Several months ago I was contacted by someone who lives here in the Eugene metro area (if that's not an oxymoron) who shares my general theological perspectives as outlined in that post. We have a friend in common who told him about our move to OR and he reached out to me. He introduced himself and suggested we meet for coffee. We did, and have done that for four or five times since then.
He's very smart, has a thorough knowledge of Greek, and has spent a lot of time studying the Bible. He's come to very fixed views on a number of issues, some of which are unusual. For example, pastors should preach from the Greek text, should only preach verse-by-verse (as opposed to any topical sermons), and should not accept a salary (it wrongly elevates them to a "priestly class"). Virtually all texts on biblical Greek are wrong in their analysis of the language. I'll skip listing some of his theological views because they fall into the category of fine points, and that's part of the problem.
On all of these matters, regardless of their significance, he's what could be called strident. Harsh. Judgmental. He's right, others are wrong, and their error comes from a failure to use good methods. When we're done talking I'm weary of the criticism of others, including authors I respect and men whose ministry I admire.
After our first conversation I was troubled After the second meeting I was put off. By the end of our meeting this last week I was angry. I don't think it occurred to him that his criticism of almost everyone doing ministry regarding a wide range of practices included my time in ministry, but mostly I'm fed up with his critical spirit. At one point this week he prefaced a judgmental statement with, "This might sound arrogant, but...." By then I was past trying to swallow it, so when he was done I said, "That was arrogant."
I know what you're thinking. Or at least what my sons are thinking. "You can't write that stuff in your blog! What if he reads it?!"
He already has.
After debating it with myself for three days I sent him an email this morning saying that I don't want to meet anymore and explained why. I said his critical spirit and judgmental attitude aren't edifying, they leave me feeling irritated, even angry. I respect the time and energy he's put into studying the Bible and that he's come to conclusions on a wide variety of issues, but his expressed opinion on those who disagree with him is the antithesis of grace. I said that after going back and forth since our last meeting I'd finally decided to tell him preemptively that I don't want to meet anymore, and rather than say no when he suggests our next conversation I'd explain now.
I bcc'd Pam on the email because when I told her what I was going to do she feared I'd be unkind.
Me???
She agreed my message left no question about what I thought, but that it was well written and not overly harsh.
But wait! There's more!
Wednesday he told me he's going to start an online school where he'll teach biblical Greek like it should be taught. He plans to pitch his school to area pastors, including Brett, our pastor at UFC. (Turns out they went to H.S. together.) When he told me that I thought: "Great. He's going to meet with Brett, tell him we're both 'grace' guys, and I'm going to get painted with the same negative brush." It's almost enough to make me disavow my theological convictions (last night's post).
This morning Brett preached from Acts 23. Good preaching (typical) that included some time talking about being gracious toward those with whom we disagree.
I hung around afterward to talk with him and told him he would get contacted by this guy. I explained I didn't want to be associated with his attitudes. (I don't think Brett knows my theological perspectives, which are irrelevant to our fellowship at UFC.) "That's NOT where I'm coming from!" By the end of our brief conversation Brett made it clear he knew where this guy was coming from (judgmental and harsh), wasn't interested in promoting his school, and now knew I was to blame for having to meet with him to hear the pitch (he was kidding).
Whew!
It's taken 66 years, but I've figured out that while silence may be golden, sometimes saying nothing amounts to complicity, in this case with an inappropriately critical spirit. I think my email was frank without being unnecessarily harsh. To continue to meet every few weeks pretending I was benefiting from our interactions would be dishonest.
Sometimes you only know if you got it right after the fact. So here I am having sent that email and then talked to Brett. I spent three days thinking about it, wrote that email very carefully and precisely, and in retrospect am convinced I did the right thing. Not the easy thing, but the right thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment