Jan 12 Column on careful speech

Recently, i was at a dreadful meeting, where I could feel my life draining away by the second. At one point, we were introduced to a document that spoke of ways of speaking in civil ways to each other. This is of vital interest to all of us, but maybe especially in churches. I am constantly astonished at how rudely people in churches speak to each other, especially in meetings. it is as if they feel as if they have an exemption from being polite due to being in church, or we revert to childish ways of speaking when we are in church meetings. In part, I think we secretly hope that conflict will not raise its head in church meetings, and our resentments show when they do.

Speaking clearly and calmly in conflict does not come easily to most of us. We all can use some training and help in learning this important social skill. I think of 12 step programs where in working the steps, people gather and learn how to share their story without jumping on someone else. In so doing, people become free to tell out loud, their inmost struggles and outward failures.David Marshall reminds me of using the principles of fair fighting in marital or other arenas. Just as boxing sets rules, we can decide what is out of bounds, what is below the belt. We can express ourselves without being hurtful. We can come to understand that different points of view are not assaults but merely expressions of one point of view.

While AA groups may reside in church halls, church meetings need much help here. My group, the Presbyterian Church (USA) has issued some helpful pointers to move church meetings in conflict from snake pits to  respectful place of Christian community. they urge us to treat each other respectfully so as to build trust;  we are urged l not ask questions or make statements in a way which will intimidate or judge others. Few things will shut someone down more than the sense that they are being judged harshly for a viewpoint.Like the World Cafe approach, we seek to learn about different points of view and data on the topic of discussion. Misunderstanding plagues us all, so we try to state what we think we heard and ask for clarification before responding, in an effort to be sure we understand each other. Instead  of questioning people’s motives,intelligence or integrity; we attempt not engage in name-calling or labelling of others prior to, during, or following the discussion. Just as in AA, we share our personal experiences about the subject of disagreement so that others may more fully understand our concerns.

Rather than a focus on the negative or points of contention, we try to indicate where we agree with those of other viewpoints as well as where we disagree. Conflict does not have ot mean cutting someone off, or de-friending them as in the echo chamber we call Facebook, but we are asked to seek to stay in community with each other though the discussion may be
vigorous and full of tension; Not only do we admit our own fallibility, we will be ready to forgive and be forgiven. Further, we try to seek each person as made in the image and likeness of God, as a vessel of Christ, so we take their concerns seriously. We try to see that no one person possesses all wisdom, but that a group can move even beyond its individual actors toward collective wisdom.

Our politics have grown poisonous. We have gotten to a point where we can rarely agree on facts, let alone interpreting them. We label opponents and lose sight of each other as patriots and citizens. Free speech is valuable, not as it seeks the lowest common denominator, but that it offers a forum for us to speak, to be heard, and to listen to others with civility and respect.