I've been thinking lately about complaining. I complain a lot. About a lot of things, but about church probably more than anything. I want to complain less, I really do. I have more posts in me about that, but there is something I want to complain about at the moment.
There are so many kinds of people, so many personalities in this world. What would ever lead us to believe that one expression of faith would be right for everyone? It's not that I think one kind of church is bad and another is good. I used to, but I have learned the error of that belief; it was born of pain and experience, it isn't reality. But I just can't get my mind around why it matters so dang much what kind of church you "do".
An athlete's gifts require discipline, training, knowledge, power. His accomplishments are tangible, measurable.
An artist is all about emotion, life, expression, experience. His accomplishments are fluid and vague.
The athlete cannot appreciate the artist because art doesn't require discipline.
The artist cannot understand the athlete because athletics don't allow room for perception.
All I really want is for these two people to concede they may never see eye to eye; but each of their gifts are equally valid.
All I want is peace, love and harmony.
I'm a INFP, what can I say?
"There's no good guy, there's no bad guy, there's just you and me and we just disagree."
Peace out.
I really like this analogy I was in theater/choir in high school but could have been a football player. I mixed among both groups but it was tough to grt jocks to mix with drama weirdos as they often said. *and the lion shall lay with the lamb and forever He will reign* btw, I also really appreciate your comments,wherever i see them you are truly unique plz feel free to leave me a comment anytime on anything :)
ReplyDeleteYou have a very interesting blog. I hope you don't mind, but I added a link for your blog on mine. Take care.
ReplyDeleteHey Robert - Thanks for the kind words! Glad the analogy "spoke" to you.
ReplyDeleteTom - Thanks for the link! I just became acquainted with your blog a few weeks ago; darned if I can remember who through.
You write some good stuff! I'll get a recip. link up for you soon.
Lily ... nice analogy. It's speaking clearly to a situation I find myself in. Thanks for voicing it.
ReplyDeleteSonja - Thanks for commenting. This post was based on a situation I was recently in. I'm glad it was encouraging to you.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if it is not a case of different churches reaching more to other people - or maybe that is the mystery of the church that people who are so radically different could share a life in common together - i don't think the NT points to a harmonious church but one where people fell out, had disagreements, strong views etc but still somehow managed to hold out Jesus as bigger than them?
ReplyDeleteMaybe that is part of the growing of our character - certainly the times i've grown most in patience is when i've been hanging out with christians who drive me up the wall. Rather than writing them off as weird i'm just starting to think maybe i could learn from these folks, maybe we don't have to agree on everything for them to show me something that maybe i don't have that will enhance my faith. We usually agree on theology just differ on practice and at the very least i am learning that why is my practice any better than anyone elses?
Hi Paul - I truly appreciate your comments here.
ReplyDeleteI would love to experience what you talk about, it's my heart's desire. Ideally I would love for there to be a place where all types were equally valid. I have yet to find it - though I'm sure it exists.
Instead what I have seen is those who are "different" desiring to branch out; because "different" tends not to be widely accepted by the "traditional".
I do agree that the NT model surely doesn't show harmony but does show unity. Today, people who are different are often asked or forced to leave the traditional, and that's what I hate to see.
I'm not sure what happened, but it seems we are somewhat out of practice in choosing to learn from each other as you suggest. I wish we all could learn to learn from the Christians "that drive us crazy". That would certainly change things.
Thanks much for taking the time to comment.
I understand lily, i think we have lived through a period of history which has been about whether i am right and you are wrong or vice versa and so difference becomes a divirsive issue - if you are different to me you must be wrong [i sure as heck couldn't be, lol]...
ReplyDeleteI think now the challenge, to quote mclaren, in the age we are moving into now is not so much whether i am right or whether i am wrong but whether i am good. Which echos some of what jesus said about good fruit etc...
I think for me that means two things - a rediscovery of the importance of community, and a community that is not the same. After all if i surround myelf with people who think the same as me and who are like me i have not formed a community but a clique. Your post highlights out difficult that is in practice.
I think that leads to the second thing which is a rediscovery of rethinking and humility - which is needed to help wean me off my addiction to being right...
If you're interested it's something i wrote a lil about here...
http://paulmayers.blogs.com/my_weblog/2007/02/is_wrong_the_ne.html
To be honest Paul, I think we have made the boundaries of right and wrong too narrow - at least on the subject of church. Sometimes I wonder why anyone has to be considered to be the "right" one or the "wrong one".
ReplyDeleteI like what you said about the difference between community and clique.
I read the post you referred to - I know I will enjoy poking around your blog...
I do know that personally my tendency is to think I'm right in my motivations for rebelling against the status quo - but some of the things you have said and that I've read on other blogs lately have got me thinking again about the difference between right, wrong, and shades of gray.
i think you are very generous lily, tooo narrow is one way of putting it, too dogmatic/prescriptive would be another :). Then again that was how culture was wired, science vs religion, religion vs religion, denomination vs denomination - church was practiced in the style of the modern world but the world is a changing, at leastin the west.
ReplyDeletei'm curious to hear your thinking on right/wrong/shades of grey and how it has developed/changed?
Narrow/dogmatic/legalistic - they are all just mincing words, eh?
ReplyDeleteYou could call it the modern/postmodern argument. I don't like to label things, but it's fact that in modern thinking it's all about "knowing" and in postmodern thinking it's all about "not knowing".
As far as right/wrong/gray, I think it's simple. Religions and denominations used to be really clearly defined - let's say 50 years ago. You could go into a church of a particular denomination anywhere in America (true in the UK, too?) and pretty much know what you were getting, know what the service would be like, know what they believed. And of course, what they believed was right and what everyone else believed was wrong.
Today there are many more churches who are unaffiliated, and you can never be sure what they believe/practice. Likewise, you can even go into a, let's say, Baptist church and still not be sure anymore what they are all about. There are so many shades of gray, so many shades of Christian.
Some people find this to be a problem, but I think that's all great. We will reach more people more effectively with diversity of beliefs than with narrow-mindedness.
Does that make any sense?
Me an INFP too - have we talked about this before? Maybe we have and my fish memory doesn't remember.
ReplyDeleteHooray for INFPs. I used to be ENFJ all the time but now I'm consistently INFP. Weird
We did talk about that, Sue, way back when we first met. It's why I knew I'd like you.
ReplyDelete