Bend it Back

What I was starting to say, before I went off on my Lord of the Flies tangent yesterday, is that I see some real harm in the polarization that is taking place in our world.  I'm going to put secular politics to the side for the moment, because ultimately I believe that secular politics is doomed to pursue the self interest of those in power.  What I would like to talk about is Church politics, which for a brief moment was actually newsworthy.  The General Assembly has made some moves, some would say, "big moves," I would say controversial moves.  I'm not going to talk about the merit of those moves, but rather the response to those moves in a polarized environment (that sounds vaguely scientific).
We have reached a point where true consensus is difficult, if not impossible, on some issues.  Marriage equality and Israel/Palestine, are the ones in question here.  The interesting thing about this in a religious context is the explicit involvement of the conscience and one's understanding of God.  It is a dangerous thing to challenge someone's opinion on an emotionally charged issue, but when that opinion is informed by their connection to ultimate authority...
Thus there is much weeping and gnashing of teeth.  Some say we have become apostate, some say heretical, (there is an important difference: apostasy is about practice, heresy is about ideas).  And then again some say that we have actually removed a major stumbling block from the path of certain "little ones," and have become more like Christ, welcoming the stranger and the outcast and challenging unjust systems.
In all of this there is much equivocation and some conciliatory gestures.  However, attempts at continued dialogue from the victorious factions, are rife with the smell of smugness masquerading as humility.  How else can it sound?
After an almost forty year debate, the Presbyterian Church (USA) has finally come to the precipice of defining "biblical" truth differently than it has in the past.  A church that has historically valued our intellectual and spiritual connection with the Jewish faith, and been vocal in our support of the nation of Israel, has decided that our friends have been behaving badly towards a group of people we had largely ignored until recently.  We have made a nearly toothless, symbolic gesture, and it has offended a chunk of people.  If a symbolic gesture doesn't ruffle some feathers what good is it?
What I hope does not come of this is our fellowship to begin to follow progressivism without question.  In recent years I have found that my own experience on the journey of faith have made me feel more at home with the progressive agenda, but I still respect my more conservative friends, in much the same way as I respected my progressive friends when I was younger and tilted more towards the right.  The journey away from some of my formerly held opinions has involved deeply personal experiences of God's grace in some of the most tragic and unsavory experiences.  I have become more and more aware of the power of God's redeeming love, and as I have done so have found the idea of God's judgment less and less problematic.
At the same time I was witnessing some decidedly un-Christlike behavior from people who I thought were "on my side."  I found that asking honest questions was not acceptable and therefore true dialogue was nearly impossible.
On the progressive side, I found that questions were okay, and things began to seem alive and hopeful again.  I thought I was home.  But I made the same mistake, yet again, in thinking that we ever get home short of God's presence.  Lately, as the scales have begun to shift and the progressives have begun to win some battles, I'm seeing the ugly head of un-reflective dogma pop up again: naming those who disagree enemies, smug condescension to those "poor backwards evangelicals."
Seriously?  I thought I had migrated out of that.
Jim Wallis of all people, penned a draft of a letter about religious freedom in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision.  Wallis, editor in chief of Sojourners magazine, was one of the voices that sort of calmly assured me it was okay to step a little to the left.  What he said was basically that religious freedom is a good thing, and we shouldn't get too riled up that the government interprets that basic premise fairly broadly.   Because Hobby Lobby and Conestoga are pretty obviously using this case to throw a wrench in the Affordable Care Act, and because, as Mother Jones has uncovered, their commitment to the issue is somewhat less than consistent, the Progressive movement has not had nice things to say about Mr. Wallis.
One comment was that Wallis was not a true progressive, he was a "liberal evangelical" and there was a difference.  The implication being that his opinion was not worthy of the high ideals of the "In Crowd."

Really?  Have we not learned anything about litmus tests and trying to enforce doctrinal purity?
Doesn't Wallis, of all people, have enough street cred to say something that might call us to a little bit of moderation in the tone of a conversation?
Another thing that caused me to jump off the conservative bandwagon is the schismatic practice of separating into smaller and smaller groups of like minded people.  Want to talk about an "un-biblical" model of community: try this on for size: only associate with people who agree with you 100 percent, never try to learn from what other people might have to say, if you disagree with them, God hates them, judge them as harshly as you want, call them sinners, and shun them from your presence.   Always remember to fly off the handle whenever someone does something you don't like, because only the strong-minded and doctrinally pure will inherit the kingdom of heaven.
Irony and sarcasm full stop.
We can do better than this people.  We don't all have to agree on stuff, but it would be a really good idea to stop labeling each other as Antichrist.
We need to stop this in all quarters, because it's making us look bad.  The thing all those people we hope to reach in the name of Jesus Christ see in the church is a bunch of bickering fools.  They may pay attention, whenever our fight is about something that resonates with the "real" world (i..e. marriage equality, middle east stuff), and then it's really important to show that we can actually think about things and try to find the Jesus way through it all.