"The Rules of Engagement"
 

I attend a very liberal church which honors the beliefs of all people as long as they are respectful toward others. Sunday, our minister gave an excellent sermon on "the rules of engagement." I think it applies, at least to some degree, to tfpers, so am sharing it here.

According to Paul Knitter, there are 4 major ways to share our beliefs:

1. replacement model -- "my faith is true, yours is false, therefore my faith should replace your faith." Before judging that model, take a look at some of your beliefs that should be shared. For example, when someone is belittling woman based on their gender, is it really okay? Isn't that a time to work on "replacing" their belief with a more healthy view? Yes, there should be freedom, but harmful beliefs should be challenged.

2. fullfillment model -- you are a good person and you will be completely fullfilled if you simply embrace this one belief. This can be good when one is being urged to look beyond themself and at other beliefs that may complete a circle for them. Just don't build resentment by coming off better than the other person.

3. mutuality model -- don't try to convert each other, rather look at what you have in common. This is a "fun" model, but it can lead to dead ends. We all have our own view of reality and certain key words, such as God, carry different meanings for different people. Never assume that just because we sound alike, we are in total agreement.

4. acceptance model -- "sometimes we may need to realize that no amount of argumentation, dialogue, coercion or persuasion is going to alter the reality that people don't think alike." This is huge on tfp. Sometimes there are threads with lots of arguing, and very little listening. It is okay to accept that not everyone believes the same.

"It takes widsom and sensitivity to know when to replace, fulfill, mutually enrich or simply accept religious difference." We need to keep talking -- but let's think about how we can share without hurting one another.

My questions to you are how can we exercise the above information and still be respectful of one another? How do you practice each of these? What areas do you need to work on?

For some reason this makes me think of Lebell and myself.
We are on quite opposite poles of religiosity and yet, we are very respectful of each other in public and personal discourse - especially on topics which would be considered potentially inflammatory. I believe he has taken the time to consider my reasons for my beliefs and decided he can respect my positions. I have a great deal of respect for his depth of knowledge and the personal integrity he brings to these discussions.
In brief, our differences are one of the things which make the dialog so engaging. When he types, I read and am always edified. I hope he gains some similar edification from my presentations here.

Every perspective is a new view.

Take everything under consideration.
Maybe seeing things at different angles will reveal more.;)

P.S.
That guy up there, rogue49 - he also exemplifies this ideal real well here...

There are many others.
Thanks to all of you.

most of the discussions i have tend to be on the mutual/acceptance level...there are many people here and in RL that i seek out to engage with ideas, knowing that niether of us will change our minds, but have them better made up for the challenge of the interaction.

For me, it is more important to engage the idea, rather than what decision gets made in the end. My favorite saying on this means justifying the ends is on an argument among rabbis over who was greater, Moses or Abraham. After hours of contention, one of them said "Abraham, for when he was told that many would die, he went to the Lord, Blessed Be He, and he argued for the lives of his fellow man."

The moral of the story is that when we engage our faith/philosophy, we reap its benifits...we are drawn in to living a life authenitic to our beliefs. Thanks, sexymama for posting this-i will be reposting to all the other boards i frequent...i think a lot of them could benifit from thinking about what level of discource they have.

Wow -- your welcome. Thanks to Lebell also, as he is the one that requested I write the post.

VERY neat way of looking at this subject!

Personally, I simply don't feel that I own "correct". As such, I am compelled to listen, if only to see if someone else might be closer to correct than I am.

Sexymama,

Thank you very much for consenting to post this thread and adding your voice to "Tilted Philosophy".

I think the points made by your minister are excellent and should be heard by more people.

I'll also add for general consumption that sexymama is one of the smartest and most compassionate people I know, so it is no surprise that she has been drawn to the Unitarian Church.

Art,

As usual, you are able to express yourself elegantly and with insight: I do indeed respect you and your positions and the life experiences that have led you to them, my friend.

I am also flattered and pleased that I have had the privilege of adding to them.

Rogue,

I hate to turn this into a general love fest, but I must add that I also look forward to reading your posts and gleaning from your wisdom.

I can count on you to post succinctly and clearly, yet with deeply thought out positions.

Thank you all.

Yeah. Too many people (or people i know atleast) may say lots of stuff like "accept everyone" and good stuff like that, but none of them do it, and it goes unoticed. I had a big epipahany a few years ago where i realized that the only way i could accept myself was to do the things i know i should to the best of my abilities, and ive never been happier or a better person. So thanks for the advice, i completly agree and im glad you helped us build on our ideas.

That's a very good set of rules. I think about how I aproach the world, and see that I follow the acceptance model and mutuality model the most. But there are times when the other two need to be used instead.