December 1, 2021 • 45 mins
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
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Travis Albritton (00:01):
Hey there, and welcome back to the women in the
church podcast. Now while wehave certainly finished the
super deep exegetical Biblestudy covering women's roles
within our public worshipassemblies on Sundays, we are
certainly not done because nowthat we've done the academic
work, to understand how to readthe Bible, the different
(00:22):
arguments and how you get tothem. Now the rubber really
meets the road, right? And wehave to implement these findings
and practices in real life withreal people. And we're not
always going to agree on what wethink the answer should be. So
in this episode, in the nextepisode, I'm gonna be sitting
down with Steve Stayton. Now,Steve has quite an eclectic
(00:44):
background in his professionallife, he spent nine years in
engineering, and then head over25 years of experience in church
leadership, overseeing staffeducation, pastoring, and
managing crises, conflict andchange in a variety of settings.
So as a conflict resolutionexpert, those are my words, not
his. He's worked with single andmulti site churches of 250, all
(01:08):
the way up to 6000 members inthe UK, Canada, Hawaii,
California, Alaska, Georgia,Florida, Washington, Montana,
Kansas, in other Midwest states.
So he has been brought in bymany churches in our fellowship,
to help manage the dynamicswithin a congregation, when
people aren't seeing eye to eyeeither between the leadership
(01:29):
and the congregation, or withinthe congregation itself, to help
them work through that and comeout on the other side stronger
and more unified than ever. Sowe knew we wanted to cover this
topic of how to manage theinternal dynamics of a church
congregation working throughthis question together. Steve is
the man for the job. So withoutfurther ado, here's my
(01:49):
conversation with Steve Stayton.
Well, Steve, thank you so muchfor taking the time to hop on
the podcast with us. We'reexcited to dig into some church
unity talk.
Steve Staten (02:01):
Fantastic is so great to be here. I'm honored.
Travis Albritton (02:03):
So let's just start right off the bat with the
elephant in the room. In thelast episode, we identified
that, you know, we really can'twith 100% certainty, say, this
position is correct, or thispoint is correct. And so we're
in this really interesting placewhere we're holding this tension
between two different ideas orperspectives about the role of
(02:23):
women in the public assembly,how do you even approach trying
to manage that dynamic?
Steve Staten (02:28):
Well, a part of this is about the orientation of
the church in his own personalhistory, and also the history of
the region, you know, this partof the country or wherever, and
when you know that, it helpsinform where the conversation
can go. So for instance, if Ilook at some flagship churches
(02:48):
in flagship, meaning those thateither were the pillar churches
of our family of churches, orvery first in their domain,
larger than life having greatinfluence, I've seen two
different kinds one flagshipchurch is about, we should all
get back to doing such and such,and everybody should do the same
(03:12):
thing together, and we've got tobe unified and what they mean
sometimes is uniform. Okay. Andthen another flagship church, we
got burned by maybe a previousprevious era will say you do you
we do us, and then they wantgreat diversity and not to be
told what to do. And both can beproblematic. And I see both
(03:34):
being problematic on a number ofdifferent issues. So I think
it's just really good to know ifthat's the paradigm, or the
motional place that people arecoming from, until you can find
a way to bridge that you won'tbe able to solve quite a few
topics. It just there'll be anumber of things that show,
yeah, we're not on the samepage. But if you can recognize
(03:55):
those two landing places, andyou can have a conversation
about it. And if it's a goodconversation, I think you can
tackle some of these topics.
Travis Albritton (04:04):
So let's kind of focus in and zero in the
conversation on like a localcongregation, because that's
where, internally a lot of theseconversations are happening
before they start butting upagainst what conclusion did that
church come to? I would presumein every church, individuals
that are like, nope, limitedparticipation is the way to go.
That's what the Bible says. Andthen there's a group that says
(04:25):
actually, we think fullparticipation is the more likely
interpretation as a leader of achurch trying to manage that
dynamic, recognizing you're notgoing to please everybody,
right? How do you actually putprocesses and steps into place
to be able to move forward as aorganization?
Steve Staten (04:44):
Well, I'd say that in that congregation, let's just
say it's 200 members, and it'slocal is not one of the main
hots big spots around the globe.
Those there'll be people in thatcongregation that are very tied
in that want to know what otherschurches are doing, they might
default to a favorite teacher,or a book written by somebody
(05:05):
from the outside. And theleadership will definitely want
to be connected and thinking interms of the greater family of
churches. But a number ofmembers will be like, that
doesn't matter to me what theydo hear I hardly ever leave this
city, you know, right, I'mtalking about just right here.
So the tension will be betweenthose who want to move together,
either regionally orcollectively with some sort of
(05:28):
margin of difference, versusthose who want an outcome right
now, right here for the citythat I live in. And what happens
out there doesn't matter to me.
And I think if you could evencatch everybody up to that
conversation of what is allgoing out on out there. And then
(05:49):
I think I would introduce skillsfor collaboration, you can't
collaborate just by saying Iwant to collaborate there, it's
a it's an art. And it takeshumility takes a lot of
listening skills. But if you canset the stage for collaboration,
say, we will get to yourfavorite topic, I promise, it's
(06:09):
definitely, it's coming, okay.
But you got to have peoplewilling to come to the table.
And sometimes it's best to dowith 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 justgonna dominate the discussion,
(06:31):
suck the air out of the room,but they're really, you know,
good folks, then you can cocreate a narrative of how we got
here, our longer Christiantradition, or longer sector
denomination, or movementtradition, and then our local
way of how we've got here, andwhat are some of the markers in
(06:52):
the ICRC history. And there weresome moments like wine women and
song, I think, was around 90 to93. That was a very positive
turn, in our family churches,maybe didn't address everything
related to the women's role. Butif you could just kind of step
it along, say, here's our Ark,our narrative, how we got here.
(07:12):
And if everybody sees thatthat's accurate, and maybe even
senses that their voices inthat, like, there's the tension,
and we can be honest with thatnarrative, then I think you can
really begin to then talk aboutwhat collaboration looks like.
And and by the way, if you'vegot to that spot, you've
collaborated, because anarrative that has everybody's
voice in is the first place tocollaborate.
Travis Albritton (07:37):
Well, and I think another key foundational
element to that is trust in thatprocess. Right? Right, that if
you're not personally involved,feeling like you can trust the
outcome, because it is thisreally interesting dynamic where
you can't have too many chefs inthe 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
(08:00):
a certain point, since noteveryone is going to be equally
vested in that process, what isa healthy amount of
transparency, or a healthyprocess that would enable the
people that are a part of thatgroup, like, let's say someone's
creating a task force in theirchurch or their region? Yeah,
that would enable them to havethe capability of collaborating
(08:22):
and moving forward and bringingeveryone else with them?
Steve Staten (08:25):
Well, when you mentioned transparency, what
first came to my mind is say yougot a very decently established
Task Force in a congregation.
And let's say there are seven ornine people in it some you know,
the idea there is people shouldbe free to talk in that group
without what's being said, goingoutside the group. So what I'm
(08:45):
saying now, in my initialposition, I'll share with you,
you know, I'm assuming it's notgoing to go outside this room.
And you will hear, you know, Idefault on egalitarianism
default on complementarian. Andyou'll hear people say, I'm
troubled by both perspectives. Ithink that there's some nuance,
and we need a new term for anuanced position. That's not
(09:09):
either or. And so when peopleare free to go to that place,
and discuss it, and they've gotthat safety thing in there where
we are safe. I think it's wherethe chemistry starts right then
in there.
Travis Albritton (09:25):
And then how, because this is something that
you know, whenever you starttalking about convictions, even
in that sound doctrine bucketwhere we recognize at least
theoretically, there's somemove, there's some room for
movement without it beingheresy. Yeah, it still feels
like an attack on coreconvictions. What does
(09:45):
collaboration look like? Whenit's very difficult to feel like
there can be a compromisedposition, trying to meet in the
middle of feels, it feels likeit's got to be one extreme or
the other. Either everythingstays the same or everything
changes. But I know that that'snot necessarily true. So kind of
walk through what that wouldlook like trying to find a third
way.
Steve Staten (10:05):
Well, this has been something in the
restoration tradition, that'salways been a difficult topic,
what is core, what is veryimportant, and what is rich but
mysterious. So core would be thethe person and work of Jesus
Christ at death, barrel, theresurrection, how salvation
(10:26):
occurs. And so on and so forth.
The things we see on our Creed'sthe very important, but not in
the same category would beeschatology, those kinds of
things, the structure of achurch governance role of women.
So the test of fellowship shouldnot be on that second category.
(10:47):
Test, the fellowship should beon the first category. And the
third category will be a mysteryuntil we reach the end. And
that's things like Providence,and things that are just so, so
mysterious. And then we alsosorted this out when a team of
us worked on the cooperationagreement back in oh, five and
(11:08):
six, we had these are the mostimportant beliefs. And then we
went down and said, then there'sthis and this. And some, once
you get into practices,practices do not stand up to the
gospel as being anywhere near asimportant. I important for sure.
