In this episode, author and conflict resolution expert Steve Staten joins the podcast to help us work through the real-word ramifications of this conversation and how we can navigate the internal dynamics of our churches when we don't see eye to eye.
If you're a leader, grab Steve's Appreciative Inquiry Survey template to get the conversation going in your church.
Learn more about Steve at his website: StephenFStaten.com
Sign up to receive Bible study guides, handouts, and resources that complement what you learn in this podcast by going to WomenChurchPodcast.com
In this episode, author and conflict resolution expert Steve Staten joins the podcast to help us work through the real-word ramifications of this conversation and how we can navigate the internal dynamics of our churches when we don't see eye to eye.
If you're a leader, grab Steve's Appreciative Inquiry Survey template to get the conversation going in your church.
Learn more about Steve at his website: StephenFStaten.com
Sign up to receive Bible study guides, handouts, and resources that complement what you learn in this podcast by going to WomenChurchPodcast.com
Hey there, and welcome back to the women in the church podcast. Now while we have certainly finished the super deep exegetical Bible study covering women's roles within our public worship assemblies on Sundays, we are certainly not done because now that we've done the academic work, to understand how to read the Bible, the different arguments and how you get to them. Now the rubber really meets the road, right? And we have to implement these findings and practices in real life with real people. And we're not always going to agree on what we think the answer should be. So in this episode, in the next episode, I'm gonna be sitting down with Steve Stayton. Now, Steve has quite an eclectic background in his professional life, he spent nine years in engineering, and then head over 25 years of experience in church leadership, overseeing staff education, pastoring, and managing crises, conflict and change in a variety of settings. So as a conflict resolution expert, those are my words, not his. He's worked with single and multi site churches of 250, all the way up to 6000 members in the UK, Canada, Hawaii, California, Alaska, Georgia, Florida, Washington, Montana, Kansas, in other Midwest states. So he has been brought in by many churches in our fellowship, to help manage the dynamics within a congregation, when people aren't seeing eye to eye either between the leadership and the congregation, or within the congregation itself, to help them work through that and come out on the other side stronger and more unified than ever. So we knew we wanted to cover this topic of how to manage the internal dynamics of a church congregation working through this question together. Steve is the man for the job. So without further ado, here's my conversation with Steve Stayton. Well, Steve, thank you so much for taking the time to hop on the podcast with us. We're excited to dig into some church unity talk.
Steve Staten:Fantastic is so great to be here. I'm honored.
Travis Albritton:So let's just start right off the bat with the elephant in the room. In the last episode, we identified that, you know, we really can't with 100% certainty, say, this position is correct, or this point is correct. And so we're in this really interesting place where we're holding this tension between two different ideas or perspectives about the role of women in the public assembly, how do you even approach trying to manage that dynamic?
Steve Staten:Well, a part of this is about the orientation of the church in his own personal history, and also the history of the region, you know, this part of the country or wherever, and when you know that, it helps inform where the conversation can go. So for instance, if I look at some flagship churches in flagship, meaning those that either were the pillar churches of our family of churches, or very first in their domain, larger than life having great influence, I've seen two different kinds one flagship church is about, we should all get back to doing such and such, and everybody should do the same thing together, and we've got to be unified and what they mean sometimes is uniform. Okay. And then another flagship church, we got burned by maybe a previous previous era will say you do you we do us, and then they want great diversity and not to be told what to do. And both can be problematic. And I see both being problematic on a number of different issues. So I think it's just really good to know if that's the paradigm, or the motional place that people are coming from, until you can find a way to bridge that you won't be able to solve quite a few topics. It just there'll be a number of things that show, yeah, we're not on the same page. But if you can recognize those two landing places, and you can have a conversation about it. And if it's a good conversation, I think you can tackle some of these topics.
Travis Albritton:So let's kind of focus in and zero in the conversation on like a local congregation, because that's where, internally a lot of these conversations are happening before they start butting up against what conclusion did that church come to? I would presume in every church, individuals that are like, nope, limited participation is the way to go. That's what the Bible says. And then there's a group that says actually, we think full participation is the more likely interpretation as a leader of a church trying to manage that dynamic, recognizing you're not going to please everybody, right? How do you actually put processes and steps into place to be able to move forward as a organization?
