One
of the classes we had in seminary dealt with ethical issues from a religious
viewpoint – how would we, as Christians, respond to different ethical situations
locally as well as around the world. It was an interesting class, not only
because we faced real-life situations, but also because we were able to listen
to and discuss the different situations from several points-of-view.
The
class started out with simpler issues such as how we respond to different
styles of raising our children. For instance, a child has just learned how to
crawl and is doing so on the living room floor. Her parents are in the room, as
well as a few other adults. Other children are present as well, ranging in age
from newborn to 4 years old.
The
crawling child sees a butter knife lying on the ground and picks it up. The
adults in the room, including her parents, decide that there really isn’t too
much damage a butter knife can do to a crawling child so they let it go, but
keep a watchful eye on her anyway.
The
child, with the knife in hand, begins crawling towards a wall which has an open
electrical socket. You notice nobody in the room makes a move towards the
child, even as it gets right next to the wall socket, still with the butter
knife in hand.
What
do you do?
Let
me see a show of hands. How many in the room would have stopped that child a
long time ago, as soon as she picked up the butter knife? How many would have
stopped the child while she still had the butter knife in hand and it became
obvious she was headed to an electrical socket? How many would have done what
the other adults in that room were doing and did nothing up to this point?
Remember,
I said this was a simpler issue, but I can honestly say the discussion of what
to do and when to do it took 30 minutes and would have gone longer if the
instructor let it. The debate didn’t get heated as much as it could have, but
it was clear there were 2 distinct sides: take away the butter knife before the
child reached the wall, and leave the child alone. While both sides could
understand why the other stood firm in their point-of-view, neither side budged
in accepting the other’s solution.
Then
it got interesting. After that half hour discussion/debate the instructor said,
“Now imagine that this issue was splitting your church. What would you do?”
The
room got quiet, really quiet. Then, a student who was on the “take away the
butter knife” side raised his hand. The instructor asked if he had a question.
“Yes”, said the student, “I want to know why they wouldn’t take away the knife
from the child, even though they know there’s a chance the child can hurt
herself or worse, stick that knife in the socket and get electrocuted?”
It
would seem that during the entire debate nobody had thought to ask the simplest
question of the other side – Why? Sure, the reasons were given, but still,
nobody asked . They were just given
Someone
on the “leave the child alone” side simply said, “Because the child hasn’t done
anything to harm herself or others, not yet anyway.” To which she added, “If it
became apparent that the child was going to absolutely put the knife in the
socket, or in any other way harm herself or others, an adult in the room would
intercede.”
The
question remained, though. Why? The answer wanted to be understood at the root
level.
Someone
else said, “Because when our people, the indigenous people, raise their
children we prefer that they explore all avenues which lead to making their own
decisions from as young an age as possible. So far the child’s decisions
weren’t harmful, so her decisions were deemed correct. If she had actually
raised the knife and made a movement to place it in the socket, every adult in
that room would react and remove the knife from her hand and her parent would,
in some way, discipline her.”
It
was then we looked around the room to see who was on what side. The westerners,
those who lived and thought in a more western way, were on the “take it away”
side, while the indigenous people were on the “leave her alone” side. The
entire class had just been given a lesson on learning to respect the ways of
the people with whom you reside or visit.
We
had also been given a lesson on asking the “why” question. Because after the
answer was given, both sides found it easier to accept the other’s
point-of-view and while some people still couldn’t fully agree with it, at
least a way to move forward was found.
The
wall which separated the 2 sides had begun to come down. This is what the hopes
for the church in Ephesus were as well, that the wall which was keeping the
Gentiles and Jews from working together could find its way to be broken down so
the church could move forward.
Moving
forward is a very important thing for a church, but it can sometimes be
difficult. Using my example from seminary, we had to each write a short
response and solution to how we would allow the situation of the child and the
electrical socket keep us together. Right down to the last written response
everyone agreed that we would need to first decide what the church would look
like on the other side of that argument – what the end goal was – then we all
decided to continue to be in conversation until an agreement could be reached.
Also
right down to the last written response was the fact that as a church we needed
to be sure to ground our conversations, actions, and results in what we
believed to be where Jesus Christ was leading us. It was Jesus Christ who
brought us together, it is in Jesus Christ we must build upon. Jesus Christ is
and will always be the cornerstone with which we continue to build the church.
Then
the instructor posed another discussion point: If Jesus Christ is to be our
cornerstone, what then is our foundation?
Again
we sat in a silent room. Until a voice came from one of the indigenous elders,
who had a small chuckle before saying, “Guys, isn’t it obvious – God is the
foundation of all things.”