Because, you know, Paul talksabout building with gold and
(11:28):
silver and a and all that. Ithink when we error on some of
these other categories, we'renot building well, but it does
not exclude us from thefellowship.
Travis Albritton (11:40):
So are there any examples that we can pull
from in the New Testament to seewhere the early church was
running? I mean, Jesus Gentilesis a well documented, right, in
the early church. Sure. Andthere was a lot of tension
culturally around lifestyle andpractices between Christians
(12:02):
coming out of pagan backgrounds,right? It was like, hey, the way
that I worship God as I go havesex with a temple prostitute
versus Jews becoming Christianswho 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 churchto get a model for how to
approach conversations likethis?
Steve Staten (12:22):
Well, I've been thinking about that very
question. So a pose ahypothetical. What if around 51
ad, aliens from another planetcame down and set up every
believer with the internet cellphones, and you know, they had
the whole smartphones the wholebit, so they knew instantly what
(12:42):
was happening somewhere else,you would have a problem. Here's
the problem. At around 49 ad iswhen the x 15 council released a
letter and it was meant for theeastern seaboard of the
Mediterranean, from Antioch allthe way down to Judea. Some
(13:03):
regulations for what shouldhappen it included not eating
food sacrificed idols. Threeyears later, Corinth is planted.
And then shortly after that,Paul writes a letter. And that
letter opens the door for eatingfood sacrificed idols. So you
can imagine James getting acall, you know, or an email
(13:28):
blast goes out you Would youbelieve what they're doing in
Corinth, and Paul, who was atthat extra 15, or at that
council was an X 15 yet? Okay.
Paul, was at that councilmeeting heard the conclusion
from the letter, and how dare hedeviate from what the apostles
and the elders and James andPeter came up with. So I think
we are in a dilemma because weare so connected. We are so
(13:50):
connected, I'll give you a veryspecific example that you can
relate to specifically, I did apresentation in Jacksonville, on
a Friday night releasing thereport, and a slide version to
the congregation of some of thetroubles there as a consultant
that I was brought in to look atand the leadership to their, you
(14:10):
know, to compliment them, theysaid, 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 asituation that has pros and
cons. And the con of it is someof our cultural norms locally
(14:33):
differ from a cultural normsomewhere else. And when we find
out what somebody else is doingdifferently, it can be very
offensive to our norm.
Travis Albritton (14:45):
Well, and you don't have to go very far for
that to happen. Right. So Ithink we think, Oh, cultural
norms that's like United Statesversus Middle East. But it's
North Carolina versus Virginia.
You don't have to go very far tofind vast differences.
Communication Style culturalnorms, how we relate to each
other, how we approachquestions, how we think about
leadership. Yep. And if we'renot mindful that those
(15:06):
differences exist, then we canassume ill intent on the other
party.
Steve Staten (15:13):
So I have an illustration that I did not
discuss with you. But it fitsperfectly in this topic. So a
friend of mine, a woman, gettingher Master's or endeavor at some
university, and one of herassignments was to deliver a
sermon around the subject ofEaster, okay, around the
resurrection. So she did it in adenominational setting. The
(15:38):
point minister for her local, alocal church in her city,
because this is more than onechurch in the area, saying, Hey,
can you do that for us? Okay.
And I saw it, she asked me tolook at it, I did. And it was
not a authority, authoritativething. It was not giving
direction, it was a testimonialpiece. That was her experience
(16:00):
with the resurrection. And itwas also an her subject matter
specialty related to her studiesat the school. Well, then she
was asked to do it at anotherchurch in our family of
churches. And it was livestreamed and word went out.
Okay, word went out, and youcould just you know, where
(16:22):
that's going. Okay. So, but thenI weighed in with the people
that I heard were troubled byit. And I said, how does that
differ from the testimony thatwe often see from women at
communion? And how does thatdiffer from listening to a
person and their subject matterspecialty, sharing what they've
(16:43):
learned? And by the way, we'vedone similar versions to that.
And it's never raised aneyebrow, you know, but on a
Sunday morning, it does orsomething about that. And I
think that has to be unpacked. Idon't claim to have all the
answers on that. I just likeconsistency. You know, it kind
Travis Albritton (17:06):
of goes back to the semi tongue in cheek
comment that Jesus makes to thePharisees this, is the temple
holy, or is it the gold in thetemple? That's right, right.
Right. Yeah. And it's like, arewe splitting hairs on something
that we're creating more workfor ourselves than is necessary,
which again, holds that tensionof what does it look like to
work out these things? Yeah, ina way that is also really humble
(17:30):
to the scriptures, right?
Because that can be a danger toespecially my generation. And
this is not just millennials andGen Z, like this is just a young
people thing in general questioneverything your elders have ever
given passed down to you,because they're probably idiots.
And you probably know whatyou're talking about. I say that
very sarcastically. And so thereis this cultural dynamic of,
well, why can't church be likethis? Why can't women speak from
(17:53):
a stage on Sunday, when wecelebrate when members of our
own congregation, get promotionsthat put them in authority over
other men in business settings,
Steve Staten (18:07):
we'll have another example exactly what you're
talking about. Because when Iwas in Chicago, I was where I
was in a ministry 26 years, andI had led every region of that
church, and then in all thedifferent roles, but my last
stage there was just as a sectorleader, as I was transitioning,
going back to school andbecoming a consultant. And we
(18:27):
asked the sister to share acommunion. And this particular
meeting was the joining of theSouth and the North sides were
about 70 plus percent AfricanAmerican. But this very beloved
sister gets up and does hertestimony and other brothers up
on stage during the prayer, youknow, afterwards, but she goes
(18:48):
long, instead of you know, thethree to four minutes, whatever,
I think she does, like eight ornine, and she is delivering,
okay, let's put it that way.
Some bytes, say preaching, okay.
But it was so compelling. And itdefinitely stepped over the line
(19:09):
of sensibilities if you arecoming from a certain place,
okay. But it didn't in thatministry, because there's a
cultural piece. This discussionwe are having now. From my
experience is not a bigdiscussion in the Urban
Ministries of African Americans.
And it certainly wasn't evendiscussion with the recipe list
(19:32):
never raised an eyebrow, wewould no mention of it. Nobody
was brought it up to the elderin the ministry, the evangelist
or me. I do think there's acultural piece to it because
there are some places in theworld certainly Island cultures
being a good example, where theelders on the island, I'm not
talking about Christianity, I'mjust talking about their tribal
things. The elders are women.
(19:55):
They're the wise people to go toto solve problems. So if we were
to reach that place with our ownparadigm on these things, we
find that we have we're allcoming from a different starting
place. I don't think this iseasy stuff, Travis. I don't have
the answers. But I thinkstarting with humility, and
(20:17):
building some good understandingof everybody's starting place,
learning how to collaborate,negotiate, negotiate, look at
past precedent, look atscripture, look at how we got
here, and keeping the book open.
Because that's, that's where ourstandard is. But we also
recognize we read it with our,our lens of our personal
(20:37):
experiences. And we have to putthat on the table too.
Travis Albritton (20:41):
Yeah, I think that's one of the biggest eye
opening things for me, just myown recent growth as a disciple
is you always suspect thatthere's a certain level of
subjectivity in how you read theBible, and that, you know, the
questions I ask my ownexperiences, my own past is
going to color, the things thatjumped out to me, and the things
(21:01):
that I resonate with that I kindof latch on to, but no one
thinks they're more subjectivethan everyone else. They suspect
they're, they're likely correct.
Otherwise, you wouldn't thinkthe things that you think. And
so there is this element of justkind of recognizing our own
shortcomings in being objective.
But then that introduces anotherquestion, especially when we're
(21:23):
talking about starting places,like how do you balance being
all things to all people? And inthe 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, youknow, the X Council where
they're like, let's not eatfood, sacrifice to idols. So
(21:44):
that way, we're not searing theconsciences of our Jewish
Christian brothers and sisters.
How do we straddle that fence ina God honoring way of let's not
be so separate from the worldthat we're just aliens, and we
look like we have three heads.
But also, the Bible calls usconsistently to be
countercultural, and so notconformed to the pattern of the
(22:04):
world. So how does thatinteraction play out?
Steve Staten (22:08):
Well, there's a concept of flexibility. And
also, there's the concept ofbeing willing to surrender, that
things won't go my particularpoint 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 thosecongregations, very conservative
on the role of women on stagespeaking, pray, and whatever,
(22:31):
very, very conservative. Andthese are good men that got good
elders, and I don't know theircurrent preacher very well. But
I sat down with the elders. Andthey said to me, Steve, if you
can help us get our churchesback together as the one Atlanta
church and some configuration ofwhat that might mean, this is
about 10 years ago, we'rewilling to move on this issue
(22:54):
with the role of women becauseour unity and working together
means more to us than ourparticular point of view, on the
role of women, I was surprisedthat they were that flexible. So
it's a conviction. But it's nota conviction at the same level
(23:14):
as the desire to be tight andstrategic together and being a
you know, so they're reallynever both and kind of thing.
