Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
3950 Clemmons Road, Clemmons, NC www.salempresbytery.org P. O. Box 1763, Clemmons, NC 27012 336.766.3393 Fax: 336.766.7153 March 5, 2015 Star Trek, Robert’s Rules of Order and Marriage – A More Excellent Way After a morning of worship and joy in the afternoon I listened to the anguish in the voices of many of those who rose at our February Presbytery meeting to speak to the motion from two of our church sessions regarding the Heartland Presbytery overture to the General Assembly related to issues arising from the legalization of same-gender marriages in certain states. I could not help but think about the science fiction series Star Trek, in which there is a “simulation” test known as the “Kobayashi Maru” that is given to cadets at Starfleet Federation Academy. In the scenario the cadet receives a distress signal stating that the spaceship Kobayashi Maru has struck an explosive mine in the Klingon (enemies of the Federation) Neutral Zone and is rapidly losing power, hull integrity and life support. There are no other vessels nearby. The cadet is faced with a decision: Attempt to rescue the Kobayashi Maru's crew and passengers, which involves violating the Neutral Zone and potentially provoking the Klingons into hostile action or an all-out war; or Abandon the Kobayashi Maru, potentially preventing war but leaving the crew and passengers to die. If the cadet chooses to save the Kobayashi Maru, the scenario progresses quickly. The bridge officers notify the cadet that they are in violation of the treaty. As the starship enters the Neutral Zone, the communications officer loses contact with the crippled vessel. Klingon starships then appear on an intercept course. Attempts to contact them are met with radio silence; indeed, their only response is to open fire with devastating results. There is no way to win the resulting battle, especially since the computer is allowed to "cheat" to guarantee defeat; the simulation ends with the understanding that the cadet's ship has been lost with all hands. The objective of the test is not for the cadet to outfight the opponent but rather to test the cadet's reaction to a no-win situation. In the history of the exam, the only cadet to win was Captain James Kirk, because he “re-programmed” the computer to allow a hopeful conclusion. In dealing with issues surrounding homosexuality the “simulation” we encounter is one in which one side of the argument “wins” and the other side “loses”. The “computer” of Roberts’ Rules of Order “frames” the question into a win-lose argument. Ron Heifeitz, whose book Leadership Without Easy Answers makes the point that there are two types of problems – “technical” problems – in which the problem is clear, the resources are readily available, and the people needed to solve the problem are present. The second type of problem is “adaptive” – in which the issues are clouded – unclear – solutions are not obvious – more learning and exploring is required – and the people needed to solve the problem are scattered or yet to be discovered. With many of the issues we have “voted” on we have applied “Roberts Rules of Order” which is a “technical” problem solution. The anguish and unease we feel is because we are seeking to solve an adaptive problem with a technical solution. It is a Kobayashi Maru scenario. The “computer” is designed to end up with a win-lose result. Our question as Salem Presbytery echoes the dilemma faced by the apostle Paul in the church in Corinth: “Regarding this next item, I'm not at all pleased. I am getting the picture that when you meet together it brings out your worst side instead of your best! First, I get this report on your divisiveness, competing with and criticizing each other. I'm reluctant to believe it, but there it is.” – Eugene Peterson The Message. What follows is a discussion of their divisiveness over how the Corinthians celebrate the Lord’s Supper – and their internal “scrambling” over one another to assert that their “spiritual gift” was just a little bit better than that of their neighbors. Paul talks about the diversity of the “Body” of Christ and then concludes chapter 12 with this “…And now I will show you a still more excellent way.” I Corinthians 13 then bursts forth with his affirmation that the greatest gift of all is love. Paul is “re-programming” the computer for how we are to act in one another’s presence. Perhaps we might yield to his encouragement and shift our attempts to deal with difficult issues to “discussions” and “sharing” instead of “voting”. In our discussions we can acknowledge in love that both sides have genuine issues of conscience, perspectives on scripture that are in tension. I think we will need a new way to “live” into the answers to the questions we face rather than “voting” into the answers. We must admit, as one spiritual teacher pointed out, that “no mud, no Lotus flower.” Being a human being is messy and muddy – and yet somehow God continues to “sanctify” us and helps the “flowers” of beauty and love to emerge from within our failures and shortcomings. Before any attempts to deal with our adaptive problems we might do well to practice loving-kindness with ourselves, and with those with whom we disagree. The spiritual discipline is to offer up the prayer that the “other” (who is a “thou” – not an “it”) may be Healthy , Happy, Peaceful, and Safe. I hope that those prayers would bring us together in the name of Jesus Christ, who is present with us and loves us each and everyone. John O’Donohue, the Irish spiritual teacher offers us this blessing for each new day, “May I live this day Compassionate of heart, Clear in word, Gracious in awareness, Courageous in thought, Generous in love.” Gracefully, Sam Marshall