Steve Staten:Well, I'd say that in that congregation, let's just say it's 200 members, and it's local is not one of the main hots big spots around the globe. Those there'll be people in that congregation that are very tied in that want to know what others churches are doing, they might default to a favorite teacher, or a book written by somebody from the outside. And the leadership will definitely want to be connected and thinking in terms of the greater family of churches. But a number of members will be like, that doesn't matter to me what they do hear I hardly ever leave this city, you know, right, I'm talking about just right here. So the tension will be between those who want to move together, either regionally or collectively with some sort of margin of difference, versus those who want an outcome right now, right here for the city that I live in. And what happens out there doesn't matter to me. And I think if you could even catch everybody up to that conversation of what is all going out on out there. And then I think I would introduce skills for collaboration, you can't collaborate just by saying I want to collaborate there, it's a it's an art. And it takes humility takes a lot of listening skills. But if you can set the stage for collaboration, say, we will get to your favorite topic, I promise, it's definitely, it's coming, okay. But you got to have people willing to come to the table. And sometimes it's best to do with the representative. So from full or limited participation, if you could have people that are strongly in those camps, initially. But they're also spiritual, they're temperate, they're humble. They're not Alpha fee figures that just gonna dominate the discussion, suck the air out of the room, but they're really, you know, good folks, then you can co create a narrative of how we got here, our longer Christian tradition, or longer sector denomination, or movement tradition, and then our local way of how we've got here, and what are some of the markers in the ICRC history. And there were some moments like wine women and song, I think, was around 90 to 93. That was a very positive turn, in our family churches, maybe didn't address everything related to the women's role. But if you could just kind of step it along, say, here's our Ark, our narrative, how we got here. And if everybody sees that that's accurate, and maybe even senses that their voices in that, like, there's the tension, and we can be honest with that narrative, then I think you can really begin to then talk about what collaboration looks like. And and by the way, if you've got to that spot, you've collaborated, because a narrative that has everybody's voice in is the first place to collaborate.
Travis Albritton:Well, and I think another key foundational element to that is trust in that process. Right? Right, that if you're not personally involved, feeling like you can trust the outcome, because it is this really interesting dynamic where you can't have too many chefs in the kitchen, and you're entertaining so many voices, that reaching any kind of consensus is going to be very, very difficult. Right? And so at a certain point, since not everyone is going to be equally vested in that process, what is a healthy amount of transparency, or a healthy process that would enable the people that are a part of that group, like, let's say someone's creating a task force in their church or their region? Yeah, that would enable them to have the capability of collaborating and moving forward and bringing everyone else with them?
Steve Staten:Well, when you mentioned transparency, what first came to my mind is say you got a very decently established Task Force in a congregation. And let's say there are seven or nine people in it some you know, the idea there is people should be free to talk in that group without what's being said, going outside the group. So what I'm saying now, in my initial position, I'll share with you, you know, I'm assuming it's not going to go outside this room. And you will hear, you know, I default on egalitarianism default on complementarian. And you'll hear people say, I'm troubled by both perspectives. I think that there's some nuance, and we need a new term for a nuanced position. That's not either or. And so when people are free to go to that place, and discuss it, and they've got that safety thing in there where we are safe. I think it's where the chemistry starts right then in there.
Travis Albritton:And then how, because this is something that you know, whenever you start talking about convictions, even in that sound doctrine bucket where we recognize at least theoretically, there's some move, there's some room for movement without it being heresy. Yeah, it still feels like an attack on core convictions. What does collaboration look like? When it's very difficult to feel like there can be a compromised position, trying to meet in the middle of feels, it feels like it's got to be one extreme or the other. Either everything stays the same or everything changes. But I know that that's not necessarily true. So kind of walk through what that would look like trying to find a third way.
