What if we can't all get along?

"I felt, even upon first meeting him, that Mr. Wilberforce and I could never assume so close a partnership as our mutual colleagues had divined to each of us individually. His amiability and warmness were as clear to me at our parting handshake as they had been at our first. Yet, something felt amiss in our conversation. Though our aims are mutual, our passions similar, I knew almost at once a secret distaste for cooperation with him. 

As a gentleman I pride myself on setting trifling disagreements aside, yet upon learning a few of his less outspoken positions (yes, there are a few), I could not fight entirely the colour with which his views painted my opinion of him. I am somewhat burdened with guilt at letting down such prosperous prospects for our camaraderie. Nonetheless, I will not let time develop my distaste for a man so deserving of my respect. No. It is best we parted as we did, amiable acquaintances, with kind words for one another, untroubled with commitments beyond our passing appointment."

-Sir Patrick Dempsey June 12 1816

Have you ever felt guilty for disagreement? Not guilty that you are wrong, assume this is a case where you are not. In fact, assume they are just as sure that they're right, too. Have you ever felt perturbed when you answer the question "can't we all just get along?" with a confident "NO"?

We feel the pang of remorse because we are being made to long for peace, and a greater part of peace is the absence of conflict. It is assumed that in the Body of Christ we will observe a peace and unity of mind amongst the brethren. Paul extols and encourages the virtue; so much so, that we are riddled with guilt when our idea of peace isn't realized, especially within our church family. 

So how do we interpret this dichotomy? How do we acknowledge reality is not in line with the ideal, while still striving for the ideal rather than questioning its foundations? 

The above excerpt is an example of splintering. Whether we like it or not we can all admit to meeting people in our lives that we have a secret (or perhaps not so secret) dislike of. What I hope you can see in the example above is this: 

1) people don't agree on every thing

2) distaste can be handled tastefully 

3) proximity impacts opinion

Not every person you don't like will interact with you as Dempsey and Wilberforce did. Not every reaction will be so civil. You may even have an expectation that you should get along, just like Dempsey's friends implied to him. It's unsettling when the person you don't 'click' with seems like a great person to interact with initially, but does not work so well with you in relationship. 

Let's put this on a far bigger scale: As long as you're not a stickler for one fan-club. Denominations of the Church appear to be a sad break from the unity Christians should exercise. How can so many followers of Jesus find so much to break apart over? 

But, if we really do believe in a God who remains outside of time, yet is concerned with every soul on a planet where everything happens for a reason. If we further acknowledge that same God uses the iniquities of a creation that has broken away from Him for good. Is it so hard to imagine a Church whose splinters can be used powerfully in this Age for the one to come? 

Say that Dempsey and Wilberforce both served the Lord. Could it be that in God's great plan these two were made to do more apart than they could ever accomplish together? (Strength in numbers is a military tactic, it isn't always true for Christians. In fact gathering together in majorities might do more to hinder the Gospel than it does to spread it. We need to pray for the wisdom of God on this matter, not the wisdom of earthly generals.)

What I hope to point you to in this series of rhetorical questions is this: Perhaps instead of worrying over guilt at the lack of peace, you need to make your peace. Make your peace, especially with those you don't get along with that know the Lord, and seek Him for your next direction. Even great godly people were not meant to be at peace with one another in every case. 

As we grow in our faith, and begin to disciple others, we need to see disagreement not always as a cause for guilt. Let's at least consider it as a possible catalyst. An opportunity where one circle of influence can be made into two. Yes sometimes the rift is saddening. Sometimes a rift needs mended. But splinters can make good kindling, and two fires are brighter than one. How many fires in the darkness are shining now, I wonder, because of splinters?