel).

Most people do not like conflict, but pushing it aside or burying it does not solve the issue. At best ignoring a problem leads to hypocrisy, to a façade that all is well and to relationships that are essentially dishonest and superficial. At worst avoiding an issue allows it to fester until it can no longer be contained and unspoken hurts spill over into acrimony that leads to lasting damage.

In our personal lives and in community, conflict is always best addressed rather than pushed aside. If we can learn to talk things through, to put our cases gently and firmly, to listen patiently and without prejudice then we will build robust and honest relationships that more truly demonstrate the love of God in and between us.

[1] I am heavily reliant on Tim’s content but hope I have put it in my own words. (johnmarkministries.net.au Northern Region Clergy Conference)

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Matthew | Comments Off on Conflict resolution