It is understandable that the descriptive term generous spaciousness creates some inherent challenges. Some people resonate with it and seem to have a gut sense of what it is all about. For others, it is a term that fails to bring clarity to an already complex conversation. Part of the thinking behind coining such a description is that it necessitates further discussion. It is a description that invites further development and evolution and definition. I think this is helpful in our current discussions around the kind of climate we want to nurture in the Christian community in our interactions with those of us who experience sexual or gender identity differently than the majority of people do.
And that raises the first point about generous spaciousness: It is intended to describe the environment, climate, ethos within expressions of the Christian community as it pertains to engaging with gender and sexual minority persons. It is not a theological position statement. It is not about doctrinal boundaries. It is not about promoting particular positions.
We believe that such an environment is best nurtured from a series of postures:
• The posture of hospitality: all are unconditionally welcomed and invited into relationship
• The posture of humility: we all hold our own convictions deeply with the keen awareness that, “I could be wrong” given the reality that none of us has a perfect pipeline to God and all of us see through a glass dimly
• The posture of grace: I seek to have eyes to see the good fruit in another person’s life – particularly those with whom I may have particular disagreements; I expect the best, not the worst, of those I am in community with; I recognize that there will be times I am misunderstood and I determine to not get defensive or combative about it; I will do my best to not take offense and respond in the manner of Christ
The second major focus of generous spaciousness is that it prioritizes spiritual exploration and growth. Clearly the stewardship of our sexuality and the moral decision-making we are all called to is an integral part of our spiritual growth. However, for many sexual and gender minority persons such matters have been elevated to the primary and sometimes sole priority by those in the Christian community around them. In my experience, this perpetuates the very thing most Christians agree on, that people should not be defined by nor reduced to the realities of their sexuality. In light of this, generous spaciousness seeks to focus on encouraging individuals to explore and more deeply connect to the person of Jesus, to grow in wisdom and discernment, to develop mature spiritual disciplines like prayer, worship, silence etc., and to pursue a life of virtue that exemplifies the fruit of the Spirit. Regardless of where one lands on the question of appropriate choices for a life of faithful discipleship for gender and sexual minorities, this emphasis will best position someone to be open and able to respond to the leading and prompting of the Holy Spirit.
A third focus of generous spaciousness is that it is not intended to be a theoretical concept – but is intended to be an embodied and lived reality through relationships in community. This makes it a little challenging to have discussions about this concept divorced from shared life together. To simply have a discussion where one person brings in their experience and another contributes their separate and distinct experience may prove to be simply frustrating. Generous spaciousness only becomes a life-giving concept as people actually seek to embody it in their interactions with one another in real-time, face-to-face relationship. Though I think we can model aspects of generous spaciousness in online interactions, this is a limited expression of the depth of what the concept seeks to encourage.
For some, a description like generous spaciousness seems to be unhelpful because it doesn’t articulate clear boundaries. It is certainly true that generous spaciousness is not a stand-alone term. It is meant to encourage a particular environment within given groups in the Christian community.
So, in the context of a Christian family where there may be divergent views on the appropriateness of same-sex relationships, generous spaciousness might indicate a commitment to find common ground in a shared faith in Christ despite differences. It might mean that family members give each other the benefit of the doubt when sharing about their spiritual life rather than assuming that such testimony is counterfeit because of the position they hold on same-sex relationships. It might mean that there is a shared agreement to not allow debates and arguments consume family conversations. It might mean a mutual commitment to focus on encouraging each other to continue drawing near to Christ.
In a church setting, generous spaciousness might mean that within the framework of whatever clear position on same-sex relationships the church holds, there will be a sense of safety, trust, and freedom to wrestle with the variety of perspectives that exist in the Christian community on these questions. It might mean that individuals are encouraged to live in the tension between their personal autonomy to shape and own their beliefs and values and the call to live in mutual submission to one another within the context of the faith community. It might mean that space is made for someone who believes differently on the question of same-sex relationships with the understanding that the individual will not constantly seek to confront, coerce, or challenge others within the community to adopt their viewpoint. It might mean that once clear understanding has been established of the church’s position and an individual’s position, the focus prioritizes spiritual growth as described above.
In a Christian organization, generous spaciousness might mean that the idea of who can be a Christian is more than a code of moral conduct. It might mean that there is an intentional commitment to find unity in diversity with the understanding that people may form and shape their beliefs and values based on slightly different approaches to scripture – but it doesn’t mean that people can judge who cares about the scriptures and who doesn’t. In a Christian organization, generous spaciousness may mean that we recognize that sexual and gender minority persons may navigate their journey of discipleship in different ways but the priority should be to be alert to the fruit that is evident in their lives as they seek to follow Jesus.
