A local TV news report on the adoption this week of the Human Sexuality Report by the General Synod of the CRCNA meeting in Grand Rapids began by saying, "The discussion has centered on beliefs surrounding the LGBTQ+ community." I am thankful that they cast the discussion on "beliefs" rather than personal or community conflict. If it is heard, that is helpful distinction.
To be sure, there are persons and communities that disagree here. But these persons and communities are gathered around a particular set of beliefs that are competing with one another. I would hope that the people involved can remain respectful, even as we figure out the consequnces of differing beliefs and learn how best to negotiate them.
Let me dig a bit deeper into this by offering a more nuanced view of the disagreement and what it may mean.
First, There Is An "Experience"
As I have pondered this situation, it seems to me that everything begins with an "experience" that a person has. In this case, a person has an experience of Same-Sex Attraction. That experience is real, even powerful and attractive, but in isolation, it is hard to know what to make of it. On this level, it is simply an "experience." No more, no less.
For discussion, let's label this as "Experience A," but I think you can use my framework to reflect on many different "experiences." That experience is real, but it also raises a question: What do I make of that "experience," for us: "Experience A"?
Second, There Is An "Understanding" Of That "Experience"
Once a person has an experience of some type, there may be a variety of ways to "understand" that experience. For a variety of reasons, the same experience can be understood in different ways by different people for different reasons. What is different is not the experience itself. The difference is the "understanding" given to that "experience."
Any particular "understanding" is developed over time from a variety of sources - previous experiences and outcomes, convictions, social connections and beliefs to name a few.
In our case, "Understanding A," for all of its reasons, considers "Experience A" to be a gift of God, and so a blessing to be affirmed and lived out if a person is to be fully themselves. By contrast, "Understanding B" considers "Experience A" to fall short of God's intention, being a result of the brokenness in the creation. As powerful and attractive as the experience itself may be, it also comes with some harm and risk, so is best avoided.
"Experience A," in and of itself, is the same. But whether you view that "Experience A" through "Understanding A" or "Understanding B" has an enormous impact on the outcomes and behaviors that follow.
Then, There Will Be "Behaviors" That Follow
We move now from a single "experience," interpreted by two different, even conflcting, "understandings." Those different understandings will lead down different paths of behavior. "Behavior A" - in this case an example might be performing a Same-Sex wedding - follows naturally from "Understanding A" of the one "experience" even as "Behavior B" - not doing that Same-Sex wedding - follows naturally from "Understanding B" when applied to the identical "experience." "Behavior A" and "Behavior B" will be different because the underlying "understanding" of the "experience" in question is different.
Finally, Communities Gather Around Those Different Understandings and Behaviors
There is not a particular problem when people gather together around share convictions. That is how various sports teams have dedicated followings.
But how are we to manage life when differing communities are in conflict? One response is for the communities to seperate from one another. Another, is to let the conflict play out until one community has won, and the other has lost.
A better way might be to recognize that the communities are brought together by different behaviors and then try to allow for or reduce those behaviors. A "live and let live" sort of approach. This may work well for less important differences - like your favorite college football team - but when the different communities are formed around different behaviors that result from different understandings that are deeply held and formative, that may prove impossible or even dangerous. For example, a totalitarian Marxist and I will not be able to get along on much of anything, because our deeply held "understandings" of the experiences of the world are simply too different to be ignored over time.
So, in my proposal, "experiences" are interpreted by "understandings" that lead to "behaviors" that eventually gather "communities. Seeing these multiple layers help us navigate conflict and seek reconciliation.
Back to the CRC and Its Newly Adopted HSR
It seems to me that within the CRC there are now differing communities that advocate different behaviors as acceptable regarding LGBTQ+ issues. For example, one community would support the "behavior" of Same-Sex Marriage and another would not.
The difference between these two communities and the behaviors that they find acceptable grow from two very different "understandings" applied to the "experience" of SSA. A new question emerges: can those two differing "understandings" be reconcilied, and if not, can they even co-exist??
In my view, the point of conflict is not the experience of SSA. That is real and as I listen, I understand that it is powerful. The point of conflict is how are we to understand that experience. That is where the difference between the various communities and their responses begin. We need to pay attention to that level of difference.
A Mental Exercise
Try working through my 4-step perspective by starting with a different "experience" to be considred by different "understandings" that lead to different "behaviors" that gather different "communities." For the exercise, make "Experience B" something like "the initial spark of sexual attraction to a person other than my spouse."
As always, I am willing to follow up with any further ideas, clarifications, questions or cups of coffee. Feel free to contact me through the Harderwyk Ministries office so we can look for a suitable way to move forward together in conversation.
No comments:
Post a Comment