Having the Dialogue

Note: A treasured friend of mine recently e-mailed this back to me--a "blog entry" I had written months ago and shared with her, but never published. "Synchronistically," (I started to say "ironically," but realized I could coin a better word) I had just had a great "dialogue" that morning with a man in a restaurant that made this all the more poignant. He belongs to the Church of Christ and was discussing with us the maxim of their denomination, "Speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent." The conversation had set me off in a world of thought. Do we believe that the Bible draws lines or opens doors? Do we believe the Bible is "final" or transformational? Do we honor the divine nature of the spirit-words more by treating them like ancient writings or by accepting them as living radiative generators of high-energy light? IS THERE A TIME IN WHICH--on any level or in any realm--THE BIBLE IS EVER SILENT???? It all depends on how you view it all... There is much more to be said about this, but for now, here's the previously unpublished blog entry as a beginning towards that dialogue:

In Britain, more than in Texas, they use the word “dialogue” as a verb, and I have come to greatly respect that practice. If a leader is pondering a change in style, schedule or format in the “new churches” in the U.K., he doesn’t go off into a room alone and produce a document (as we Americans might tend to do), but rather he gathers people and—wait for it—begins to “dialogue.” Yes, they “have a curry” (or something else) and they go round the room tossing about the implications of the change or concept they are considering. No one even really takes notes—there seems to be little being done but engaging hearts, mouths and brains in various combinations. It seems that the overall agenda of “results” is subordinated to the process of interaction and there is a bedrock conviction under it all that if we don’t get there together, we haven’t really “gotten there!”

I am aware that this may be a cultural difference. The broad tendency in the British culture leans toward such extreme respect that our friend Clive Price says that his people have a national obsession with the word, “sorry”. (You accidentally bump into them at the airport, but THEY say, “oh, sorry,” as if they were guilty of choosing to stand on a piece of earth which was destined to be part of your path to the ticket counter.) It would make sense that British leaders would genuinely value their comrades’ opinions, given this deferential climate. (In America, especially in Texas, so often this contrast is stark: We are often clearly and solidly NOT sorry, even when the collision of whatever kind might be our actual fault! We often would indeed think, “You really shouldn’t have been standing in my way.” Ouch…)

Perhaps the British educational system has fostered this fondness for dialogue. The British psyche with its frequent reminders of Roman occupation as a part of its own history may have an inextricable tie to the classical methods that built the Western world. Greek philosophers reasoning together as they applied the Socratic method of discussion may have looked a bit like church leaders discussing whether or not to rent the local school hall for a youth meeting (except for the togas, probably). Again, the value placed on the collective wisdom would be the common theme. (I’ll speak up here for my British friends as well: At this point a few of them would bring in the other side and say, “Yes, but at least you Americans arrive at a decision and act!” And in fact, there might, dare I say it, be an advantage at times to being a cowboy! There might be a point at which dialogue ends and action is called for, but that’s another blog entry.)

The bottom line is that church leaders will dialogue rather than dictate when they “do church” from a relational grid. We here in Texas have been trying to do that for years—often misunderstood, sometimes even gently corrected by well meaning people who mistake the group-speak for weakness, but nevertheless we press on. We don’t always know how to bridge the gap between the vision we have in our hearts (that exists on a plane which is beyond what we can express) and the common understanding of a group of people trying to make the journey from traditional church and non-spiritual communication. After more than twenty years of perhaps getting in wrong as often as getting it right (the jury’s out on that proportion)—I still say it’s all about the willingness to have the dialogue. In fact, I’ll go as far as to say that as a leader, what you really have is NOT the stuff you put on paper as law and hand out—all you really have is the dialogue in which you are willing to engage. We wrongly strain to view the policy documents as comprehensive, when in fact--like the Bible which hopefully inspired them--they are instead meant to be living, breathing starting places for life—opening doors to a thousand applications—coming alive in the hands of living hearts and moving pictures—uncontainable urgings of life wanting to leap into being off the page. It is not the words arrived at that are important, but rather the ongoing dialogue with people that keeps on generating a “chat”! (The best policity documents will leave room for the dialogue.)