Steve Staten:Well, this has been something in the restoration tradition, that's always been a difficult topic, what is core, what is very important, and what is rich but mysterious. So core would be the the person and work of Jesus Christ at death, barrel, the resurrection, how salvation occurs. And so on and so forth. The things we see on our Creed's the very important, but not in the same category would be eschatology, those kinds of things, the structure of a church governance role of women. So the test of fellowship should not be on that second category. Test, the fellowship should be on the first category. And the third category will be a mystery until we reach the end. And that's things like Providence, and things that are just so, so mysterious. And then we also sorted this out when a team of us worked on the cooperation agreement back in oh, five and six, we had these are the most important beliefs. And then we went down and said, then there's this and this. And some, once you get into practices, practices do not stand up to the gospel as being anywhere near as important. I important for sure. Because, you know, Paul talks about building with gold and silver and a and all that. I think when we error on some of these other categories, we're not building well, but it does not exclude us from the fellowship.
Travis Albritton:So are there any examples that we can pull from in the New Testament to see where the early church was running? I mean, Jesus Gentiles is a well documented, right, in the early church. Sure. And there was a lot of tension culturally around lifestyle and practices between Christians coming out of pagan backgrounds, right? It was like, hey, the way that I worship God as I go have sex with a temple prostitute versus Jews becoming Christians who are like, I don't even eat pork. Right? So what are some, maybe some case studies that we can look at in the early church to get a model for how to approach conversations like this?
Steve Staten:Well, I've been thinking about that very question. So a pose a hypothetical. What if around 51 ad, aliens from another planet came down and set up every believer with the internet cell phones, and you know, they had the whole smartphones the whole bit, so they knew instantly what was happening somewhere else, you would have a problem. Here's the problem. At around 49 ad is when the x 15 council released a letter and it was meant for the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean, from Antioch all the way down to Judea. Some regulations for what should happen it included not eating food sacrificed idols. Three years later, Corinth is planted. And then shortly after that, Paul writes a letter. And that letter opens the door for eating food sacrificed idols. So you can imagine James getting a call, you know, or an email blast goes out you Would you believe what they're doing in Corinth, and Paul, who was at that extra 15, or at that council was an X 15 yet? Okay. Paul, was at that council meeting heard the conclusion from the letter, and how dare he deviate from what the apostles and the elders and James and Peter came up with. So I think we are in a dilemma because we are so connected. We are so connected, I'll give you a very specific example that you can relate to specifically, I did a presentation in Jacksonville, on a Friday night releasing the report, and a slide version to the congregation of some of the troubles there as a consultant that I was brought in to look at and the leadership to their, you know, to compliment them, they said, Let's be very open about this. I sit down after I'm done, Travis, and I get a text from my daughter, Tamra, great job dead, the whole thing was live streamed. So I think we are in a situation that has pros and cons. And the con of it is some of our cultural norms locally differ from a cultural norm somewhere else. And when we find out what somebody else is doing differently, it can be very offensive to our norm.
Travis Albritton:Well, and you don't have to go very far for that to happen. Right. So I think we think, Oh, cultural norms that's like United States versus Middle East. But it's North Carolina versus Virginia. You don't have to go very far to find vast differences. Communication Style cultural norms, how we relate to each other, how we approach questions, how we think about leadership. Yep. And if we're not mindful that those differences exist, then we can assume ill intent on the other party.
