Sunday, July 24, 2005

Email: Communication and dialog [SD]

I do sometimes communicate things strongly; this is my desire to communicate things clearly and directly, which some people are not used to. It's probably the same way with insecure men who feel "emasculated" by a "strong woman" (read: a woman who has an opinion and [without drama] simply speaks it out loud). I agree with everything you say, and I feel that I am saying so -- just adding to it -- so I'm not sure where the problem lies. Either I'm communicating clearly or I'm not. [You decide. After all, communicating means connecting.]

When I say "the evangelical point of view" I am not badmouthing evangelicals! I am describing evangelicals. This is what they really believe and say. Watch and listen. Sometimes I can hear something and say, "Wow, that's a perfectly typical Lutheran (or Catholic or Baptist) statement or point of view." For instance, you just wouldn't have a Lutheran saying that the Pope is infallible. Catholics would simply never advocate adult baptism over infant baptism. This is never saying one or the other stance is right or wrong, but you can't discuss the issues at hand until you describe what you see and hear. Anything else is just bandying with buzzwords and trading in generalizations. I don't believe generalities ever reach any meaningful accord or resolution without digging into specific examples. Experience really does come before (if not apart from) dogma.

Of course I can't speak to your inner motives unless you share and discuss them, but it has been my experience and observation for the past 30 years that people do take things personally out of fear of rejection. (Actually, I've been debating ethics and theology for longer than that.) I don't believe that any one person should or needs to be in "charge" of any conversation; if both parties have equal respect and status, then dialog becomes an ebb and flow between two, never a broom-pushing competition where one aims to beat the other.


Post a Comment

<< Home