And so I, I was just impressedby that. So I would say
flexibility. And also beingwilling to just have your way
not become the way of the group.
Travis Albritton (23:30):
And that's always difficult when you feel
pretty confident about yourposition. And you are in a
position of influence, becausemost of these conversations are
driven by a small percentage ofindividuals, right? Just being
real, right? So it's not likewe're gonna survey the whole
church and everyone's voicesweighted equally. There's
usually less than five people inthat congregation no matter how
(23:53):
large it is, yeah, thatultimately determine kind of the
outcomes of these conversations.
So how do you navigate thatdynamic, especially as a leader?
When right? It's like, Listen, Igotta Shepherd everyone,
including these fiveindividuals, but also everyone
else?
Steve Staten (24:08):
Well, the whole subject of consensus is so
important. Why is the subject ofconsensus important because it's
a chance for people to find outwhere the bulk of the community
wants to be. But what happens ifyou have practiced negotiation
along the way you watch people'sopinions change it, same thing
(24:30):
happens in a jury? They'll allstart 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 somereally great practices of
discovery, one of the best wayto see people change their mind,
but it become their personalchange would be to have them
argue the other person'sperspective vehemently. So I
(24:53):
have a daughter that was presentthe debate team at Wheaton
College And I saw a debate onlyonce because there's a lot of
traveling involved. But I wasreally impressed that she was
capable of being vigorous forthe opposite view. And sometimes
you were actually told, you'reonly going to take this
(25:14):
position. That's your job, eventhough you don't agree with
that. But what would happen islight bulbs would go on, you
know, epiphanies would occurbecause you're now thinking
through the feet of otherpeople, that really does make a
difference. And then you retestthe consensus. Okay, now, where
are we at now, two days later,and, and, okay, here's where I'm
leaning. Now, if there's theright atmosphere, people get
(25:38):
nudged. And that's howcollaboration occurs.
Travis Albritton (25:43):
So let's dig into that. So we've kind of
talked high level, some of thereasons why this is not the
easiest thing in the world todo. Yeah, now, let's start
breaking down some tools for howto collaborate for how to come
together, to how to come toconsensus, and to work together
in a unified fashion, elevatingthe things that are important.
And, you know, maybe allowingroom for there to be
(26:05):
disagreement, but within aunified framework, like how
would you approach doing that?
Because I know you have a lot ofexperience saying there's two
sides, it's very fractured, howdo we come together?
Steve Staten (26:16):
So one thing you could do, first of all, I've
mentioned before you find outwhere everybody is at,
initially, we have the safetythat we can change our views, we
some of us probably will, orfind more nuance and them.
Sometimes I'll put an empty seatin the room. And that empty seat
might be That's God's, or he'ssitting here, okay, does not
(26:36):
forget that we are answerable.
He's the audience that we mostcare about. Okay. But I also
might put other seats there ofpeople who have spoken to this
topic that they might even bedeceased, so that we are
answering to those who've done alot more research than ours. And
we might even put the apostlePaul in there, because we're
dealing with some of thestatements that he's made that
are very significant. And thenso you have this group of maybe
(26:59):
seven, that's really becomes agroup of 12, not forgetting the
other people that are importantin the conversation. And from
time to time you stop and say,What would Paul say and you
know, and whomever, so I thinkthat's really good. And then
testing it out to ask somebodyto vigorously go after another
perspective, another thing youcan do is kind of look at a case
(27:20):
study, something that's happenedbefore a precedent, maybe a
congregation that successfullynavigated 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 thisis a case where they found a
(27:43):
third way. And by the way, Ithink the language is important
looking for third way language,or both and language, staying
away from either or, and lookingfor ways to, you might ask
somebody to put a post up, postit up on the wall, what would be
a scenario that could satisfypeople coming from both
(28:07):
perspectives, in terms ofpractice, point of views may not
change that much. But practicesthat we haven't done now, that
can strengthen and validate theinfluence of women in the
church. But not, you know, go sofar and see the fullest
participation, which will alwaysbe controversial, at least in
(28:28):
the ICRC about women, elders,you know, that kind of that
level of participation. And Iknow that's not on the table in
these discussions. But what youhave to do is, say, here is a
post of what I think could helpus move the needle, and then you
stop, and you take a breath, andthen you say, let's do a test to
see where we are again. Now.
(28:52):
Another thing you can do is onthe very front side is defined
consensus. And I've seen insituations where consensus is
defined as unanimity, and that'snot consensus. But the problem
with that version that takesjust one person to stop any
progress, you know, right. Butif you set it as four out of
(29:13):
five or eight out of 10, in thatthe two out of 10, that are not
happy with at least theconclusion, but they're happy
that they were heard. They maysay, they may be willing to say,
I'm gonna go with it. I'm justgonna go with it. I'll tell you
a true story. I know a teacher,who is definitely
(29:33):
egalitarianism. He doesn't sharethat with anybody. I don't think
hardly, Biden knows, but maybeme or one other person. And the
evangelist in his church said, Ineed you to agree completely on
my position of the role ofwomen. And he said, So what's
your position? And my friendsaid, it doesn't matter? Because
(29:57):
I go with this communitiesbecause Question, because this
is my family. And not everythingI believe has to be the way
things go. And that's also theway family is, you know, you
just say this is this is how ourfamily functions. And I'm going
to go with it. Also a healthyview of how to get to consensus.
So if you have a facilitator,you rotate the facilitator,
(30:22):
typically to those that youknow, are most impartial in
their principal, who they are.
And they will like be the pointperson for the discussion that
day. And then the next time issomebody else. And it is
possible to have a position verystrongly. But to lead a
discussion in which it doesn'tshow up in any way, shape, or
(30:43):
form. But it takes a persondeeply committed to principle,
who's self aware, and reallydoesn't want to be the
dominator. They want the greatergroup good. So I would say a
good facilitated discussionrotated around to build
consensus and continually testwhere we are at Travis, people
change, they change from theprocess, they transform,
(31:06):
sometimes they'll go from Ican't believe where I was
starting out, but I'm in adifferent place now. And that's
what I love about thisnegotiation process.
Travis Albritton (31:18):
So I want to follow up on something you just
said, which is the tension ofbeing committed to the
fellowship, the body of Christ,which is something that we see
very clearly laid out in theBible, we belong to each other.
Right? And there's a certainamount of denying yourself, for
the sake of others, that issimply a part of discipleship.
(31:38):
Yep. So that is a piece that wealways need to have friend
center. But then, because we'realso sinful people, right? There
are places where those churchpractices and the way that we
implement the positions that wehold are not done in the most
loving or gracious are thoughtthrough manner. And there's real
hurt that's experienced, yeah,by both men and women. And you
(32:00):
know, we're gonna talk KyleSpears is coming up on the
podcast to talk about spiritualtrauma. But how do you balance
those things, because it couldvery easily become a codependent
relationship between you and theorganization of I just need to
completely deny my feelings andmy emotions, even when I've been
hurt. For the sake of notrocking the boat, right? How do
you manage that tension? Becausethat's a reality for a lot of
(32:22):
people. Well,
Steve Staten (32:23):
this goes into conflict management and being
able to have really importantdiscussions in the church world,
especially where there's a powercomponent authority versus
somebody further down thestructure. I think, coaching
even how to have thosediscussions to set personal
boundaries. One of the thingsthat I've taught people that's
(32:44):
gotten me in a little bittrouble, but I'll continue to
teach it is how to tell a leadersomebody over you and authority.
No, just the word no. Becausesometimes people overstep, they
think they have more power thanGod has ever given them. And
they need to hear no, they needa bumper, they say you just
crossed the line. But you alsowant to find where you can say
(33:07):
yes to that same leader. Yes, Iwant to work with you. Yes, I
want to be in your ministry.
Yes, we can do great thingstogether. But we won't be able
to if you continue thatbehavior. That's so against the
word, the paradigm that someministers have, because they
just think that they can getaway with stuff. And I don't
think that's panning out verywell for people in any faith
(33:30):
tradition these days, you know,yeah. So I but I think how to
have conversations around, orhow to have meaningful
conversations where there's aconflict will have less trauma,
if we can manage conflict, if wecan manage conflict within the
power structure, so that youdon't have a leg up if you are
(33:51):
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 bullyand to use my position to
overpower somebody where theyare having an interpersonal
conflict with me. I would wantthem to find me approachable,
(34:12):
willing to have a third partycome in and help us because
we're brothers before an elderteacher evangelists, in the
greater route, long stretch ofeternity, our titles and roles
will mean absolutely nothing.