Steve Staten:So I have an illustration that I did not discuss with you. But it fits perfectly in this topic. So a friend of mine, a woman, getting her Master's or endeavor at some university, and one of her assignments was to deliver a sermon around the subject of Easter, okay, around the resurrection. So she did it in a denominational setting. The point minister for her local, a local church in her city, because this is more than one church in the area, saying, Hey, can you do that for us? Okay. And I saw it, she asked me to look at it, I did. And it was not a authority, authoritative thing. It was not giving direction, it was a testimonial piece. That was her experience with the resurrection. And it was also an her subject matter specialty related to her studies at the school. Well, then she was asked to do it at another church in our family of churches. And it was live streamed and word went out. Okay, word went out, and you could just you know, where that's going. Okay. So, but then I weighed in with the people that I heard were troubled by it. And I said, how does that differ from the testimony that we often see from women at communion? And how does that differ from listening to a person and their subject matter specialty, sharing what they've learned? And by the way, we've done similar versions to that. And it's never raised an eyebrow, you know, but on a Sunday morning, it does or something about that. And I think that has to be unpacked. I don't claim to have all the answers on that. I just like consistency. You know, it kind
Travis Albritton:of goes back to the semi tongue in cheek comment that Jesus makes to the Pharisees this, is the temple holy, or is it the gold in the temple? That's right, right. Right. Yeah. And it's like, are we splitting hairs on something that we're creating more work for ourselves than is necessary, which again, holds that tension of what does it look like to work out these things? Yeah, in a way that is also really humble to the scriptures, right? Because that can be a danger to especially my generation. And this is not just millennials and Gen Z, like this is just a young people thing in general question everything your elders have ever given passed down to you, because they're probably idiots. And you probably know what you're talking about. I say that very sarcastically. And so there is this cultural dynamic of, well, why can't church be like this? Why can't women speak from a stage on Sunday, when we celebrate when members of our own congregation, get promotions that put them in authority over other men in business settings,
Steve Staten:we'll have another example exactly what you're talking about. Because when I was in Chicago, I was where I was in a ministry 26 years, and I had led every region of that church, and then in all the different roles, but my last stage there was just as a sector leader, as I was transitioning, going back to school and becoming a consultant. And we asked the sister to share a communion. And this particular meeting was the joining of the South and the North sides were about 70 plus percent African American. But this very beloved sister gets up and does her testimony and other brothers up on stage during the prayer, you know, afterwards, but she goes long, instead of you know, the three to four minutes, whatever, I think she does, like eight or nine, and she is delivering, okay, let's put it that way. Some bytes, say preaching, okay. But it was so compelling. And it definitely stepped over the line of sensibilities if you are coming from a certain place, okay. But it didn't in that ministry, because there's a cultural piece. This discussion we are having now. From my experience is not a big discussion in the Urban Ministries of African Americans. And it certainly wasn't even discussion with the recipe list never raised an eyebrow, we would no mention of it. Nobody was brought it up to the elder in the ministry, the evangelist or me. I do think there's a cultural piece to it because there are some places in the world certainly Island cultures being a good example, where the elders on the island, I'm not talking about Christianity, I'm just talking about their tribal things. The elders are women. They're the wise people to go to to solve problems. So if we were to reach that place with our own paradigm on these things, we find that we have we're all coming from a different starting place. I don't think this is easy stuff, Travis. I don't have the answers. But I think starting with humility, and building some good understanding of everybody's starting place, learning how to collaborate, negotiate, negotiate, look at past precedent, look at scripture, look at how we got here, and keeping the book open. Because that's, that's where our standard is. But we also recognize we read it with our, our lens of our personal experiences. And we have to put that on the table too.
Travis Albritton:Yeah, I think that's one of the biggest eye opening things for me, just my own recent growth as a disciple is you always suspect that there's a certain level of subjectivity in how you read the Bible, and that, you know, the questions I ask my own experiences, my own past is going to color, the things that jumped out to me, and the things that I resonate with that I kind of latch on to, but no one thinks they're more subjective than everyone else. They suspect they're, they're likely correct. Otherwise, you wouldn't think the things that you think. And so there is this element of just kind of recognizing our own shortcomings in being objective. But then that introduces another question, especially when we're talking about starting places, like how do you balance being all things to all people? And in the example you gave Paul saying, Hey, Church, in courts, there is actually latitude for eating food sacrificed idols, otherwise, you don't have to be vegans. Yeah, versus the, you know, the X Council where they're like, let's not eat food, sacrifice to idols. So that way, we're not searing the consciences of our Jewish Christian brothers and sisters. How do we straddle that fence in a God honoring way of let's not be so separate from the world that we're just aliens, and we look like we have three heads. But also, the Bible calls us consistently to be countercultural, and so not conformed to the pattern of the world. So how does that interaction play out?