The
class laughed, not so much because the elder was funny, but because the elder
was right. We were thinking too hard to see what was right in front of us – God
is indeed the foundation for all things.
By
the end of that first class, almost 3 hours later, we had begun to understand
that Christian ethics doesn’t lie in concrete black and white. Rather,
Christian ethics lies in the respect we show for one another in all that we say
and do, and that when we put our words and actions into motion they come from a
place of love that is fully accepting of one another, regardless of our own
beliefs.
We
were reminded that one of the more intimate moments in the bible is when God
walks through the garden in search of humanity. Unfortunately, that intimacy
was shattered because humanity had other ideas. Imagine, we were told, if when
God had found humanity in that garden we had put God’s wishes before ours. God wants
an intimate relationship with us, even when we try to hide as did man and woman
when they were naked. Whether or not we allow this intimacy to happen is up to
us.
Will
we, can we, put God’s wishes before ours so God will find us as a loving people?
Will we, can we build on the examples of Jesus’ teachings about loving God with
our entire being and loving each other and ourselves in the same way?
Or
are the powers of self-realization before another’s well-being the driving
force with which we continue to move forward?
The
ethical situations in class got more difficult each day, and each day we found
ourselves taking sides and arguing our positions. We also found ourselves
learning to listen more, ask questions to understand more, and find common
ground in which we can agree that the decisions being made were in the best
interest of what God would want and based in the teachings of Jesus Christ.
The
final day of class had come and with it the most difficult situation of the
entire week. This time, however, the class would be different. Instead of open
discussions and the opportunity to ask questions, we had to write a short paper
based only on the story we were told. In this paper we were asked to reach a
conclusion as to what was the best way to move forward. I never had a more
anxious time writing a responsive paper in my life.
In
the 1960’s, archaeologists came across a tribe of people known as the Luba who
lived in the Congo region of Africa. These were very primitive people and had
never seen an outsider before. They welcomed the archaeologists into their
villages and taught them their languages and customs; things archaeologists
truly love learning.
The
religious beliefs of the Luba were pagan, of course, and they had many gods to
which they prayed and gave tribute to. As it is with most ancient tribes there
was a god for just about every aspect of life. There was a god of human
fertility, for the planting of crops, for the first harvests, and for the
weather.
The
archaeologists learned that the Luba were very religious people and attributed
their well-being to keeping their gods happy. It would seem that for many
centuries the Luba lived in peace and harmony, fearing no evil spirit could
ever take hold of them.
Then,
one day while the archaeologists were observing the birth of a child, something
they will never forget happened. The child was born with a physical defect,
which immediately brought true and deep fear into the village. The local
religious leader, similar to what the Native Americans might call a medicine
man or the Hawaiians would call a kahuna, was called into the birthing hut,
where he immediately took the child.
A
few of the archaeologists followed the medicine man and observed as he
occasionally held the child high into the air, chanting as he continued to move
into the forest. As they moved further away from the village they could hear
the running water of a stream or a river. The kahuna moved towards the sound of
the water and it became obvious they were headed towards that river or stream.
A
clearing in the trees stood before them, and as they approached what they could
now see was a deep, fast-running river the medicine man stopped, held the
newborn child high above his head, chanted some words they could not
understand, and before anyone knew what was going to happen the religious
leader of that Luba tribe tossed the child into the waters.
The
archaeologists stood there, shocked, unable to do anything but watch as the
newborn child disappeared into the whitewater of the river as it pushed against
the protruding rocks.
When
they got back they were angry, and told the chief that what he allowed to be
done was horrific and repulsive, and they would be letting the Congan
authorities know what had just happened.
The archaeologists decided to pack their things and get out of that
village as soon as they could, refusing to partake any further in the shocking
practices of what was obviously a primitive and savage group of humans.
As
they were packing up, one of them asked the woman who had just given birth how
she could have let them do what they did to her child. It was explained to her
that even though a child is deformed it still has value in society.
The
woman explained that what was done had to be done for the safety and security
of her people. She told the story of how a thousand years ago such a child was
born into their village and for the entirety of that child’s life nothing but
evil happened to their people. There were unexplained deaths and disappearances
of loved ones, famine as the crops withered in drought conditions, the
livestock and animals which were hunted all but died of disease. Her people
suffered death because of such a child being allowed to live among them.
It
was the Luba’s long-held belief that the only way to ensure an evil spirit
could never again bring destruction into their village was to give the deformed
child to the gods to do with as was needed. For the thousand years since they
had this practice, no such evil force had taken root and the Luba lived in
peace and harmony with one another and with their gods.
How
would you move forward?
God is with us
always. Amen
No comments:
Post a Comment