What will matter is how weconnect to each other's brothers
and sisters. That's a longwinded answer to this whole
thing. But Kyle's a friend ofmine and I do have concerns
(34:35):
about people that don't grow theway they could don't mature the
way they cook because theyhaven't been able to process
traumatic events.
Travis Albritton (34:43):
Again, none of these things are easy, because
if you are serving and it's ashepherding role and overseeing
role in your church, yeah, Godhas given you an obligation to
protect the people in thatchurch from false teaching now,
what is the false teaching talksabout the Newton MIT, how do we
interpret it? That's a wholenother discussion. Sure. So
(35:03):
there can be this tension oflike, at a certain point, there
has to be a line, we do notcross. And we need to protect
even each other from ideas thatcould undermine our faith in the
court and our core convictions.
Yeah. But it's very, it's verydifficult to do that in a way
that is that feels like you'relistening, because you're also
trying to really put your footdown and say, This is a line we
(35:24):
cannot cross. Right?
Steve Staten (35:28):
Well, when we were talking about collaboration a
few minutes ago, it ties intothis whole thing about a line,
you do not cross I think what'sreally important at the end of a
collaboration negotiationprocess, you have guardrails
that you've defined, we won't gohere and we won't go there. Not
necessarily that they're evil topass those guardrails. But as
(35:48):
for us now, in our community,we're staying right here. And
what that does is it helps theamygdala calm down for people.
Sure. And I recently heard asermon done at a leaders meeting
that addressed from aconservative thing, all the
worries about progressives andall this in the church and
(36:09):
progressive theology practicesaround diversity, women's roles,
so much of it was actually good.
And this guy was a friend ofmine, but I said to him, What
about the other side of thecontinuum? And that's there,
too. And if you only address oneside, it could be
misinterpreted, that everythingis a okay to go anywhere you
(36:30):
want on the other side. So it'sgood to do that. Another thing,
and this is the idea of aslippery slope and a continuum.
I actually believe in the powerof slippery slope arguments, but
there's a pitfall when they'reused out of being fearful. And
just we quickly go, oh, that's aslippery slope. You know? I
(36:52):
mean, there are slippery slopes,right? Okay. There are certain
practices that could open us upto get into spiritual trouble.
Now, we know that we know thateach of us personally, we have
what would be a slippery slope.
That could be around drinking orthe movies, we watch an
entertainment, the things we seeand chemicals we ingest in our
(37:14):
body and all that kind of stuff.
There are slippery slopes, butwe don't want to go there real
quick and say, Whoa, bro, that'sa slippery slope, because that's
a fallacious argument. Becauseif you look at the continuum,
there is a reasonable place inthe continuum on any given
topic, where are most giventopics that we can work with,
because there is someflexibility and latitude even in
(37:36):
the Bible, and then there's aplace this A Bridge Too Far. So
it's good to have thosediscussions towards the end.
Because if your church of 200,that we're talking about this
fictional church has a landingplace that feels really good to
the group, at least for the hereand now. Then they've got to
create a message that goes outto the 200. And that will
(37:59):
definitely include this is whatwe now support. This is what we
don't, both in and so forth.
Travis Albritton (38:07):
Well, and I've seen a lot of the hesitation in
engaging and the topics we'vebeen discussing on this podcast,
is not even necessarily thequestion about is a woman
permitted to teach preachbiblically speaking, right? It's
all the other conversations thatquickly get connected to the
question. Yeah, or observationsyou see about other churches and
(38:28):
things that have happened there.
Right. So like, I've seen theargument that if we nudge or
give an inch at all, on thequestion of women's roles,
compared to historically howwe've interpreted it, then it's
only a matter of time before allthese other things happen. We
are embracing gender theory andall these other things. It's
(38:49):
like, I'm just trying to ask thequestion about can a woman teach
me on a Sunday from behind apulpits? Right? I'm already
reading her blog, can she do itin this fashion? And as you
suggested, that does feel veryfear based?
Steve Staten (39:03):
It is the like I said, as the amygdala gets
hijacked for what things can be.
And I think if we would alladmit it, nobody would disagree
with this statement. What ishappening in our nation right
now is affecting the church,what we watch what we listen to
our experiences in theworkplace, around vaccine
mandates around BLM, that'salready an old story, but it's
(39:27):
still a factor, critical racetheory, and how much role of
government can have in ourlives, all sorts of education
issues. These are big, they'rebig in my house, we have these
conversations, you know, everycouple of days, and we're
largely coming from the sameplace and all the topics but
it's in our face. How would thisnot affect the church, right? So
(39:50):
what we ought to do is find thethings that engender trust, to
dial things down and go hey, butat least have Jesus then add
from there, you know, we've gotto constantly work at dialing
things down to a place where wecan have a meaningful
conversation.
Travis Albritton (40:10):
This is a very sticky conversation. And we're
going to dig into this more inthe next episode. I know a lot
of members, and a lot ofleaders, artists feeling tired,
like the last year and a halfhas been exhausting. Last year,
at least in the United States,in 2020, we had a lot of really
emotionally taxing conversationsaround culture, and race and our
(40:34):
lived experiences and how thatimpacts the way we show up in
church. And there can be a veryreasonable reaction of can this
just wait like a little bitlonger, we get a little bit more
of a reprieve. And then on theother hands, you have
individuals that are of personalstakes in this conversation that
feel like we've waited longenough. We've waited for it to
(40:57):
be convenient. Now is the timeto talk about it. How do you
bridge that dynamic?
Steve Staten (41:02):
Actually, I have in some of my consultations. And
so usually as a from a distanceover the phone or over zoom in
I've really encourage the boardsof churches to make sure their
leaders are getting sabbaticalswhen possible that they've got
good policies for it. Asabbatical doesn't have to be
long to be powerful andeffective. But it has to be a
(41:24):
really well designed one, and soforth. And so here I'm a little
bit more empathetic towards theministers. And here's why. If
you don't have that minister ina 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 havea good outcome either. Nobody's
going to be a winner. In thatsituation. We're gonna have
(41:45):
people stepping out theministry. And it's a massive
problem in the evangelical worldright now. So many people
stepping out and wanting to stepout, there's surveys on it. 38%
of the people in the ministrysaid that they seriously have
considered stepping out in thegreater evangelical world. I
don't think that's far from thecase in our situation, from my
conversations with people. So wegot to look out after people,
(42:08):
their ministers in theirdevelopment, their training
their sabbaticals, and givingthem the chance to get some
skills on how to docollaboration, negotiation,
diversity training, I'm nottalking about just our own stuff
I'm talking about from theoutside. And then when we tackle
topics that we'll be able totackle them with much more
agility and even speed. But wewe might be delayed from when we
(42:32):
want to, but when we do it, wecan do it well. On the other
hand, and coming from theposture of the congregation, I
think they need to be giventimelines so that they'll know
it's going to happen. We aredeliberate or serious as a
church. But we have to get readyfor it. And the past, we didn't
give timelines I would seeminister say, Yeah, we're
(42:54):
looking into that. Five yearslater. Yeah, we're looking into
that. Words don't mean anything.
Matter of fact, that's adiscouraging thing. We're
looking into it. Who do you havea 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. Asurvey can create goodwill, as
be well designed and wellinterpreted. But a survey allows
(43:16):
you to find out what are theshared components of a
congregations and appreciativeinquiry survey, it's a certain
technique, but you find out whatis that? Like? What are those
life giving forces thateverybody agrees and feels great
about. And then it also exposeswhere the tensions are. And it
gives you a chance to go Oh, sothat's reality. So that's where
(43:38):
our people are. And then whenyou have people tackling the
topic that are coming from adiverse array of perspectives,
you have the conservatives, wesaw that in Jacksonville five
years ago, the true and triedthis, do things the way used to
work, because it really didwork. And then you have the
progressives, well got us herewon't get us there, we got to do
something new. Okay, well,they're both right. And they're
(44:01):
both wrong, you know, there'slike a way to blend it all
together. And so I love to seeintegrative teams, integrative
task forces, and it can reallyproduce great results on a slow
and methodical timeline. But ourministers have to be in a good
spot. And we should commit tohelping them get in a good spot
(44:21):
if they're getting burnt out.
Travis Albritton (44:25):
So if you're a leader, and you're listening to
this, and you're wanting to doone of these surveys, Steve has
graciously agreed to create atemplate an example that you can
use that you can modify, to knowthe right questions to ask to
get the results that are goingto really set you up for
success. And see if we got youfor one more episode. Next week.
We're gonna keep digging intothis and talk about what do
(44:45):
healthy expectations look like?
What does church unity looklike? And then what are some
healthy ground rules to makesure that we respect and love
one another, but are also ableto speak with honesty and
transparency.