Steve Staten:Well, there's a concept of flexibility. And also, there's the concept of being willing to surrender, that things won't go my particular point of view for the greater good. So a real quick story, there's, you know, as we know, like seven churches in Atlanta, that used to be one congregation, one of those congregations, very conservative on the role of women on stage speaking, pray, and whatever, very, very conservative. And these are good men that got good elders, and I don't know their current preacher very well. But I sat down with the elders. And they said to me, Steve, if you can help us get our churches back together as the one Atlanta church and some configuration of what that might mean, this is about 10 years ago, we're willing to move on this issue with the role of women because our unity and working together means more to us than our particular point of view, on the role of women, I was surprised that they were that flexible. So it's a conviction. But it's not a conviction at the same level as the desire to be tight and strategic together and being a you know, so they're really never both and kind of thing. And so I, I was just impressed by that. So I would say flexibility. And also being willing to just have your way not become the way of the group.
Travis Albritton:And that's always difficult when you feel pretty confident about your position. And you are in a position of influence, because most of these conversations are driven by a small percentage of individuals, right? Just being real, right? So it's not like we're gonna survey the whole church and everyone's voices weighted equally. There's usually less than five people in that congregation no matter how large it is, yeah, that ultimately determine kind of the outcomes of these conversations. So how do you navigate that dynamic, especially as a leader? When right? It's like, Listen, I gotta Shepherd everyone, including these five individuals, but also everyone else?
Steve Staten:Well, the whole subject of consensus is so important. Why is the subject of consensus important because it's a chance for people to find out where the bulk of the community wants to be. But what happens if you have practiced negotiation along the way you watch people's opinions change it, same thing happens in a jury? They'll all start out, you know, seven people say innocent, you know, three people say guilty, but it's not the same at the end. And why because there's some really great practices of discovery, one of the best way to see people change their mind, but it become their personal change would be to have them argue the other person's perspective vehemently. So I have a daughter that was present the debate team at Wheaton College And I saw a debate only once because there's a lot of traveling involved. But I was really impressed that she was capable of being vigorous for the opposite view. And sometimes you were actually told, you're only going to take this position. That's your job, even though you don't agree with that. But what would happen is light bulbs would go on, you know, epiphanies would occur because you're now thinking through the feet of other people, that really does make a difference. And then you retest the consensus. Okay, now, where are we at now, two days later, and, and, okay, here's where I'm leaning. Now, if there's the right atmosphere, people get nudged. And that's how collaboration occurs.
Travis Albritton:So let's dig into that. So we've kind of talked high level, some of the reasons why this is not the easiest thing in the world to do. Yeah, now, let's start breaking down some tools for how to collaborate for how to come together, to how to come to consensus, and to work together in a unified fashion, elevating the things that are important. And, you know, maybe allowing room for there to be disagreement, but within a unified framework, like how would you approach doing that? Because I know you have a lot of experience saying there's two sides, it's very fractured, how do we come together?
