Difficult Conversations - Painful Choices

We at First United Methodist Church, Arlington, are beginning to engage in what most people think are difficult conversations. These conversations focus on the Council of Bishops' report on A Way Forward. The presenting issue of this report is the issue of homosexuality in The United Methodist Church.

Conversations about issues are always difficult. Issues by nature polarize and divide. They require a position to be taken, for or against. Those positions, in turn, create an "us versus them" scenario.

Two factors (certainly there are more than two) contribute to our struggle with the polarization around issues.

First, we are relational beings. We were created to live in relationship. Polarization is painful because it touches this deep need to live in relationship, to be connected with others.

The way we commonly seek relationship is through sameness. We associate with those like us - that "birds of a feather" thing. We seek connection through things we have in common. When it comes to issues, sameness translates into agreement: we think alike; we have the same position on an issue. When we build our relationships on sameness or agreement, we struggle with differences (diversity). We have difficulty relating to those who are not like us or who think differently than us.

The second factor in our struggle is also inherent to our human condition: we naturally think in terms of winning and losing ... and we like to win! This inclination leads us to view the two positions associated with an issue and judge one position to be right and the other wrong. And, again, we like to be right!  But winning means the other loses. Winning-losing thinking contributes to the pain of polarization.

These two factors not only contribute to the pain of polarization around issues, they also contribute to those times when polarization becomes destructive. Polarization is destructive when a person is willing to sacrifice a relationship for the sake of his/her position. It is also destructive when one person seeks to impose his/her position on others as "the right" position. As The United Methodist Church deals with the Way Forward report, different groups have talked about both of these actions. If either or both of these actions are taken, The UMC will experience some degree of splintering. The polarization will become not just painful, but destructive.

Is there another way to deal with this issue and its inherent polarizing nature? Do we have to agree in order to live in relationship? Does one position have to be "right" for everyone?

These deeper questions will be a part of our conversations at FUMCA.