Wednesday, 04 July 2007

who says?

a big theme in religious talk is AUTHORITY. the issue is, who get's to say what's in and what's out. more personally, we have to decide who we're gonna listen to - i.e. who we will invest authority in. i've often thought about the authors/books i choose to read.

what if what i read today takes me to a new place (in terms of outlook and perspective) and, to some extent, determines the next book i choose to read... and so on... then perhaps all the books I've read were to some extent a consequence of the first author I chose to read... hmmm, so how does one choose? isn't there a danger that we end up choosing books that reaffirm our already held views? or do you purposefully seek out books that present alternative perspectives, so as to broaden your scope?

that aside, i have a question which I would like to propose as a HELPFUL and RELIABLE (meaning, "authoritative") question in the hard work of making decisions about our lives. When we have to make an important decision, Who do we turn to? Who's opinion counts? What principles guide us?

Here's my Guiding Question: "What is the bigger danger in my life?"

The question needs some clarification. Let me use an example from my own life.

I have lived my life in fast forward mode since I can remember. I joined my parent's bible study class when I was 15. I took on leadership responsibilities at church and school in my teens. I started preaching when I was 17 and offered myself to become a minister at 18. I left home at 18, graduated at 22 and was ordained as a minister at 24. I led my first funeral service when I was 19, even though I couldn't remember actually ever attending one! At 27 I was made the solely responsible minister/pastor in a local congregation... I have taken on huge responsibilities as a senior pastor of a various local christian communities - for the well-being of their individual members and for the health of the communities as a whole. I'm now 35. I'm not bragging. It's just that I'm slowly beginning to realise that I am a person who tends to take on a lot of responsibility. For whatever reasons, I take on huge responsibilities, sometimes at a high price to myself... (How did I come to realise this about myself? - the Guiding Question...)

So, when a decision comes along I ask myself the Guiding Question: "what is the bigger danger in my life?" Am I in danger of being accused of being an irresponsible person? or is it that I become overly-responsible for others. When phrased like that it's an easy question to answer. The far greater danger in my life is that I take on too much responsibility. This has helped me to reflect on decisions from a different perspective and has helped me to take more enlightened decisions that protect me from the seemingly endless demands of Responsibility...

I think the goal of the Guiding Question is greater health.

Another person may acknowledge, in response to the Guiding Question, that they are a person who is in greater danger of irresponsibility... the challenge for them, as they make a decision, is how to take on more healthy responsibility...

One more example: for some people the "rule" no-sex-before-marriage is Authoritative. But what happens if we apply my Guiding Question to the following scenario - I am thinking of a 28 year-old person, who has faithfully abided by the "rule" and is a virgin. The unfortunate result of this in their life is that sexuality has become a source of frustration and even irritation, and therefore it has been gradually devalued. Now they meet someone... What is the greater danger for this person - that the gift of sexuality be devalued by a faithful and mature sexual relationship at this point in their lives or that the gift of sexuality become increasingly harmed by an ongoing denial. I suggest that for this person it may be helpful to use the Guiding Question (alongside the Rule), exploring this person's high regard for the "Rule" and encouraging them to consider that the Spirit of the Rule may not necessarily be best served by ongoing abstinence.

In the same way, a very gregarious and physically confident young person in their late teens might answer the Question quite differently - becoming aware that the greater danger for them is a path of sexual promiscuity, and that the potential for hurtful and even life-threatening consequences suggests that they strongly consider the "Rule" as a guide for their forthcoming years...

I think I may be missing some clarity, but this is already too long... but please, your reflections on the helpfulness of this "Guiding Question" would be appreciated!

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Barry, do you find the Enneagram to be a useful tool when reflecting on your propensity to rake on responsibility?

Anonymous said...

ooops, meant to say "take on responsibility" ... but "rake" works just as well :P

Unknown said...

Hi Barry,

First, thanks for letting me know where I can find you. :)

I have a couple of thoughs, if you don't mind. A few years ago before I got knocked off the religion wagon I was writing a book on religious ethics. The fundamental question I asked my readers was, "How shall we live?"

Obviously that's a huge question and one that is too broad to suffice to show each the steps along the path. But I think it is helpful and meaningful to have a broad base for one's personal ethical paradigm.

After we've established how we should live, what values we are going to uphold, where we rest our hearts, and what for us are ideals of ultimate value, we can then start tackling smaller everyday tasks and obstacles.The smaller questions have a frame of reference--each action we take should support in some fundamental way the orientation we have chosen for our lives.

One of my guiding values, for example, is to do no harm and help where possible. Using your example of sexual activity before marriage, one of my questions would be,"Where is the harm?" By identifying what could go wrong--disease, pregnancy, instability, emotional emptiness, etc, I'm able to logically and methodically reduce situations to questions and answers.

The trouble, of course, is weighing some answers against others.

I don't want to repeat everything I've already written here,
but i will say that just having answers to the fundamental questions isn't enough. I have to also consider those answers in the web of my other values and immediate desires.

I might decide that the harm of sex is an unwanted pregnancy, which is fairly significant, but then I might also say that one of my values is, say, experience of and giving of love. And now I'm in the situation of figuring out which weighs more, and worse, which weighs more *right now*, since my values will change at any given time for a variety of reasons, so I can't even reliably use past decisions as a guideline.

I think no matter how you slice it, living ethically is difficult...or if not difficult, exactly, at least something that has to be done consciously, and sometimes that little bit of extra thought is too much effort.

the topic is too broad for me to be able to reduce my feelings and impressions in a blog comment, but, maybe that'll be something to chew.

barry said...

thanks for the question aiden - hmmm. i love the enneagram because it isn't binary and symetrical. UP/DOWN LEFT/RIGHT Thinker/Feeler binary kind of categorisations... I'm a 3 on the enneagram.. lot's of striving. building, desire to achieve with lots of need for recognition and approval... haven't really linked the over-responsibility thing to it before. what do you think? is there a link between a 3 and this tendency to over-commit?
(I thought it was a 2 that needed to be needed...)

Anonymous said...

Well, I wonder which of your wings finds a stronger expression in your life ... the 2 or the 4?