home | board | compass | prayer | eCard

[Main Index]

01/24/2003 Entry: "Dealing with disagreement"

I had no intention of returning to the abortion debate today. I've been feeling the need for something a bit more frivolous, and although there are undoubtedly bruises out there in blogland, there have been some meaningful conversations as a result of Wednesday's controversy. I'm sure some good in terms of mutual understanding will come of it all. But then I read this piece by Gregory Popcak and I had to respond somehow.

That said, I am sick and tired of the saccharine, namby-pamby "compassionate Christianity" crap that refuses to call a spade a spade and murder, murder.  I am sick and tired of the nonsense that the worst sin a Christian could commit is to offend someone?!?  Good heavens, someone is offended!  Stop the presses!  Alert the thought-police!  Bring out the Royal PC Guard!  Crucify him! Crucify him!  Give me a break.Apparently Jesus didn't get your memo either. After all, calling the pharisees a "den of vipers" was not exactly a warm fuzzy.   He engaged the public debate using language the people could understand.  So, all you would-be Rodney "Let's all just get along" Kings out there, please line up now for your ritual slapping.Consider this a much-needed reality check from the friendly therapist at St. Blog's.

No, the deeper issue is how Christians respond to one another when we find that we have deep disagreements that apparently cannot be reconciled. One response is simply to shrug and say it doesn't matter. You go your way and I'll go mine. Live and let live.In my view, ignoring our differences this way is dishonest and unwise. We may be able to travel that way for a while, but eventually a point will be reached - and maybe Wednesday's issue was one of these - where to ignore the opinions of another would be a betrayal of our own integrity. Everyone, even a horrid namby-pamby, hoity-toity, keep-your-voice-down, don't-upset-the-neighbours, pink's a -nice-colour-isn't-it liberal has their limit.

A second response to disagreement is to what what I think Mr Popcak did. Denigrate your opponent. Pour scorn on his arguments, but in no circumstances address them directly, because to do so concedes that there is a debate to be had. I'm right. I know, because God told me. If you disagree, you're either a fool or an apostate or both.I must say, this is a very satisfying way to conduct an argument, because you begin with iron-clad defences and a fully-stocked ammunition cabinet. Shouting louder usually does the trick, and if you really want to press home a point, crank up the anglo-saxonisms a notch or two. You can emerge the victor every time and it feels great. I know.The trouble is, for every person that shouts "Amen!" there's another shouting "No way!" The Body of Christ is divided and weakened. ("Can the eye say to the hand, I don't need you?") If we fall out of fellowship with one another, we all lose.

The better way is to face our disagreements openly, with the humility to be willing to learn from one another. Of course, in any argument I'm going to be sure I'm right. And I've got an opinion about everything. But I hope I've acquired sufficient wisdom to know that I won't be right about everything. It's in dialogue with one another that we learn and grow - that's how the Church has always operated from its beginning. Talk to me. Say your piece and, I hope, let me say mine. The internet offers us more channels for communication than we've ever had before, more opportunities for individual Christians to "meet" across geographical and cultural boundaries. It's up to us whether we use the opportunity to promote growth or deepen our divisions.

You are concerned that my post (which was not placed in full context) lacks sensitivity to post-abortive women. If you will go here www.exceptionalmarriages.com/weblog/BlogDetail.asp?ID=3697 , I think you will be intrigued by what at least one post-abortive woman have to say about that (she is representative of several similar comments I received from women who had abortions). Combine that with Amy Welborn's comment here www.exceptionalmarriages.com/weblog/BlogDetail.asp?ID=3709 and I think you will find that while your theory sounds good on paper, reality is, in fact, on my side.

Reverend, you have the mistaken impression that facilitating healing means being less than truthful. Abortion IS murder. Now, that said, of COURSE, women who have had an abortion thought it was the lesser of two evils at the time. But clearly it wasn't, and the fact is, healing cannot take place until one fully reconciles with the gravity of what one has done and what she has experienced.

All your approach does is slap a band-aid on the wound, which does nothing save compel your parishioner to put on a brave face so Reverend can feel like he did his bit. Then, she suffers another year or so until she eventually comes to someone like me, who can finally help her really heal. I wish I had tuppence for every time I heard that story. Similarly, the psychologist and founder of Rachel's Vineyard www.rachelsvineyard.org/ , Dr Theresa Burke, an internationally recognized authority on Post-Abortion Syndrome (and advisory board member of my org.), states that well-intentioned though approaches like yours may be, they actually compound the problem. A post-abortive woman, having been told by a pastor, or counselor, or other helper, that she did the best she could and that she should not to be so hard on herself, walks away from the experience feeling ashamed for continuing to feel so bad. She knows in her heart that abortion is murder, that's why she feels so bad in the first place. She comes to you because she wants someone to validate that experience and her understanding of that experience so that she can fully repent, fully receive God's mercy for what she has done, and finally, fully heal.

Regarding your comments on the need for humility, I will only say that everything has its season. Perhaps you would think that Elijah lacked humility for standing up to the prophets of Baal, or Joshua lacked humility facing down the walls of Jericho, or Josiah lacked humility for making the people of Israel weep at having forsaken the Law of their fathers. Perhaps you would, but I would not. Nor would I dare to suggest that standing up to the modern day prophets of Baal, the clinic administrators and assorted flunkies of PP, was lacking in humility. Reverend, I will leave it to you if you wish to placidly stand by while your people sacrifice their children to Moloch. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

Finally, if that spade looks like a shovel to you, I would suggest that it is for the same reason you Brits confuse that Euro-weenie sport, "soccer" with "football" and think that french fries are chips.

Now, just to show that there are no hard feelings, I'll buy the next round.

Posted by Greg Popcak @ 01/25/2003 07:27 AM CST

Richard, as always you make sensible and salient points, but in fairness to Greg's quote, I think in this case you may have approached a bit out of context. Before he talks about 'namby-pamby "compassionate Christianity" crap' he prefaces his point that he is approaching the argument with his therapist hat on.

Meaning, I would suspect he deals with numerous individuals afflicted with all sorts of dysfunctions, co-dependencies and a host of psychosis -- most or all of which result in him getting people to admit and face their shortcomings, rather than continually play the blame-shifting game. I also suspect that by the time some of his clients are in their estate, for as Amy Welborn added in a later post on the same site, because of people in positions of authority in the church aiding and feeding the dysfunctional by entertaining their rationalizations.

With that in mind, I think there is a middle ground we must seek between his points and yours where we do as Jesus did, show tough love when needed, and compassion when called for. The trick I would think is knowing which to do, and when.

Posted by Dean Peters @ 01/25/2003 02:51 AM CST

I'm sure you're right Richard. But no matter how much you fight with your brother (as I have with mine!) he will always be your brother. What happens in the church so often is that people "divorce" one another. We forget that we're tied by bonds of blood.

BD: it's a nasty cliche, but "and let it begin with me" is always going to be apt.

Posted by Richard Hall @ 01/24/2003 08:54 PM CST

I love my brother dearly... but, often, we don't understand each other. In our youth, our misunderstandings and disagreements led to some of the worst "knock-em-down and beat the living out of each other" fights. Over the past 15 years, we've learned to deal with each other in much more respectful ways.

Sibling warfare gets really nasty, realy quickly.

I wonder if that's part of what happens in the family and household what we call "Christianity"?

Blessings and peace - Richard

Posted by Richard @ 01/24/2003 08:20 PM CST

I guess translating what you said into the blogging community starts on our own blogs.I wonder if wanting and trying to make my blog to be a safe place for others to come is a beginning....

Posted by Bene Diction @ 01/24/2003 07:55 PM CST