Steve Staten:So one thing you could do, first of all, I've mentioned before you find out where everybody is at, initially, we have the safety that we can change our views, we some of us probably will, or find more nuance and them. Sometimes I'll put an empty seat in the room. And that empty seat might be That's God's, or he's sitting here, okay, does not forget that we are answerable. He's the audience that we most care about. Okay. But I also might put other seats there of people who have spoken to this topic that they might even be deceased, so that we are answering to those who've done a lot more research than ours. And we might even put the apostle Paul in there, because we're dealing with some of the statements that he's made that are very significant. And then so you have this group of maybe seven, that's really becomes a group of 12, not forgetting the other people that are important in the conversation. And from time to time you stop and say, What would Paul say and you know, and whomever, so I think that's really good. And then testing it out to ask somebody to vigorously go after another perspective, another thing you can do is kind of look at a case study, something that's happened before a precedent, maybe a congregation that successfully navigated that specific topic, that you gotta be careful there, because if it only goes towards, like complementarian, or a gala, terian, you're gonna lose half the group. Okay. But maybe this is a case where they found a third way. And by the way, I think the language is important looking for third way language, or both and language, staying away from either or, and looking for ways to, you might ask somebody to put a post up, post it up on the wall, what would be a scenario that could satisfy people coming from both perspectives, in terms of practice, point of views may not change that much. But practices that we haven't done now, that can strengthen and validate the influence of women in the church. But not, you know, go so far and see the fullest participation, which will always be controversial, at least in the ICRC about women, elders, you know, that kind of that level of participation. And I know that's not on the table in these discussions. But what you have to do is, say, here is a post of what I think could help us move the needle, and then you stop, and you take a breath, and then you say, let's do a test to see where we are again. Now. Another thing you can do is on the very front side is defined consensus. And I've seen in situations where consensus is defined as unanimity, and that's not consensus. But the problem with that version that takes just one person to stop any progress, you know, right. But if you set it as four out of five or eight out of 10, in that the two out of 10, that are not happy with at least the conclusion, but they're happy that they were heard. They may say, they may be willing to say, I'm gonna go with it. I'm just gonna go with it. I'll tell you a true story. I know a teacher, who is definitely egalitarianism. He doesn't share that with anybody. I don't think hardly, Biden knows, but maybe me or one other person. And the evangelist in his church said, I need you to agree completely on my position of the role of women. And he said, So what's your position? And my friend said, it doesn't matter? Because I go with this communities because Question, because this is my family. And not everything I believe has to be the way things go. And that's also the way family is, you know, you just say this is this is how our family functions. And I'm going to go with it. Also a healthy view of how to get to consensus. So if you have a facilitator, you rotate the facilitator, typically to those that you know, are most impartial in their principal, who they are. And they will like be the point person for the discussion that day. And then the next time is somebody else. And it is possible to have a position very strongly. But to lead a discussion in which it doesn't show up in any way, shape, or form. But it takes a person deeply committed to principle, who's self aware, and really doesn't want to be the dominator. They want the greater group good. So I would say a good facilitated discussion rotated around to build consensus and continually test where we are at Travis, people change, they change from the process, they transform, sometimes they'll go from I can't believe where I was starting out, but I'm in a different place now. And that's what I love about this negotiation process.
Travis Albritton:So I want to follow up on something you just said, which is the tension of being committed to the fellowship, the body of Christ, which is something that we see very clearly laid out in the Bible, we belong to each other. Right? And there's a certain amount of denying yourself, for the sake of others, that is simply a part of discipleship. Yep. So that is a piece that we always need to have friend center. But then, because we're also sinful people, right? There are places where those church practices and the way that we implement the positions that we hold are not done in the most loving or gracious are thought through manner. And there's real hurt that's experienced, yeah, by both men and women. And you know, we're gonna talk Kyle Spears is coming up on the podcast to talk about spiritual trauma. But how do you balance those things, because it could very easily become a codependent relationship between you and the organization of I just need to completely deny my feelings and my emotions, even when I've been hurt. For the sake of not rocking the boat, right? How do you manage that tension? Because that's a reality for a lot of people. Well,
Steve Staten:this goes into conflict management and being able to have really important discussions in the church world, especially where there's a power component authority versus somebody further down the structure. I think, coaching even how to have those discussions to set personal boundaries. One of the things that I've taught people that's gotten me in a little bit trouble, but I'll continue to teach it is how to tell a leader somebody over you and authority. No, just the word no. Because sometimes people overstep, they think they have more power than God has ever given them. And they need to hear no, they need a bumper, they say you just crossed the line. But you also want to find where you can say yes to that same leader. Yes, I want to work with you. Yes, I want to be in your ministry. Yes, we can do great things together. But we won't be able to if you continue that behavior. That's so against the word, the paradigm that some ministers have, because they just think that they can get away with stuff. And I don't think that's panning out very well for people in any faith tradition these days, you know, yeah. So I but I think how to have conversations around, or how to have meaningful conversations where there's a conflict will have less trauma, if we can manage conflict, if we can manage conflict within the power structure, so that you don't have a leg up if you are in a position of power. Like, I've been in all the different roles, as I mentioned before, but I would view this as heresy, that level of wrong, to bully and to use my position to overpower somebody where they are having an interpersonal conflict with me. I would want them to find me approachable, willing to have a third party come in and help us because we're brothers before an elder teacher evangelists, in the greater route, long stretch of eternity, our titles and roles will mean absolutely nothing. What will matter is how we connect to each other's brothers and sisters. That's a long winded answer to this whole thing. But Kyle's a friend of mine and I do have concerns about people that don't grow the way they could don't mature the way they cook because they haven't been able to process traumatic events.
