Humble Dialogue and the Willingness to Be Wrong

Amazing Grace: A Vocabulary of Faith, by Kathleen Norris
progress: complete

A friend of mine once described a comment made by his Bible college philosophy professor, one of the few educators at that school which he held in high esteem: In describing his encounters with skeptics or people of different beliefs, he would tell them that, even as a Christian, he would follow the truth wherever it took him, no matter what. No belief was too precious if the truth led him elsewhere.

At the time, I remember struggling with that statement. What exactly would he be willing to discard? Did it mean he would be willing to renounce his faith in Jesus? My friend saw it as a profound example of his integrity and commitment to the truth. I tended to see it more as a threat to the faith. What did he mean he would follow the truth wherever it took him - did he actually think the Christian faith could be wrong? Maybe his own faith was suspect.

Somewhere along the way, I had picked up the idea that a Christian must be completely confident in every aspect of her faith if she is to convince others to believe. There is no room for doubt, because that might scare people away! (Either that or other Christians might become suspicious of you.) What I hadn't thought of was whether or not it was my job to convince other people, or whether exaggerated overconfidence would be more of a turnoff than honest doubt.

Kathleen Norris challenges this modern-day temptation within the church (and Christian institutions) to know everything (or to act like we do) with examples from the early monastic tradition, in which    "I know not" was considered a wise response to individual portions of Scripture. Having an all-inclusive approach to Scripture, they were willing to acknowledge that there was a larger context to that passage (i.e., the whole of Scripture), of which they might be as yet uninformed. Humility and a reticence to produce half-baked opinions allowed them time to take in the big picture, to resist the temptation to "use scripture for his or her own ends," (337) until they were sure that their convictions fit into the whole of Scripture. Norris quotes a Benedictine sister and biblical scholar on the benefits of this approach:

'We're forced into contention with the Bible in uncomfortable, often memorable ways,' she says, 'which save us from citing just the scriptures that agree with our own preconceived ideas.' (Shawn Carruth, quoted on page 337)

Even though I've broadened my views considerably since those Bible college days, it's still hard for me to talk about the freedom to say "I know not" without offering up a few disclaimers. I'm not trying to challenge the authority of Scripture. I believe that Christians can have confidence in the Bible. It is 100% authoritative in my life. What I am challenging is whether my interpretations and hermeneutical applications of the many individual passages of Scripture are 100% authorative. I cannot be 100% confident in my own interpretation, because I am a fallible human tainted by sin. This should make room for a refreshing willingness to admit that I might be wrong, and therefore to hear with humility the differing perspectives of others. It allows me to resist prideful judgment of others with differing viewpoints. Norris writes,

To church congregations and denominations that are weary of strife, of continually arguing things out in a tense, judgmental atmosphere, it may come as welcome news to learn that they, too, are allowed to say 'I know not' with regard to the Bible, free to not use it to justify taking sides in every issue that coms along. (338)

She goes on to describe the yearning voiced to her by an acquaintance who

hoped that religious communities could provide a vision of a church, and a community, 'in which not everything has to be decided, where you don't have to take a stand on every issue before you can live together peaceably and creatively.' (338)

Sounds refreshing, doesn't it? Imagine if, instead of persecuting Galileo for his heliocentric views, the Catholic church was willing to say, we can't be 100% sure if that jives with Scripture, but the bigger picture of your life tells us that you're a man who loves God and his word, so let's agree to disagree and move forward in community until the truth is made more plainly clear. Hm. There are far too many examples of this pigheadedness-in-the-name-of-conviction in our churches today. I have modelled it far too much in my own life. 

Truth will win out in the end. It can withstand scrunity without our feeble attempts to "protect" it. And if we will make room for genuine inquiry, we might learn something and even grow in our own faith. But, as Norris points out, 

Genuine inquiry takes time. It also requires patience, trust, and the ability to listen well, qualities that are unfortunately in short supply in theological schools as well as church congregations, and to be truthful, in the human heart. I do not wish to be mistaken for an anti-intellectual when I criticize the criticizers, that is, when I suggest that the modern methods of biblical interpretation have given us more than we could have hoped for but also less than we need to sustain our faith, and the Christian church. As good and necessary as these methods have proven to be, they have furthered harsh and seemingly intractable division among Christians. (339)

It amazes me how vehemently we as Christians can argue issues that really have comparatively little to do with living the Christian life, alienating so many others in the process, and distracting ourselves from focusing on those little things, like "bearing with one another in love," "making every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace," and "do not think more highly of yourselves than you ought." Oh yeah, and "Be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry" - an especially challenging one for me, since I am prone to chatter. 

I don't pretend to know just how it's done, but I suspect a good place to start is with silence and a sincere and thorough searching of the Scriptures, not so much for an answer to vindicate a particular view as for direction to guide us ever deeper into the heart of God. For this is the purpose of God's word: not to win arguments but to transform its readers into Christlikeness. If we forget that, we are lost. 

In the end, I think it's fair to say that the professor's attitude wasn't so much a threat to "the faith" as it was a threat to mine, which was immature and untested. I am inclined to think it was the strength of a deep-seated, mature faith that enabled him to speak with such confidence about Truth - for sincere faith that makes room for honest doubt is in the end, likely to be the strongest.

I'll close with an extended quote from Shane Hipps, author of the great book Flickering Pixels: How Technology Shapes Our Faith (I just read it last year, but might have to read it again for bookmeal): 

Many [Christians] are coming to believe that robust faith lives somewhere between absolute trust and deep doubt. The colours of faith change through seasons of grief and hope, passion and despair. No one has it all figured out all the time - both Christians and non-Christians are in need of ongoing conversion. Humanity as a whole is called to participate in an unfolding process of redemption and reconciliation.

and further,

The person who is a true follwer of Jesus, a student and learner, but perhaps not yet - and maybe not ever - an orthodox believer. This category of doubting disciple didn't seem to bother Jesus; after all, his parting words to us in the book of Matthew were, 'Therefore go and make disciples...' Jesus didn't tell us to make believers. He called us to make disciples, and disciples are followers and students of the way of God. Followers learn to change their beliefs as they walk.

Let's not be afraid of doubt, disagreement, or dialogue on these things. The truth can defend itself best when we listen in love, not judgment; when we seek to save souls, not arguments; and when we humbly remind ourselves that our own understanding of things can only ever be partial - at least on this side of heaven.

He who answers before listening—that is his folly and his shame. - Proverbs 18:13

Share