Living in Love and Faith

Working, and indeed living, with those with whom we have a fundamental disagreement can be challenging at best, and damaging at it’s worst.

As a feminist who works within two predominantly male organisations I have often been at the coal face of some difficult conversations around equality, but I see similar dynamics around sexuality, gender identity, and even when it comes to families raising teenagers!

Some of you may have noticed the news in the press recently that the Church of England has decided to allow it’s clergy to bless same sex marriages. This has come at the end of a six year process of listening to various voices in the Church. It has not been easy, and there are plenty of people within the Church who are deeply unhappy with the outcome of these conversations. Either because they feel the Church has gone too far, or because they feel it has not gone far enough.

In spite of the tortuous six year journey, and the fact that it has not resulted in everyone being happy, I have seen some valuable lessons in how to disagree well within the process. These are lessons that we can take and apply in any situation where we find ourselves at odds with others.

Listening well

How often have you found yourself in a disagreement with someone and have been so determined to get your point across that you simply stop listening to anything the other person is saying?! The difference between a disagreement and an argument sits on the fine line of our ability to hear the other person. The first key aspect of the Church’s discussions has been to fully listen to each side of the divide. It starts by giving the other person the opportunity to speak without interruption, then involves us feeding back what we have heard, and finally offers the other person the chance to affirm that they have been heard or explain again. Then we reverse roles so that each gets the chance to speak. This process stops us from rehearsing our arguments whilst the other person is speaking, if you have to feedback what someone has been saying you have less capacity to plan your attack! It also stops us from assuming we know what the other person is saying or wanting. Feeding back what we have heard both shows that we are listening and engaged, and gives us a moment to see if there is actually some common ground. Your teenager who tells you that ‘you never listen to me’ is probably right, reflecting back to someone what they have said shows that you have heard what they have said. This doesn’t mean you agree with them, but it does allow you to have a conversation instead of a confrontation. You might be surprised when you find out what the other person really wants…

Respecting difference

I trained during COVID, and at one point my whole platoon had to spend two weeks in isolation. Each of us was in our own room, not allowed to leave except to empty our bins, having to give the person who had just placed our meal outside the door time to leave before we opened it. It was absolute heaven as far as I was concerned, I had my own ensuite, didn’t have to interact with anyone, and if I angled my laptop just right the PTI couldn’t see if I was doing burpees or waving my arms periodically from my bed*. Pretty much everyone else thought they were in some form of hell. We were never going to agree on a shared experience, but if we each listened to the other we could at least understand why we felt differently. Listening well allows us to understand why other people feel the way they do, it often helps us to explore why we feel the way we do as well. Sometimes we forget to stop and ask ourself ‘yes, but why do I think feel like this’. That moment of reflection can then lead us to question if we might want to change. It took me years to realise that my infuriation with the toolbox being left wherever my partner was last using it stemmed from the fact that as a child the toolbox lived under the stairs. It took a number of heated arguments to articulate this, but once I had it meant I was able to consider if there were other possibilities, and my partner was able to avoid an argument by putting the toolbox back where it belonged (!).

Finding compromise

Once we have fully listened to each other, recognising that this may take a few attempts (it has taken the Church six years!), understood what our differences are and where they stem from, we are finally in a position to ask ourselves ‘is there a compromise here?’ Hopefully, and in many situations the answer is YES! But the answer may well be no, or it may be a compromise that works for many but not for all. The reality is that any compromise involves both parties making a sacrifice, and a sacrifice is never painless. The Church of England was asked to agree to same sex marriage, after six years of discussion it has agreed that it can compromise by recognising that same sex marriages are a place of love that contribute to the wellbeing of society and should be blessed, but it cannot compromise to the extent that it will change its teaching that marriage is between one woman and one man. Some, and I am one of them, are saddened that we cannot marry those of the same sex. I see no theological compromise because I believe we are all made in the image of God, and that the whole of humanity, male, female, trans, queer, intersex, non-binary, reflects that image. There are others who are saddened that the Church has chosen to bless marriages between same sex partners. They do not feel that we can interpret the bible as I have, but rather that we should take its word as truth. That is the reality of compromise, everyone gets to share in the pain until we are able to meet in the same space. The Church will continue its conversations for as long as it has to manage the compromise. As long as we are respecting our differences then we continue to need to listen well because the conversation is not finished.

So there it is, a short guide to disagreeing well!

Whether your disagreement is at home or at work, I hope these reflections will help you to change destructive conversations into constructive ones so that you might build better relationships with family, friends, and colleagues.

All clergy are able to choose whether or not their conscience allows them to bless same sex marriages, personally I am delighted to now be able to offer a liturgical recognition of all relationships. If you would like to have your marriage or partnership blessed at the Station Church please do get in touch so that we can discuss it further.

*Clearly as a person of Integrity I was doing the burpees, though I confess probably not as wholeheartedly as I did when the PTI was screaming in my ear…!

Opening Hours

MON 8.30 - 6.00PM

TUES 8.30 - 6.00PM

WED 8.30 - 6.00PM

THUR 8.30 - 6.00PM

FRI 8.30 - 6.00PM SAT 8.30 - 6.00PM

Commanding Officer: Lt Col A Harris AAC

Second-in-Command: Maj P Parkes, AAC

Adjutant: Capt WES Hearnshaw, AAC

Regimental Sergeant Major: WO1(RSM) MR Jones

Ex ALPINE ARCHER

On the evening of the 27th of January, thirty-two members of 664 Sqn boarded a coach bound for the continent and fresh Alpine pistes.

Despite managing to avoid any strikes or the now ubiquitous channel port delays, the journey still took a gruelling eighteen hours. The pain of travel was worth it, however, when the group finally arrived in Val Thorens to be met with clear blue skies, crisp mountain air and snow as far as the eye could see. The Archers would be calling Le Cheval Blanc home for the next week and whilst some were keen for bed, others elected to do some first night exploration of the resort.

Rested and raring to hit the slopes, the following morning personnel divided between groups completing Ski Foundation 1, 2 or 3. The level 1 qualification takes troops from never having skied before to confidently tackling blue and red slopes; level 2 builds on these skills and introduces off-piste skiing and ski touring (going up as well as down!). Level 3 would normally focus solely on ski touring but owing to equipment shortages on this trip the group developed their off-piste skills instead.

Those on the SF2 course would have been forgiven for thinking they had mistakenly joined a selection cadre under the harsh tutelage of WO2 Lewis. The GSF Commander managed only an hour of this punishing instruction before returning to the more sedate level 1 course. Similarly, the 4AAC Adjutant’s direction of ‘just turn more’ seemed rather questionable, however something must have clicked as there was clear progression across all groups throughout the week.

The action was not confined the slopes, with personnel able to enjoy the delights of Val Thorens in their down time including some legendary apres ski at the Bar 360. Culinary exploration was also on the menu, at both ends of the spectrum: the Sergeant Major indulged in steak and cheese all week, whilst some other personnel sampled some suspiciously cheap beef, later identified as horse meat!

The week proved to be a triumph: sixteen personnel who had never skied before completed their SF1 qualification and only one person required a helicopter ride to hospital (no permanent damage done!). LCpl Todd was named Best Skier of the Week, whilst WO2 Bowker picked up the prize for best crash; his prowess at the controls of an Apache did not quite transfer to skiing off piste. The exercise was a well-earned change from the rigors of Wattisham and a successful return to the slopes for the Archers.

Capt McClurey-Rutkiewicz 664 Sqn