Steve Staten (44:55):
I look forward to that subject very, very much
Hey there, and welcome back to the women in the
church podcast. Now while wehave certainly finished the
super deep exegetical Biblestudy covering women's roles
within our public worshipassemblies on Sundays, we are
certainly not done because nowthat we've done the academic
work, to understand how to readthe Bible, the different
(00:22):
arguments and how you get tothem. Now the rubber really
meets the road, right? And wehave to implement these findings
and practices in real life withreal people. And we're not
always going to agree on what wethink the answer should be. So
in this episode, in the nextepisode, I'm gonna be sitting
down with Steve Stayton. Now,Steve has quite an eclectic
(00:44):
background in his professionallife, he spent nine years in
engineering, and then head over25 years of experience in church
leadership, overseeing staffeducation, pastoring, and
managing crises, conflict andchange in a variety of settings.
So as a conflict resolutionexpert, those are my words, not
his. He's worked with single andmulti site churches of 250, all
(01:08):
the way up to 6000 members inthe UK, Canada, Hawaii,
California, Alaska, Georgia,Florida, Washington, Montana,
Kansas, in other Midwest states.
So he has been brought in bymany churches in our fellowship,
to help manage the dynamicswithin a congregation, when
people aren't seeing eye to eyeeither between the leadership
(01:29):
and the congregation, or withinthe congregation itself, to help
them work through that and comeout on the other side stronger
and more unified than ever. Sowe knew we wanted to cover this
topic of how to manage theinternal dynamics of a church
congregation working throughthis question together. Steve is
the man for the job. So withoutfurther ado, here's my
(01:49):
conversation with Steve Stayton.
Well, Steve, thank you so muchfor taking the time to hop on
the podcast with us. We'reexcited to dig into some church
unity talk.
Steve Staten (02:01):
Fantastic is so great to be here. I'm honored.
Travis Albritton (02:03):
So let's just start right off the bat with the
elephant in the room. In thelast episode, we identified
that, you know, we really can'twith 100% certainty, say, this
position is correct, or thispoint is correct. And so we're
in this really interesting placewhere we're holding this tension
between two different ideas orperspectives about the role of
(02:23):
women in the public assembly,how do you even approach trying
to manage that dynamic?
Steve Staten (02:28):
Well, a part of this is about the orientation of
the church in his own personalhistory, and also the history of
the region, you know, this partof the country or wherever, and
when you know that, it helpsinform where the conversation
can go. So for instance, if Ilook at some flagship churches
(02:48):
in flagship, meaning those thateither were the pillar churches
of our family of churches, orvery first in their domain,
larger than life having greatinfluence, I've seen two
different kinds one flagshipchurch is about, we should all
get back to doing such and such,and everybody should do the same
(03:12):
thing together, and we've got tobe unified and what they mean
sometimes is uniform. Okay. Andthen another flagship church, we
got burned by maybe a previousprevious era will say you do you
we do us, and then they wantgreat diversity and not to be
told what to do. And both can beproblematic. And I see both
(03:34):
being problematic on a number ofdifferent issues. So I think
it's just really good to know ifthat's the paradigm, or the
motional place that people arecoming from, until you can find
a way to bridge that you won'tbe able to solve quite a few
topics. It just there'll be anumber of things that show,
yeah, we're not on the samepage. But if you can recognize
(03:55):
those two landing places, andyou can have a conversation
about it. And if it's a goodconversation, I think you can
tackle some of these topics.
Travis Albritton (04:04):
So let's kind of focus in and zero in the
conversation on like a localcongregation, because that's
where, internally a lot of theseconversations are happening
before they start butting upagainst what conclusion did that
church come to? I would presumein every church, individuals
that are like, nope, limitedparticipation is the way to go.
That's what the Bible says. Andthen there's a group that says
(04:25):
actually, we think fullparticipation is the more likely
interpretation as a leader of achurch trying to manage that
dynamic, recognizing you're notgoing to please everybody,
right? How do you actually putprocesses and steps into place
to be able to move forward as aorganization?
Steve Staten (04:44):
Well, I'd say that in that congregation, let's just
say it's 200 members, and it'slocal is not one of the main
hots big spots around the globe.
Those there'll be people in thatcongregation that are very tied
in that want to know what otherschurches are doing, they might
default to a favorite teacher,or a book written by somebody
(05:05):
from the outside. And theleadership will definitely want
to be connected and thinking interms of the greater family of
churches. But a number ofmembers will be like, that
doesn't matter to me what theydo hear I hardly ever leave this
city, you know, right, I'mtalking about just right here.
So the tension will be betweenthose who want to move together,
either regionally orcollectively with some sort of
(05:28):
margin of difference, versusthose who want an outcome right
now, right here for the citythat I live in. And what happens
out there doesn't matter to me.
And I think if you could evencatch everybody up to that
conversation of what is allgoing out on out there. And then
(05:49):
I think I would introduce skillsfor collaboration, you can't
collaborate just by saying Iwant to collaborate there, it's
a it's an art. And it takeshumility takes a lot of
listening skills. But if you canset the stage for collaboration,
say, we will get to yourfavorite topic, I promise, it's
(06:09):
definitely, it's coming, okay.
But you got to have peoplewilling to come to the table.
And sometimes it's best to dowith 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 justgonna dominate the discussion,
(06:31):
suck the air out of the room,but they're really, you know,
good folks, then you can cocreate a narrative of how we got
here, our longer Christiantradition, or longer sector
denomination, or movementtradition, and then our local
way of how we've got here, andwhat are some of the markers in
(06:52):
the ICRC history. And there weresome moments like wine women and
song, I think, was around 90 to93. That was a very positive
turn, in our family churches,maybe didn't address everything
related to the women's role. Butif you could just kind of step
it along, say, here's our Ark,our narrative, how we got here.
(07:12):
And if everybody sees thatthat's accurate, and maybe even
senses that their voices inthat, like, there's the tension,
and we can be honest with thatnarrative, then I think you can
really begin to then talk aboutwhat collaboration looks like.
And and by the way, if you'vegot to that spot, you've
collaborated, because anarrative that has everybody's
voice in is the first place tocollaborate.
Travis Albritton (07:37):
Well, and I think another key foundational
element to that is trust in thatprocess. Right? Right, that if
you're not personally involved,feeling like you can trust the
outcome, because it is thisreally interesting dynamic where
you can't have too many chefs inthe 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
(08:00):
a certain point, since noteveryone is going to be equally
vested in that process, what isa healthy amount of
transparency, or a healthyprocess that would enable the
people that are a part of thatgroup, like, let's say someone's
creating a task force in theirchurch or their region? Yeah,
that would enable them to havethe capability of collaborating
(08:22):
and moving forward and bringingeveryone else with them?
Steve Staten (08:25):
Well, when you mentioned transparency, what
first came to my mind is say yougot a very decently established
Task Force in a congregation.
And let's say there are seven ornine people in it some you know,
the idea there is people shouldbe free to talk in that group
without what's being said, goingoutside the group. So what I'm
(08:45):
saying now, in my initialposition, I'll share with you,
you know, I'm assuming it's notgoing to go outside this room.
And you will hear, you know, Idefault on egalitarianism
default on complementarian. Andyou'll hear people say, I'm
troubled by both perspectives. Ithink that there's some nuance,
and we need a new term for anuanced position. That's not
(09:09):
either or. And so when peopleare free to go to that place,
and discuss it, and they've gotthat safety thing in there where
we are safe. I think it's wherethe chemistry starts right then
in there.
Travis Albritton (09:25):
And then how, because this is something that
you know, whenever you starttalking about convictions, even
in that sound doctrine bucketwhere we recognize at least
theoretically, there's somemove, there's some room for
movement without it beingheresy. Yeah, it still feels
like an attack on coreconvictions. What does
(09:45):
collaboration look like? Whenit's very difficult to feel like
there can be a compromisedposition, trying to meet in the
middle of feels, it feels likeit's got to be one extreme or
the other. Either everythingstays the same or everything
changes. But I know that that'snot necessarily true. So kind of
walk through what that wouldlook like trying to find a third
way.
Steve Staten (10:05):
Well, this has been something in the
restoration tradition, that'salways been a difficult topic,
what is core, what is veryimportant, and what is rich but
mysterious. So core would be thethe person and work of Jesus
Christ at death, barrel, theresurrection, how salvation
(10:26):
occurs. And so on and so forth.
The things we see on our Creed'sthe very important, but not in
the same category would beeschatology, those kinds of
things, the structure of achurch governance role of women.
So the test of fellowship shouldnot be on that second category.
(10:47):
Test, the fellowship should beon the first category. And the
third category will be a mysteryuntil we reach the end. And
that's things like Providence,and things that are just so, so
mysterious. And then we alsosorted this out when a team of
us worked on the cooperationagreement back in oh, five and
(11:08):
six, we had these are the mostimportant beliefs. And then we
went down and said, then there'sthis and this. And some, once
you get into practices,practices do not stand up to the
gospel as being anywhere near asimportant. I important for sure.
