Tuesday, June 3, 2008

letters from the trench

As for the ___ situation. I (obviously?) haven't been in touch with ____ about it - as when we (you and I) ended our discussion I mentioned that I wasn't sure how to see if it affected them in any impactful way.

My only thought is this: that Christianity/ Christians need to be a people willing to engage in dialogue without pre-condemming the situation before it happens. In the world, Christians become so quick to offer their advice, suggest a "solution" or give their well intended two bits, in an off putting manner. It suggest a superiority, and ironically an ignorance - that the solution has been thought through and there is no room for change, dialogue and ultimately growth.

So often swing to either extreme- condemn them in our minds and don't confront them, or confront them in a condemning manner. Either way, we loose. Sorry if this is a tangent, but I think it applies to the current situation. The accused (just like all of us), for all of the good that is in him, has many areas to improve on; but I don't know if he is given the opportunity to see them and/or to improve on them. My suspicion is that more often than not "we" pre-condemn him, or just think the best thing is to not give him an avenue for change.

So, my thought is really only that we have to offer the accused an opportunity for change. Change could come in the form of 'live and let live' although I doubt it. Change probably would come from being able to ask the accused what the intent was behind those words, describe what the result was (incase it is different from the intent), suggest that the situation be reconciled between the accused and the accuser (ie. suggest that accused offer what he wants to the accuser), and then leave it as is. You are not pre-condemning the accused by assuming ill intent, and you are not pretending like you know the steps the accused needs to take to 'make it right.' Further, I think you are not making the issue bigger than it is.
By doing this, you are loving the accuser (in that you are protecting/preserving), and I think loving the accused in that you are giving him an opportunity for growth.

This said, I really hold no judgement on what way you choose to go with. My colleague reminds me to choose the hills on which I want to die - and while I think that lead to a selfish approach to management, it certainly is a strategy that I use often, and know it sometimes to be the wisest approach. For example, the reaction to my email last week. You may have way bigger fish to fry and Satan loves to get us mixed up in skirmishes on the periphery

Anyways, sorry, those are my somewhat scattered thoughts.

3 comments:

eutychus said...

who the hell are you talking to?

Jeff said...

i don't really know why i posted that, but as I was writing the letter I realized that for me, I think it says something of at least how I want to try to attempt to "deal" with some of the 'skirmishes' -
I was up at Anvil yesterday and for a bit today but saw your boat at the marina so didn't call. Sitting at Benny's now thinkin its been a while since we had coffee.sorry long response unrelated to your comment. terry.

eutychus said...

ok, now i am really curious.