Partisanship, incivility and irrationality seem to be the driving energies for most moral conversations. How are we going to make progress on race, poverty and the environment with such anti-intellectual and un-Christian approaches spread so broadly in our culture?
In my first pastorate, two men were at serious odds. I said to the one who was more rational and approachable, “How are you going to reconcile this difference?” He replied, “I’m going to pray with him.” I cautioned, “I’d be afraid to get down on my knees and close my eyes with his emotional instability.” The reply was: “I want to sit quietly and listen, and try to understand his point of view. If I do, I then have a basis on which to build a relationship.” To him, building a relationship was more important than winning an argument.
It worked. The reconciler discovered the irrational man grew up in an environment where people were not used to listening. They formed their opinions and were used to “telling” as forcefully as they could. That often meant yelling, cursing, belittling, agitating and even getting physical. By listening, the reconciler showed the irrational man another approach to problem solving. He extended a “hand of friendship” to the man. The two men not only became friends in the church, but also projected that friendship into the church community.
One may be surprised by what voice modulation, listening and a relaxed setting can do for changing a hostile environment. People yell because they think they are not being heard or to make their point more forcefully. Some yell because that is the model they know best.
Some would like to intimidate the “other side” by yelling. It is part of the animal instinct. Nature movies of animals help us understand how they take psychological advantage of opponents by snarling, bristling and raising up their bodies to higher positions. When humans do this, they have retreated to the animal instinct rather than intellectual advantage.
There are times when it is necessary to call “time out,” agree that what you are discussing is important, but set another time and place to continue the conversation. Set an agenda for the next conversation. Agree to talk, allowing each to have time to share his or her point of view and pledging to listen quietly. Be careful how you classify the next conversation. Avoid emotional words such as “argument,” “debate,” “disagreement” or “dispute.” Make use of words like “conversation,” “listening session” or “a time of sharing.”
Your ultimate goal should be (1) to win a friend with whom you can (2) share a point of view that will (3) have a positive impact. Simply to put another person down to get your way or to win an argument is not worthy of a maturing Christian. You have won only when the other person is blessed and becomes a blessing.
Emmanuel L. McCall, pastor
Fellowship Group Baptist Church
East Point, Ga.
We seek to connect God’s story and God’s people around the world. To learn more about God’s story, click here.
Send comments and feedback to Eric Black, our editor. For comments to be published, please specify “letter to the editor.” Maximum length for publication is 300 words.