Because, you know, Paul talksabout building with gold and
(11:28):
silver and a and all that. Ithink when we error on some of
these other categories, we'renot building well, but it does
not exclude us from thefellowship.
Travis Albritton (11:40):
So are there any examples that we can pull
from in the New Testament to seewhere the early church was
running? I mean, Jesus Gentilesis a well documented, right, in
the early church. Sure. Andthere was a lot of tension
culturally around lifestyle andpractices between Christians
(12:02):
coming out of pagan backgrounds,right? It was like, hey, the way
that I worship God as I go havesex with a temple prostitute
versus Jews becoming Christianswho 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 churchto get a model for how to
approach conversations likethis?
Steve Staten (12:22):
Well, I've been thinking about that very
question. So a pose ahypothetical. What if around 51
ad, aliens from another planetcame down and set up every
believer with the internet cellphones, and you know, they had
the whole smartphones the wholebit, so they knew instantly what
(12:42):
was happening somewhere else,you would have a problem. Here's
the problem. At around 49 ad iswhen the x 15 council released a
letter and it was meant for theeastern seaboard of the
Mediterranean, from Antioch allthe way down to Judea. Some
(13:03):
regulations for what shouldhappen it included not eating
food sacrificed idols. Threeyears later, Corinth is planted.
And then shortly after that,Paul writes a letter. And that
letter opens the door for eatingfood sacrificed idols. So you
can imagine James getting acall, you know, or an email
(13:28):
blast goes out you Would youbelieve what they're doing in
Corinth, and Paul, who was atthat extra 15, or at that
council was an X 15 yet? Okay.
Paul, was at that councilmeeting heard the conclusion
from the letter, and how dare hedeviate from what the apostles
and the elders and James andPeter came up with. So I think
we are in a dilemma because weare so connected. We are so
(13:50):
connected, I'll give you a veryspecific example that you can
relate to specifically, I did apresentation in Jacksonville, on
a Friday night releasing thereport, and a slide version to
the congregation of some of thetroubles there as a consultant
that I was brought in to look atand the leadership to their, you
(14:10):
know, to compliment them, theysaid, 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 asituation that has pros and
cons. And the con of it is someof our cultural norms locally
(14:33):
differ from a cultural normsomewhere else. And when we find
out what somebody else is doingdifferently, it can be very
offensive to our norm.
Travis Albritton (14:45):
Well, and you don't have to go very far for
that to happen. Right. So Ithink we think, Oh, cultural
norms that's like United Statesversus Middle East. But it's
North Carolina versus Virginia.
You don't have to go very far tofind vast differences.
Communication Style culturalnorms, how we relate to each
other, how we approachquestions, how we think about
leadership. Yep. And if we'renot mindful that those
(15:06):
differences exist, then we canassume ill intent on the other
party.
Steve Staten (15:13):
So I have an illustration that I did not
discuss with you. But it fitsperfectly in this topic. So a
friend of mine, a woman, gettingher Master's or endeavor at some
university, and one of herassignments was to deliver a
sermon around the subject ofEaster, okay, around the
resurrection. So she did it in adenominational setting. The
(15:38):
point minister for her local, alocal church in her city,
because this is more than onechurch in the area, saying, Hey,
can you do that for us? Okay.
And I saw it, she asked me tolook at it, I did. And it was
not a authority, authoritativething. It was not giving
direction, it was a testimonialpiece. That was her experience
(16:00):
with the resurrection. And itwas also an her subject matter
specialty related to her studiesat the school. Well, then she
was asked to do it at anotherchurch in our family of
churches. And it was livestreamed and word went out.
Okay, word went out, and youcould just you know, where
(16:22):
that's going. Okay. So, but thenI weighed in with the people
that I heard were troubled byit. And I said, how does that
differ from the testimony thatwe often see from women at
communion? And how does thatdiffer from listening to a
person and their subject matterspecialty, sharing what they've
(16:43):
learned? And by the way, we'vedone similar versions to that.
And it's never raised aneyebrow, you know, but on a
Sunday morning, it does orsomething about that. And I
think that has to be unpacked. Idon't claim to have all the
answers on that. I just likeconsistency. You know, it kind
Travis Albritton (17:06):
of goes back to the semi tongue in cheek
comment that Jesus makes to thePharisees this, is the temple
holy, or is it the gold in thetemple? That's right, right.
Right. Yeah. And it's like, arewe splitting hairs on something
that we're creating more workfor ourselves than is necessary,
which again, holds that tensionof what does it look like to
work out these things? Yeah, ina way that is also really humble
(17:30):
to the scriptures, right?
Because that can be a danger toespecially my generation. And
this is not just millennials andGen Z, like this is just a young
people thing in general questioneverything your elders have ever
given passed down to you,because they're probably idiots.
And you probably know whatyou're talking about. I say that
very sarcastically. And so thereis this cultural dynamic of,
well, why can't church be likethis? Why can't women speak from
(17:53):
a stage on Sunday, when wecelebrate when members of our
own congregation, get promotionsthat put them in authority over
other men in business settings,
Steve Staten (18:07):
we'll have another example exactly what you're
talking about. Because when Iwas in Chicago, I was where I
was in a ministry 26 years, andI had led every region of that
church, and then in all thedifferent roles, but my last
stage there was just as a sectorleader, as I was transitioning,
going back to school andbecoming a consultant. And we
(18:27):
asked the sister to share acommunion. And this particular
meeting was the joining of theSouth and the North sides were
about 70 plus percent AfricanAmerican. But this very beloved
sister gets up and does hertestimony and other brothers up
on stage during the prayer, youknow, afterwards, but she goes
(18:48):
long, instead of you know, thethree to four minutes, whatever,
I think she does, like eight ornine, and she is delivering,
okay, let's put it that way.
Some bytes, say preaching, okay.
But it was so compelling. And itdefinitely stepped over the line
(19:09):
of sensibilities if you arecoming from a certain place,
okay. But it didn't in thatministry, because there's a
cultural piece. This discussionwe are having now. From my
experience is not a bigdiscussion in the Urban
Ministries of African Americans.
And it certainly wasn't evendiscussion with the recipe list
(19:32):
never raised an eyebrow, wewould no mention of it. Nobody
was brought it up to the elderin the ministry, the evangelist
or me. I do think there's acultural piece to it because
there are some places in theworld certainly Island cultures
being a good example, where theelders on the island, I'm not
talking about Christianity, I'mjust talking about their tribal
things. The elders are women.
(19:55):
They're the wise people to go toto solve problems. So if we were
to reach that place with our ownparadigm on these things, we
find that we have we're allcoming from a different starting
place. I don't think this iseasy stuff, Travis. I don't have
the answers. But I thinkstarting with humility, and
(20:17):
building some good understandingof everybody's starting place,
learning how to collaborate,negotiate, negotiate, look at
past precedent, look atscripture, look at how we got
here, and keeping the book open.
Because that's, that's where ourstandard is. But we also
recognize we read it with our,our lens of our personal
(20:37):
experiences. And we have to putthat on the table too.
Travis Albritton (20:41):
Yeah, I think that's one of the biggest eye
opening things for me, just myown recent growth as a disciple
is you always suspect thatthere's a certain level of
subjectivity in how you read theBible, and that, you know, the
questions I ask my ownexperiences, my own past is
going to color, the things thatjumped out to me, and the things
(21:01):
that I resonate with that I kindof latch on to, but no one
thinks they're more subjectivethan everyone else. They suspect
they're, they're likely correct.
Otherwise, you wouldn't thinkthe things that you think. And
so there is this element of justkind of recognizing our own
shortcomings in being objective.
But then that introduces anotherquestion, especially when we're
(21:23):
talking about starting places,like how do you balance being
all things to all people? And inthe 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, youknow, the X Council where
they're like, let's not eatfood, sacrifice to idols. So
(21:44):
that way, we're not searing theconsciences of our Jewish
Christian brothers and sisters.
How do we straddle that fence ina God honoring way of let's not
be so separate from the worldthat we're just aliens, and we
look like we have three heads.
But also, the Bible calls usconsistently to be
countercultural, and so notconformed to the pattern of the
(22:04):
world. So how does thatinteraction play out?
Steve Staten (22:08):
Well, there's a concept of flexibility. And
also, there's the concept ofbeing willing to surrender, that
things won't go my particularpoint 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 thosecongregations, very conservative
on the role of women on stagespeaking, pray, and whatever,
(22:31):
very, very conservative. Andthese are good men that got good
elders, and I don't know theircurrent preacher very well. But
I sat down with the elders. Andthey said to me, Steve, if you
can help us get our churchesback together as the one Atlanta
church and some configuration ofwhat that might mean, this is
about 10 years ago, we'rewilling to move on this issue
(22:54):
with the role of women becauseour unity and working together
means more to us than ourparticular point of view, on the
role of women, I was surprisedthat they were that flexible. So
it's a conviction. But it's nota conviction at the same level
(23:14):
as the desire to be tight andstrategic together and being a
you know, so they're reallynever both and kind of thing.