How silly to think we can line it all out, figure it all out and prepare for every contingency, when life ongoing will present a thousand different challenges a day that are not foreseeable by our small minds. We need to view all our “documents” (including the Bible) as doors rather than ends. We need to dare to walk through them into the world of experience. This does not lesson their value, but rather enhances it. The Bible is of course the word of God, but how in the world--if it is the Word of the living Creator who Himself is full of fire and light so intense it can blind an Apostle travelling down an opposing road—how in the world can that Word fail to challenge my current understanding of life and relationships at every turn? This thing is so big we must engage—our hearts, our passions, our minds, our time—we must be living the dialogue ongoing! We are dialoguing with heaven when we dialogue with each other!

Of course I have a quantum physics truth to refer to here, because the fact is that you can be absolutely assured that this is the way the universe works. Now that we understand that the universe is far different than classical physics had predicted, we are slowly realizing that systems are indeed much more than the sum of their parts. We used to believe that to understand anything at all, we only need to isolate, define and describe each component. Understand the proton, neutron and electron and you understand the atom…understand the atom and you understand the molecule…understand the molecule and you understand the substance…on up to a complete and unshakeable understanding of the world…right? NO!!! Not at all! It turns out that it is not enough to define and describe the particles. It is not just the particles that make things what they are, but rather it is the INTERACTIONS between all the particles! The universe is defined as we interact—life is ongoing, not preset! The fabric of the universe is woven through RELATIONSHIP and empty space between particles is never really empty. Empty space is filled with INTERACTION of particles upon one another. We all really affect each other. (So much so, that it is a RELATIONSHIP that affects eternal destiny and the very substance--be it life or death--that issues forth from a human heart! The whole Kingdom—and the whole universe run on relationship.)

So…..the dialogue is all important and it makes sense that this would be the case. As a church leader, I am redefining success. My success is not about what I have delivered, defined or documented. My success—and the question of my heart today—is, simply, “Am I still having the dialogue?” Am I still willing to try to bridge the gap between the Kingdom of God as I see it in my heart and the psyches of those with whom I am travelling? Am I still engaging in the interaction or have I, through hurt or pain, decided to live out of my own stockpile, dumping on people what I have rather than discovering with them together?

Recently in our church, we hit a patch of rough waters in a very treasured relationship. (I’m reminded of the lyrics of the Dave Mason song from the 70’s: “There ain’t no good guys. There ain’t no bad guys. There’s only you and me and we just disagree.” How it would help if church people could say this rather than invoking heaven’s endorsement solely on one side or the other.) If you’re still tender at all, you hate these things and in your pain, you are tempted to either look outward or look inward. I look inward. I have been wondering what I could have done or said along the way that could have prevented the problem. I talk and dream and cast vision constantly, but did I err in failing to deal with the current state of things while peering down the road into reformation? Was I, as I am so often accused of, being an impractical dreamer leading people on with my idealism, but unable to translate the conversation into any action?

As I was sharing with my 20 year old son this morning in my introspective funk, he said to me, “Mom, you did the best you could. You’ve just been having the dialogue and the dialogue is your prayer.” Suddenly the cloud cover broke and I recommitted. The dialogue doesn’t always promise a perfect resolution—the dialogue may hit impasses and even break down, but it is still worth having and yes—he’s right—it is my prayer. Stay away—far away—from Perrianne Brownback if you don’t want to talk, dream and create a world where church is set free from the trappings of religion and allowed to flesh itself out authentically in a postmodern culture which is ripe and ready to hear the truth. This IS my prayer…though I bungle it, blunder it and botch it up at times. My heart is pressing for something because in terms of church lived out on earth, “I still haven’t found what I’m looking for….” Love me, hate me, receive me, reject me…I might feel the cuddle or the sting, but ultimately I won’t care. It will always come back to this. I can’t help it. I’m a carrier of the dialogue and it must continue. In every form and at every turn, I must (perhaps less aggressively than I’m raging on about here, but still ‘must’) explore the possibilities of the reality of God showing up where we’ve been told he can’t do!!!

I’m finally free to “not have all the answers”, but bless God, I dare you to try to stop me from having the conversation! If you can’t handle it, get out of the way because, though I’m British enough to say, “I’m sorry” when our paths collide, I’m American enough to plough on through towards the thing I see ahead. (Obviously, a balance of the two would approach “Kingdom”.) I may not get there by a predictable path or even a very pretty one, but I will not stop. There is only the cause of Kingdom Come to live for and press for and to shift the local church more and more fully into so that the days of wasted efforts of the flesh and inefficiency fully come to an end. I’m gone, hopeless…but I suspect I’m not gone alone. Who else is up for the dialogue….???