Travis Albritton:Again, none of these things are easy, because if you are serving and it's a shepherding role and overseeing role in your church, yeah, God has given you an obligation to protect the people in that church from false teaching now, what is the false teaching talks about the Newton MIT, how do we interpret it? That's a whole nother discussion. Sure. So there can be this tension of like, at a certain point, there has to be a line, we do not cross. And we need to protect even each other from ideas that could undermine our faith in the court and our core convictions. Yeah. But it's very, it's very difficult to do that in a way that is that feels like you're listening, because you're also trying to really put your foot down and say, This is a line we cannot cross. Right?
Steve Staten:Well, when we were talking about collaboration a few minutes ago, it ties into this whole thing about a line, you do not cross I think what's really important at the end of a collaboration negotiation process, you have guardrails that you've defined, we won't go here and we won't go there. Not necessarily that they're evil to pass those guardrails. But as for us now, in our community, we're staying right here. And what that does is it helps the amygdala calm down for people. Sure. And I recently heard a sermon done at a leaders meeting that addressed from a conservative thing, all the worries about progressives and all this in the church and progressive theology practices around diversity, women's roles, so much of it was actually good. And this guy was a friend of mine, but I said to him, What about the other side of the continuum? And that's there, too. And if you only address one side, it could be misinterpreted, that everything is a okay to go anywhere you want on the other side. So it's good to do that. Another thing, and this is the idea of a slippery slope and a continuum. I actually believe in the power of slippery slope arguments, but there's a pitfall when they're used out of being fearful. And just we quickly go, oh, that's a slippery slope. You know? I mean, there are slippery slopes, right? Okay. There are certain practices that could open us up to get into spiritual trouble. Now, we know that we know that each of us personally, we have what would be a slippery slope. That could be around drinking or the movies, we watch an entertainment, the things we see and chemicals we ingest in our body and all that kind of stuff. There are slippery slopes, but we don't want to go there real quick and say, Whoa, bro, that's a slippery slope, because that's a fallacious argument. Because if you look at the continuum, there is a reasonable place in the continuum on any given topic, where are most given topics that we can work with, because there is some flexibility and latitude even in the Bible, and then there's a place this A Bridge Too Far. So it's good to have those discussions towards the end. Because if your church of 200, that we're talking about this fictional church has a landing place that feels really good to the group, at least for the here and now. Then they've got to create a message that goes out to the 200. And that will definitely include this is what we now support. This is what we don't, both in and so forth.
Travis Albritton:Well, and I've seen a lot of the hesitation in engaging and the topics we've been discussing on this podcast, is not even necessarily the question about is a woman permitted to teach preach biblically speaking, right? It's all the other conversations that quickly get connected to the question. Yeah, or observations you see about other churches and things that have happened there. Right. So like, I've seen the argument that if we nudge or give an inch at all, on the question of women's roles, compared to historically how we've interpreted it, then it's only a matter of time before all these other things happen. We are embracing gender theory and all these other things. It's like, I'm just trying to ask the question about can a woman teach me on a Sunday from behind a pulpits? Right? I'm already reading her blog, can she do it in this fashion? And as you suggested, that does feel very fear based?