Generous spaciousness as a descriptive concept doesn’t mean that anything goes. As we use this phrase in the context of New Direction, there are some non-negotiable matters that we believe are critical to address to be able to truly nurture environments that are generously spacious.
• Generous spaciousness is unapologetically Christ-centered. While we are humbly grateful to have the opportunity to engage those of differing or no faith, our focus on Christ as the source and energy behind our commitment to generous spaciousness is not up for debate.
• Generous spaciousness prioritizes fidelity. We believe that faithfulness is a core facet of God’s character – and we are called to model that in our lives and relationships. While we encounter and seek to be unconditionally hospitable to people who are not modeling fidelity in their expression of their sexuality, we unapologetically uphold the standard of fidelity.
• Generous spaciousness seeks to address and prevent harmful ideas and practices that have the potential to hinder or hurt a gender or sexual minority individual in their spiritual journey. We recognize that people may disagree about what is harmful – which makes this aspect of our commitment to generous spaciousness challenging. However, our priority is to ensure that gender and sexual minority persons have every opportunity and encouragement to explore and grow in their faith in Jesus Christ. We trust that the Holy Spirit can fulfill the role of bringing conviction and correction where it is needed. We may be used in that process – but leadership and control of that process is up to the Spirit of God. This means that we will seek to address issues of language, attitude, assumptions or pastoral practices that we believe are unhelpful and potentially harmful. Our determination of such issues arises out of the last ten years of ministry and listening to the stories of gender and sexual minority Christians and paying particular attention to their descriptions of harmful and painful experiences. Despite the reality that there will be disagreement about our determinations, we make no apology for doing our best to ensure that every same-sex attracted, LGBT individual has every opportunity to consider and embrace faith in Jesus Christ.
Generous spaciousness is not a perfect concept – but we do hope that it is a vehicle through which in the messy realities of real life in community we can, in the midst of our diversity, find common focus in Jesus Christ and in encouraging one another to explore and grow more deeply in our relationship with Him.
-WG
Hi Wendy,
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering about how your desire to create generous spaciousness helps you handle false equivalences?
So often in the "discussions" (in which angry opponents shout past each other and very little listening occurs) conservative or traditional Christians react to pushback as if they are being attacked or bullied. Here's an Atheist Eve cartoon that depicts it clearly, if a bit simplisticly:
http://www.atheist-community.org/atheisteve/?id=19
A while ago I participated on the Bridges Across the Divide forum. It ended badly for me - I couldn't handle the condescension from side B, and when I pushed back (a bit angrily) I was told that it was "unfortunate that you exist." Sigh.
I see it as a flaw in the side A/B (and now X?) divides and believe the same flaw exists within GCN (was also the source of my skepticism when I first found your site): that pushback from people who have experienced real and irreparable harms is responded to as if it is as aggressive, damaging, dangerous, malicious as the harm continually generated by side B types (and there I go, not participating in the generous spaciousness space - how do I even phrase the question?)
This is why I (atheist me) really believe that your way (whatever faults it may have) is a better way, because it doesn't start from an assumption of opposition - yet does not deny the opposition that exists. Thus bringing me back to my original question: how do you mediate the need for pushback against cruel treatment (it has to stop) and the abusers false claims of victimhood (and denial that they are committing abuse)?
What's the missing piece here? In some sense I think your post addresses this philosophically; maybe I'm looking for concrete examples to understand how you think generous spaciousness looks in action.
Thanks Wendy,
Brian
Great questions Brian. And the cartoon hits the target in a way that should make most Christians squirm.
ReplyDeleteAt the risk of sounding like a cop-out, I think we're still figuring out how to address harm in an effective way. Without question, there has already been pushback from my participation in the GCN panel suggesting that I have not extended generous spaciousness because I was clear in seeking to prioritize an environment of honesty and authenticity for same-sex attracted folks to accept their reality.
Some of the practical things that have been part of New Direction's journey are:
- when appropriate public apology for former practices of the ministry which people experienced as harmful (good intentions don't change the reality that people were hurt, discouraged in their faith, and feel the regret of lost time etc.)
