There is a story from Medieval times ...
Two monks were washing their bowls in
the river when they noticed a scorpion that was drowning. One monk immediately
scooped it up and set it upon the bank. In the process he was stung. He went
back to washing his bowl and again the scorpion fell in. The monk saved the
scorpion and was again stung. The other monk asked him, "Friend, why do
you continue to save the scorpion when you know it's nature is to sting?"
"Because," the monk replied,
"to save it is my nature."
I see myself in this story as both the
scorpion and the monk.
For about half of my life in the military, it was my called
nature to be a scorpion. Leaders used my nature to sting people who
messed with the policy views my corner of the military was putting forward.
Let's make no mistake about my effectiveness: I was a
very good scorpion. My scorpion nature was recognized on the day of my
retirement with a Legion of Merit, the second highest level of recognition for
non-wartime competency. For sure, it doesn't say 'we are recognizing Dennis
for being a scorpion' but that is what it was for, pure and simple.
But I confess, I did not like that nature of myself that was
called to be a scorpion. On July 1st, 1994, I decided I was being called,
invited perhaps, to have a different nature. The road from that day to
this has not been easy, but it has by and large, been fruitful.
I am still working on the exact details of what it means for
me to "save" are but at the end of the day, the nature of who I am is
more about nurture and care, than stinging and pain. I am still a work in
progress here.
I would hope that we can agree that our nature is not
static, fixed and locked up for life. Isn't change what we expect to
happen when we take part in spreading scriptural holiness across the land? Wesley
saw it as this beautiful threefold fullness of Grace which is Prevenient
(preceding bending our knee to God), Justifying (saying to God, 'Abba, Father')
and then getting started on our life project of Sanctification ('thy will be
done')?
Paul is dealing with the basic nature of the church in
Corinth when he discusses with them the idea of the "body of Christ"
in 1st Corinthians 12. The debate is about gifts and how those gifts fit
into lifting up the body for its true purpose. The issue is how this body
works in totality, not in its individual parts. Our nature is to see
ourselves as the most important but Paul is trying to bring this group of
individualist focused leaders over to a more communitarian, common good,
approach.
I love sports, and Paul's 1st Corinthians 12 passage works
in terms of sports -- baseball in particular -- but it also works in terms of
music. The church is an orchestra and the woodwinds are not more
important than the strings. Yes, we could have an entire orchestra of
woodwinds, but if we did, we wouldn't ask the other sections to show up for
that piece of music. The church is like an orchestra but not only in
terms of instruments themselves, but also in terms of the need to listen to
each other and to perform together.
Music performed by groups that is about 97% right, can still sound pretty bad.
Music has a high expectation for suppression of the individual for the nature of team and community. A man with perfect pitch who couldn't count, once told me that I was not singing an A flat in the right sequence, and while he was right, he was singing the right A flat at the wrong time. The right note at the wrong time, is the wrong note.
Music performed by groups that is about 97% right, can still sound pretty bad.
Music has a high expectation for suppression of the individual for the nature of team and community. A man with perfect pitch who couldn't count, once told me that I was not singing an A flat in the right sequence, and while he was right, he was singing the right A flat at the wrong time. The right note at the wrong time, is the wrong note.
I bring all of that up, just to explain that my nature is to
focus on the group, the community, and trying to stay in harmony and on pitch
at that time.
My nature is also to endeavor to try and honor the community
rather than the individual.
Offering a team oriented thought to Paul's imagery from 1st
Corinthians 12, a former left fielder for the Los Angeles Dodgers, Manny
Ramirez, would do odd things during a game. When asked why Manny was
doing this, his manager, (now) Hall of Famer Joe Torre would say "it's just Manny being Manny."
Paul is saying to the church in Corinth that 'Manny just
being Manny' is not the way for us to be church.
If Paul were in the 21st Century, he would probably see by
and large the nature of the US Congress in his dealing with nature in the
church in Corinth. I have heard Congress described as 535
Valedictorians who still think they are the smartest person in the room.
To my way of hearing some of the current debate in the
(almost) Untied Methodist Church, it is this "Manny being Manny" at
one level (it's just who I am after all), meeting "I am the smartest
person in the room." And the meeting at times has collateral damage.
People -- logically I believe -- feel cutoff, estranged, and not welcome.
Here is what I aspire for as it relates to all focused
on a constructive dialogue about a hopeful future i.e. #nextmethodism,
#dreamumc, & #CurrentUnitedMethodism, is that we can alter the nature of
our dialogue so that we can truly speak to each other. I hope that we can
speak to each other in such a way that opens space for dialogue, rather than
closes it off. Please know that my observation here is not restricted to
"either side." The nature of vitriol is not isolated to one
side. The other day, I took a generic invitation to be in dialogue on
this topic to be totally sincere and welcoming; I replied; and felt welcomed.
Thank you.
I personally have gotten to a place where I think
retaliatory jousting with sharp spears is making all of us blind. At some
point, the 'he started it' must give way to shared values within the social
capital built up over time. The Common Good matters. Or at least it does to me.
We seem to be using the US Congress as the model for
dialogue, rather than Paul/1st Corinthians 12. At some point, our using the US
Congress as the model for how we are in dialogue needs to be rejected,
discarded and called out for what it is: sinful.
The UMC through all of these renewal efforts --
#nextmethodism, #dreamumc and remembering where we are #CurrentUnitedMethodism --
should model what we aspire to, not sink to increasingly lower and lower levels
of snark and combativeness.
As soon as somebody says 'but they started it, and besides
that have you been reading how mean they are' dialogue leaves the room, and we
move to monologue. In effect, they might be saying the right note here, without
regard to time, is this offering [whatever it is], and I wonder if they
understand the idea of the right note, at the wrong time, is still the wrong
note?
I am in. I want to be in this conversation. I was invited in
by inference by Dr. David Watson, but I was also invited in by colleagues across the
connection: "your voice needs to be present here."
But I return to my confession at the start of this:
I did not like that nature of myself that was called to be a scorpion. On July 1st, 1994, I decided I was being called, invited perhaps, to have a different nature. The road from that day to this has not been easy, but it has by and large, been fruitful.
My purpose with this particular blog today is to frame the
nature of how I hope we can converse, and what the nature will be that I will
use in this conversation ...
Peace be with you ...
Selah, Dennis
No comments:
Post a Comment