And so I, I was just impressedby that. So I would say
flexibility. And also beingwilling to just have your way
not become the way of the group.
Travis Albritton (23:30):
And that's always difficult when you feel
pretty confident about yourposition. And you are in a
position of influence, becausemost of these conversations are
driven by a small percentage ofindividuals, right? Just being
real, right? So it's not likewe're gonna survey the whole
church and everyone's voicesweighted equally. There's
usually less than five people inthat congregation no matter how
(23:53):
large it is, yeah, thatultimately determine kind of the
outcomes of these conversations.
So how do you navigate thatdynamic, especially as a leader?
When right? It's like, Listen, Igotta Shepherd everyone,
including these fiveindividuals, but also everyone
else?
Steve Staten (24:08):
Well, the whole subject of consensus is so
important. Why is the subject ofconsensus important because it's
a chance for people to find outwhere the bulk of the community
wants to be. But what happens ifyou have practiced negotiation
along the way you watch people'sopinions change it, same thing
(24:30):
happens in a jury? They'll allstart 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 somereally great practices of
discovery, one of the best wayto see people change their mind,
but it become their personalchange would be to have them
argue the other person'sperspective vehemently. So I
(24:53):
have a daughter that was presentthe debate team at Wheaton
College And I saw a debate onlyonce because there's a lot of
traveling involved. But I wasreally impressed that she was
capable of being vigorous forthe opposite view. And sometimes
you were actually told, you'reonly going to take this
(25:14):
position. That's your job, eventhough you don't agree with
that. But what would happen islight bulbs would go on, you
know, epiphanies would occurbecause you're now thinking
through the feet of otherpeople, that really does make a
difference. And then you retestthe consensus. Okay, now, where
are we at now, two days later,and, and, okay, here's where I'm
leaning. Now, if there's theright atmosphere, people get
(25:38):
nudged. And that's howcollaboration occurs.
Travis Albritton (25:43):
So let's dig into that. So we've kind of
talked high level, some of thereasons why this is not the
easiest thing in the world todo. Yeah, now, let's start
breaking down some tools for howto collaborate for how to come
together, to how to come toconsensus, and to work together
in a unified fashion, elevatingthe things that are important.
And, you know, maybe allowingroom for there to be
(26:05):
disagreement, but within aunified framework, like how
would you approach doing that?
Because I know you have a lot ofexperience saying there's two
sides, it's very fractured, howdo we come together?
Steve Staten (26:16):
So one thing you could do, first of all, I've
mentioned before you find outwhere everybody is at,
initially, we have the safetythat we can change our views, we
some of us probably will, orfind more nuance and them.
Sometimes I'll put an empty seatin the room. And that empty seat
might be That's God's, or he'ssitting here, okay, does not
(26:36):
forget that we are answerable.
He's the audience that we mostcare about. Okay. But I also
might put other seats there ofpeople who have spoken to this
topic that they might even bedeceased, so that we are
answering to those who've done alot more research than ours. And
we might even put the apostlePaul in there, because we're
dealing with some of thestatements that he's made that
are very significant. And thenso you have this group of maybe
(26:59):
seven, that's really becomes agroup of 12, not forgetting the
other people that are importantin the conversation. And from
time to time you stop and say,What would Paul say and you
know, and whomever, so I thinkthat's really good. And then
testing it out to ask somebodyto vigorously go after another
perspective, another thing youcan do is kind of look at a case
(27:20):
study, something that's happenedbefore a precedent, maybe a
congregation that successfullynavigated 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 thisis a case where they found a
(27:43):
third way. And by the way, Ithink the language is important
looking for third way language,or both and language, staying
away from either or, and lookingfor ways to, you might ask
somebody to put a post up, postit up on the wall, what would be
a scenario that could satisfypeople coming from both
(28:07):
perspectives, in terms ofpractice, point of views may not
change that much. But practicesthat we haven't done now, that
can strengthen and validate theinfluence of women in the
church. But not, you know, go sofar and see the fullest
participation, which will alwaysbe controversial, at least in
(28:28):
the ICRC about women, elders,you know, that kind of that
level of participation. And Iknow that's not on the table in
these discussions. But what youhave to do is, say, here is a
post of what I think could helpus move the needle, and then you
stop, and you take a breath, andthen you say, let's do a test to
see where we are again. Now.
(28:52):
Another thing you can do is onthe very front side is defined
consensus. And I've seen insituations where consensus is
defined as unanimity, and that'snot consensus. But the problem
with that version that takesjust one person to stop any
progress, you know, right. Butif you set it as four out of
(29:13):
five or eight out of 10, in thatthe two out of 10, that are not
happy with at least theconclusion, but they're happy
that they were heard. They maysay, they may be willing to say,
I'm gonna go with it. I'm justgonna go with it. I'll tell you
a true story. I know a teacher,who is definitely
(29:33):
egalitarianism. He doesn't sharethat with anybody. I don't think
hardly, Biden knows, but maybeme or one other person. And the
evangelist in his church said, Ineed you to agree completely on
my position of the role ofwomen. And he said, So what's
your position? And my friendsaid, it doesn't matter? Because
(29:57):
I go with this communitiesbecause Question, because this
is my family. And not everythingI believe has to be the way
things go. And that's also theway family is, you know, you
just say this is this is how ourfamily functions. And I'm going
to go with it. Also a healthyview of how to get to consensus.
So if you have a facilitator,you rotate the facilitator,
(30:22):
typically to those that youknow, are most impartial in
their principal, who they are.
And they will like be the pointperson for the discussion that
day. And then the next time issomebody else. And it is
possible to have a position verystrongly. But to lead a
discussion in which it doesn'tshow up in any way, shape, or
(30:43):
form. But it takes a persondeeply committed to principle,
who's self aware, and reallydoesn't want to be the
dominator. They want the greatergroup good. So I would say a
good facilitated discussionrotated around to build
consensus and continually testwhere we are at Travis, people
change, they change from theprocess, they transform,
(31:06):
sometimes they'll go from Ican't believe where I was
starting out, but I'm in adifferent place now. And that's
what I love about thisnegotiation process.
Travis Albritton (31:18):
So I want to follow up on something you just
said, which is the tension ofbeing committed to the
fellowship, the body of Christ,which is something that we see
very clearly laid out in theBible, we belong to each other.
Right? And there's a certainamount of denying yourself, for
the sake of others, that issimply a part of discipleship.
(31:38):
Yep. So that is a piece that wealways need to have friend
center. But then, because we'realso sinful people, right? There
are places where those churchpractices and the way that we
implement the positions that wehold are not done in the most
loving or gracious are thoughtthrough manner. And there's real
hurt that's experienced, yeah,by both men and women. And you
(32:00):
know, we're gonna talk KyleSpears is coming up on the
podcast to talk about spiritualtrauma. But how do you balance
those things, because it couldvery easily become a codependent
relationship between you and theorganization of I just need to
completely deny my feelings andmy emotions, even when I've been
hurt. For the sake of notrocking the boat, right? How do
you manage that tension? Becausethat's a reality for a lot of
(32:22):
people. Well,
Steve Staten (32:23):
this goes into conflict management and being
able to have really importantdiscussions in the church world,
especially where there's a powercomponent authority versus
somebody further down thestructure. I think, coaching
even how to have thosediscussions to set personal
boundaries. One of the thingsthat I've taught people that's
(32:44):
gotten me in a little bittrouble, but I'll continue to
teach it is how to tell a leadersomebody over you and authority.
No, just the word no. Becausesometimes people overstep, they
think they have more power thanGod has ever given them. And
they need to hear no, they needa bumper, they say you just
crossed the line. But you alsowant to find where you can say
(33:07):
yes to that same leader. Yes, Iwant to work with you. Yes, I
want to be in your ministry.
Yes, we can do great thingstogether. But we won't be able
to if you continue thatbehavior. That's so against the
word, the paradigm that someministers have, because they
just think that they can getaway with stuff. And I don't
think that's panning out verywell for people in any faith
(33:30):
tradition these days, you know,yeah. So I but I think how to
have conversations around, orhow to have meaningful
conversations where there's aconflict will have less trauma,
if we can manage conflict, if wecan manage conflict within the
power structure, so that youdon't have a leg up if you are
(33:51):
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 bullyand to use my position to
overpower somebody where theyare having an interpersonal
conflict with me. I would wantthem to find me approachable,
(34:12):
willing to have a third partycome in and help us because
we're brothers before an elderteacher evangelists, in the
greater route, long stretch ofeternity, our titles and roles
will mean absolutely nothing.