Steve Staten:It is the like I said, as the amygdala gets hijacked for what things can be. And I think if we would all admit it, nobody would disagree with this statement. What is happening in our nation right now is affecting the church, what we watch what we listen to our experiences in the workplace, around vaccine mandates around BLM, that's already an old story, but it's still a factor, critical race theory, and how much role of government can have in our lives, all sorts of education issues. These are big, they're big in my house, we have these conversations, you know, every couple of days, and we're largely coming from the same place and all the topics but it's in our face. How would this not affect the church, right? So what we ought to do is find the things that engender trust, to dial things down and go hey, but at least have Jesus then add from there, you know, we've got to constantly work at dialing things down to a place where we can have a meaningful conversation.
Travis Albritton:This is a very sticky conversation. And we're going to dig into this more in the next episode. I know a lot of members, and a lot of leaders, artists feeling tired, like the last year and a half has been exhausting. Last year, at least in the United States, in 2020, we had a lot of really emotionally taxing conversations around culture, and race and our lived experiences and how that impacts the way we show up in church. And there can be a very reasonable reaction of can this just wait like a little bit longer, we get a little bit more of a reprieve. And then on the other hands, you have individuals that are of personal stakes in this conversation that feel like we've waited long enough. We've waited for it to be convenient. Now is the time to talk about it. How do you bridge that dynamic?
Steve Staten:Actually, I have in some of my consultations. And so usually as a from a distance over the phone or over zoom in I've really encourage the boards of churches to make sure their leaders are getting sabbaticals when possible that they've got good policies for it. A sabbatical doesn't have to be long to be powerful and effective. But it has to be a really well designed one, and so forth. And so here I'm a little bit more empathetic towards the ministers. And here's why. If you don't have that minister in a good place emotionally, and you force them into your topic, the way when and way you want to do it, you're not going to have a good outcome either. Nobody's going to be a winner. In that situation. We're gonna have people stepping out the ministry. And it's a massive problem in the evangelical world right now. So many people stepping out and wanting to step out, there's surveys on it. 38% of the people in the ministry said that they seriously have considered stepping out in the greater evangelical world. I don't think that's far from the case in our situation, from my conversations with people. So we got to look out after people, their ministers in their development, their training their sabbaticals, and giving them the chance to get some skills on how to do collaboration, negotiation, diversity training, I'm not talking about just our own stuff I'm talking about from the outside. And then when we tackle topics that we'll be able to tackle them with much more agility and even speed. But we we might be delayed from when we want to, but when we do it, we can do it well. On the other hand, and coming from the posture of the congregation, I think they need to be given timelines so that they'll know it's going to happen. We are deliberate or serious as a church. But we have to get ready for it. And the past, we didn't give timelines I would see minister say, Yeah, we're looking into that. Five years later. Yeah, we're looking into that. Words don't mean anything. Matter of fact, that's a discouraging thing. We're looking into it. Who do you have a mouse in your pocket, you know, but to say, we have heard, and here's what we're doing. And here's the starting thing. A survey can create goodwill, as be well designed and well interpreted. But a survey allows you to find out what are the shared components of a congregations and appreciative inquiry survey, it's a certain technique, but you find out what is that? Like? What are those life giving forces that everybody agrees and feels great about. And then it also exposes where the tensions are. And it gives you a chance to go Oh, so that's reality. So that's where our people are. And then when you have people tackling the topic that are coming from a diverse array of perspectives, you have the conservatives, we saw that in Jacksonville five years ago, the true and tried this, do things the way used to work, because it really did work. And then you have the progressives, well got us here won't get us there, we got to do something new. Okay, well, they're both right. And they're both wrong, you know, there's like a way to blend it all together. And so I love to see integrative teams, integrative task forces, and it can really produce great results on a slow and methodical timeline. But our ministers have to be in a good spot. And we should commit to helping them get in a good spot if they're getting burnt out.
Travis Albritton:So if you're a leader, and you're listening to this, and you're wanting to do one of these surveys, Steve has graciously agreed to create a template an example that you can use that you can modify, to know the right questions to ask to get the results that are going to really set you up for success. And see if we got you for one more episode. Next week. We're gonna keep digging into this and talk about what do healthy expectations look like? What does church unity look like? And then what are some healthy ground rules to make sure that we respect and love one another, but are also able to speak with honesty and transparency.
Steve Staten:I look forward to that subject very, very much