- make use of opportunities to name harmful practices publicly - and acknowledge when those were part of the system of New Direction
- speak and write about the connection of biblical justice to the fair and equal treatment of all people
- encouraging language use and postures that both honour people's convictions and create hospitable environments
- develop resources that equip people to navigate the reality of diverse perspectives calmly and peacefully rather than anxiously or with fear or anger
- take risks - like participating in the GCN panel (it would have been much easier to be silent on the sidelines)
- model building relationships across a very broad spectrum of people holding differing views (so thank you for hanging in there and continuing to engage with us here at BTG) and then also encouraging others to build real relationships (not just dialogue partners) with those with whom they disagree
- trying to bring teaching about constructive dialogue to various groups within the Christian community
- allow people's personal stories speak for themselves without manipulating the outcomes
- develop teaching on shared foundations and common ground matters that can motivate people to relinquish enmity induced entrenched positions
.... these are some of the examples I think of off the top of my head. But I would be the first to say that I am still learning and figuring out how to try to balance these matters in an effective way.
If you have additional suggestions - please do feel free to contribute them either here or in a private message to me.
Greetings Wendy,
ReplyDeleteGenerous Spaciousness is a great model and, again, well articulated. Do you care to comment "publicly" why your non-negotiable prioity on fidelity no longer refers to a former core belief regarding New Directions understanding that God's good intentions for sexual relationships are to be experienced only in a monogamous heterosexual marriage?
For me, this understanding does not negate other forms of intimate relationships, something often ignored in churchy discussions.
Blessings,
Ivan
Hello Ivan,
ReplyDeleteIt is true that a traditional understanding that sexual expression be reserved only for the covenant of heterosexual marriage does not mean that other forms of intimacy cannot be experienced in relationships. It is also true that this rarely emerges in polarized debates about the appropriateness of gay marriage. Indeed, in the past I've spoken about covenanted friendships, non-consummated life-time companionship, living in intentional community etc. - all examples of intimate relationships that can be options for LGBT people who hold to a traditional sexual ethic.
In moving into the posture of generous spaciousness, New Direction has intentionally grounded ourselves in the midst of the tensions that so easily arise in this conversation. We acknowledge that people who love Jesus and have high regard for the scriptures come to differing conclusions about the question of same-sex relationships for LGB disciples of Christ. We want to be a voice in the midst of those tensions that unapologetically calls the church to create non-coercive, humble, generous and gracious environments in which LGBT people can explore and grow in faith in Christ. When we align ourselves with a particular position, we no longer have the vantage point of acknowledgment to be able to speak to folks across the diverse spectrum of belief and practice. Our number one priority is the opportunity for spiritual exploration and growth - trusting that the Holy Spirit can bring each individual into all truth and righteousness.
Whether LGBT people hold a traditional or affirming perspective, we want to be able to encourage them to draw near to Christ and deepen their relationship with him in the confidence that God can be trusted in people's lives.
We also want to be a gracious presence in the lives of LGBT people who have left Christian faith behind - but who have had hurtful experiences in the church to simple seek to embody the love of Christ to them.
Without question, it is challenging to be in the midst of these tensions with integrity, respect and grace. But, we believe that is what God has called us to do. What Tony and Peggy Campolo have tried to do in their marriage - as public figures who differ on their conclusions about same-sex relationships - New Direction tries to do as an organization.
You are promoting it to be okay to be gay/lesbian. It is not what God wants. Yes, He loves every single one of us, but you are misleading a lot of people. It is right up there with thieves, drunkards, idolaters - no difference. We all have sin, yes, but to make it okay to be gay, is not right. He loves us all,yes, but please don't embrace it as there not being anything wrong with it, or you're making your own interpretation of God's word, and leading many astray. Maybe my Romans 1 reads differently than yours. We may as well go out and murder and get drunk because God loves us, and his grace abounds. Your vocabulary is not for everyone's understanding. Using words the average joe could understand would be helpful. I'm not bothered about this being published, as I don't need to read everyone's comments back to this. This has just bothered me for a long time and I needed to get it out. We're all sinners, we all need grace,one sin is not lower than another. Yes, they need the Lord, yes He loves them, but stop making it out to be the one sin that is ignored. For the record, I have gay and lesbian friends, who I adore.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous. You have expressed a fairly common position quite clearly. It leaves no room for me to live authentically in my own skin and in your church though I am a loving and thoughtful person whose behaviour hurts no one. There are many theological counter arguments but none of that debate interests me. Being accepted in that church is not my goal. I am not looking for a list of rules. I am looking for insight on how to know god better; to further my relationship with god, a relationship where I do not judge your position as wrong or you wrong for judging me. But nor do I need to accept your judgment. It will be a relationship that remains confusing with contradictions that challenge me all of my life. As it should because for me to think I understand it would be like thinking a blade of grass understands its place in the world. I may or may not find a church community in which to do this. Again, that is not my goal. It is not just LGBT folks who feel like this. For many, many similar reasons many, many people are finding traditional religious denominations and churches irrelevant in their search for god.
ReplyDelete