What will matter is how weconnect to each other's brothers
and sisters. That's a longwinded answer to this whole
thing. But Kyle's a friend ofmine and I do have concerns
(34:35):
about people that don't grow theway they could don't mature the
way they cook because theyhaven't been able to process
traumatic events.
Travis Albritton (34:43):
Again, none of these things are easy, because
if you are serving and it's ashepherding role and overseeing
role in your church, yeah, Godhas given you an obligation to
protect the people in thatchurch from false teaching now,
what is the false teaching talksabout the Newton MIT, how do we
interpret it? That's a wholenother discussion. Sure. So
(35:03):
there can be this tension oflike, at a certain point, there
has to be a line, we do notcross. And we need to protect
even each other from ideas thatcould undermine our faith in the
court and our core convictions.
Yeah. But it's very, it's verydifficult to do that in a way
that is that feels like you'relistening, because you're also
trying to really put your footdown and say, This is a line we
(35:24):
cannot cross. Right?
Steve Staten (35:28):
Well, when we were talking about collaboration a
few minutes ago, it ties intothis whole thing about a line,
you do not cross I think what'sreally important at the end of a
collaboration negotiationprocess, you have guardrails
that you've defined, we won't gohere and we won't go there. Not
necessarily that they're evil topass those guardrails. But as
(35:48):
for us now, in our community,we're staying right here. And
what that does is it helps theamygdala calm down for people.
Sure. And I recently heard asermon done at a leaders meeting
that addressed from aconservative thing, all the
worries about progressives andall this in the church and
(36:09):
progressive theology practicesaround diversity, women's roles,
so much of it was actually good.
And this guy was a friend ofmine, but I said to him, What
about the other side of thecontinuum? And that's there,
too. And if you only address oneside, it could be
misinterpreted, that everythingis a okay to go anywhere you
(36:30):
want on the other side. So it'sgood to do that. Another thing,
and this is the idea of aslippery slope and a continuum.
I actually believe in the powerof slippery slope arguments, but
there's a pitfall when they'reused out of being fearful. And
just we quickly go, oh, that's aslippery slope. You know? I
(36:52):
mean, there are slippery slopes,right? Okay. There are certain
practices that could open us upto get into spiritual trouble.
Now, we know that we know thateach of us personally, we have
what would be a slippery slope.
That could be around drinking orthe movies, we watch an
entertainment, the things we seeand chemicals we ingest in our
(37:14):
body and all that kind of stuff.
There are slippery slopes, butwe don't want to go there real
quick and say, Whoa, bro, that'sa slippery slope, because that's
a fallacious argument. Becauseif you look at the continuum,
there is a reasonable place inthe continuum on any given
topic, where are most giventopics that we can work with,
because there is someflexibility and latitude even in
(37:36):
the Bible, and then there's aplace this A Bridge Too Far. So
it's good to have thosediscussions towards the end.
Because if your church of 200,that we're talking about this
fictional church has a landingplace that feels really good to
the group, at least for the hereand now. Then they've got to
create a message that goes outto the 200. And that will
(37:59):
definitely include this is whatwe now support. This is what we
don't, both in and so forth.
Travis Albritton (38:07):
Well, and I've seen a lot of the hesitation in
engaging and the topics we'vebeen discussing on this podcast,
is not even necessarily thequestion about is a woman
permitted to teach preachbiblically speaking, right? It's
all the other conversations thatquickly get connected to the
question. Yeah, or observationsyou see about other churches and
(38:28):
things that have happened there.
Right. So like, I've seen theargument that if we nudge or
give an inch at all, on thequestion of women's roles,
compared to historically howwe've interpreted it, then it's
only a matter of time before allthese other things happen. We
are embracing gender theory andall these other things. It's
(38:49):
like, I'm just trying to ask thequestion about can a woman teach
me on a Sunday from behind apulpits? Right? I'm already
reading her blog, can she do itin this fashion? And as you
suggested, that does feel veryfear based?
Steve Staten (39:03):
It is the like I said, as the amygdala gets
hijacked for what things can be.
And I think if we would alladmit it, nobody would disagree
with this statement. What ishappening in our nation right
now is affecting the church,what we watch what we listen to
our experiences in theworkplace, around vaccine
mandates around BLM, that'salready an old story, but it's
(39:27):
still a factor, critical racetheory, and how much role of
government can have in ourlives, all sorts of education
issues. These are big, they'rebig in my house, we have these
conversations, you know, everycouple of days, and we're
largely coming from the sameplace and all the topics but
it's in our face. How would thisnot affect the church, right? So
(39:50):
what we ought to do is find thethings that engender trust, to
dial things down and go hey, butat least have Jesus then add
from there, you know, we've gotto constantly work at dialing
things down to a place where wecan have a meaningful
conversation.
Travis Albritton (40:10):
This is a very sticky conversation. And we're
going to dig into this more inthe next episode. I know a lot
of members, and a lot ofleaders, artists feeling tired,
like the last year and a halfhas been exhausting. Last year,
at least in the United States,in 2020, we had a lot of really
emotionally taxing conversationsaround culture, and race and our
(40:34):
lived experiences and how thatimpacts the way we show up in
church. And there can be a veryreasonable reaction of can this
just wait like a little bitlonger, we get a little bit more
of a reprieve. And then on theother hands, you have
individuals that are of personalstakes in this conversation that
feel like we've waited longenough. We've waited for it to
(40:57):
be convenient. Now is the timeto talk about it. How do you
bridge that dynamic?
Steve Staten (41:02):
Actually, I have in some of my consultations. And
so usually as a from a distanceover the phone or over zoom in
I've really encourage the boardsof churches to make sure their
leaders are getting sabbaticalswhen possible that they've got
good policies for it. Asabbatical doesn't have to be
long to be powerful andeffective. But it has to be a
(41:24):
really well designed one, and soforth. And so here I'm a little
bit more empathetic towards theministers. And here's why. If
you don't have that minister ina 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 havea good outcome either. Nobody's
going to be a winner. In thatsituation. We're gonna have
(41:45):
people stepping out theministry. And it's a massive
problem in the evangelical worldright now. So many people
stepping out and wanting to stepout, there's surveys on it. 38%
of the people in the ministrysaid that they seriously have
considered stepping out in thegreater evangelical world. I
don't think that's far from thecase in our situation, from my
conversations with people. So wegot to look out after people,
(42:08):
their ministers in theirdevelopment, their training
their sabbaticals, and givingthem the chance to get some
skills on how to docollaboration, negotiation,
diversity training, I'm nottalking about just our own stuff
I'm talking about from theoutside. And then when we tackle
topics that we'll be able totackle them with much more
agility and even speed. But wewe might be delayed from when we
(42:32):
want to, but when we do it, wecan do it well. On the other
hand, and coming from theposture of the congregation, I
think they need to be giventimelines so that they'll know
it's going to happen. We aredeliberate or serious as a
church. But we have to get readyfor it. And the past, we didn't
give timelines I would seeminister say, Yeah, we're
(42:54):
looking into that. Five yearslater. Yeah, we're looking into
that. Words don't mean anything.
Matter of fact, that's adiscouraging thing. We're
looking into it. Who do you havea 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. Asurvey can create goodwill, as
be well designed and wellinterpreted. But a survey allows
(43:16):
you to find out what are theshared components of a
congregations and appreciativeinquiry survey, it's a certain
technique, but you find out whatis that? Like? What are those
life giving forces thateverybody agrees and feels great
about. And then it also exposeswhere the tensions are. And it
gives you a chance to go Oh, sothat's reality. So that's where
(43:38):
our people are. And then whenyou have people tackling the
topic that are coming from adiverse array of perspectives,
you have the conservatives, wesaw that in Jacksonville five
years ago, the true and triedthis, do things the way used to
work, because it really didwork. And then you have the
progressives, well got us herewon't get us there, we got to do
something new. Okay, well,they're both right. And they're
(44:01):
both wrong, you know, there'slike a way to blend it all
together. And so I love to seeintegrative teams, integrative
task forces, and it can reallyproduce great results on a slow
and methodical timeline. But ourministers have to be in a good
spot. And we should commit tohelping them get in a good spot
(44:21):
if they're getting burnt out.
Travis Albritton (44:25):
So if you're a leader, and you're listening to
this, and you're wanting to doone of these surveys, Steve has
graciously agreed to create atemplate an example that you can
use that you can modify, to knowthe right questions to ask to
get the results that are goingto really set you up for
success. And see if we got youfor one more episode. Next week.
We're gonna keep digging intothis and talk about what do
(44:45):
healthy expectations look like?
What does church unity looklike? And then what are some
healthy ground rules to makesure that we respect and love
one another, but are also ableto speak with honesty and
transparency.
Steve Staten (44:55):
I look forward to that subject very, very much
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.