A Like Minded Church Plays Footsie with The Law of Group Polarization

There are some churches and church pastors who genuinely believe that the most faithful expression of their faith is to be with “like minded people”. Who does not like to be with others who are like minded? I love to be with people who remind me of my favorite person (myself)! Beyond the comfort of being with others who do not challenge us beyond what where we are willing to be challenged, those advocating for a like minded church assume that the church would somehow be better.

It is argued that a like minded church would be more “faithful” or more “efficient”. This assumes that if a group of people could stop arguing about the same issues or people THEN (and only then) could we get to the “business” of making disciples. The like minded church dream assumes that revisiting the same matters is somehow unfaithful. It is as though the like minded church would rather stop wrestling with the same person for so long and walk away with two good hips. The like minded church is suspicious of limping and cannot imagine that there is any blessing in wrestling.

In addition to these basic theological concerns, we ought to have with a like minded church we also should be concerned about the harsh and empirically proven Law of Group Polarization. And what is this law?

Cass R. Sunstein’s paper described like this (bold added):

In a striking empirical regularity, deliberation tends to move groups, and the individuals who compose them, toward a more extreme point in the direction indicated by their own predeliberation judgments. For example, people who are opposed to the minimum wage are likely, after talking to each other, to be still more opposed; people who tend to support gun control are likely, after discussion, to support gun control with considerable enthusiasm; people who believe that global warming is a serious problem are likely, after discussion, to insist on severe measures to prevent global warming. This general phenomenon -- group polarization -has many implications for economic, political, and legal institutions.

You read this right. After being with a like minded group that discusses an issue, you will become more extreme after the discussion than you were before the discussion.

And so here is the great irony, those who advocate for being a church of “like minded people” as a haven against undesired change are playing footsie with the law of group polarization. To put this more plainly, being with others who are like minded will change you and your views - you will become more extreme.

This is the law of group polarization. The temptation to create a like minded church (or country) is powerful, but it is to be rejected for what it is. A pathway to justifying our self-righteousness. And I think we all have read how Jesus feels about self-righteousness.

The Telos and The Scopos

The second chapter of John Cassian’s work entitled “The Conferences of Desert Fathers” begins with Abba Moses expressing the following:

All the arts and sciences, said he (Moses), have some goal or mark; and end or aim of their own, on which the diligent pursuer of each has his eye, and so endures all sorts of toils and dangers and losses, cheerfully and with equanimity.

Then in chapter four Moses is to have said:

The end of our profession indeed, as I said, is the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven; but the immediate aim or goal, is purity of heart, without which no one can gain that end: fixing our gaze then steadily on this goal, as if on a definite mark, let us direct our course as straight towards it as possible, and if our thoughts wander somewhat from this let us revert to our gaze upon it, and check them accurately as by a sure standard, which will always bring back all our efforts to this one mark, and will show at once if our mind has wandered ever so little from the direction marked out for it.

Abba Moses taught the end is the kingdom of God while the goal is purity of heart. What that means is that Abba Moses thought that in order to reach the end (Kingdom of God) we must focus on the goal (purity of heart). We cannot reach the Kingdom of God without purity of heart but if we have purity of heart we are more likely to reach the Kingdom of God.

The difference in the telos and the scopos is made clearer by the Stoic Arius who said that the scopos is the target we shoot for while the telos is hitting the target. I think of it like a golfer hitting the ball is scopos while the cup is the telos.

The UMC spends a lot of her time working to achieve the end (make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world) and we are failing. Not because it is an incorrect ends/telos (although we only adopted this mission statement in full just twelve years ago), but because paradoxically we are more likely to hit the target if we focus on our scopos, not our telos. A golfer is more likely able to land the ball near the cup (telos) if they focus on hitting the ball (scopos). In fact taking your eyes off the ball and looking at the cup is a detriment to actually getting the ball into the cup! The golfer who focuses on the ball (scopos) and not the cup (telos), has to trust that by doing so they will get closer to their telos.

Many in the universal Church are fascinated at landing the ball in the cup that there is little time given to focus on the stance, ball, swing and follow through.

Focusing on making disciples for the transformation of the world then is like focusing on the cup and not on the ball. We are focused on the scorecard and not on the swing. We are focused on something that, regardless of its virtue, decreases our chances to actually land the ball well.

Rather than focusing on the end, the cup, the making disciples, I wonder if we were to shift our eyes and focus on that which will be more helpful to reach the same ends? What if were to take the advice of Abba Moses and have the goal of purity of heart. Or perhaps Jesus who said, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” (Matthew 5:8)

It is my conviction that pastors are much more interested in cultivating the heart of a person than to make a disciples, because a disciple can still betray and deny Jesus, but one who is the heart of Christ cannot do anything but love like Christ. What would a Church look like if we were to focus on cultivating purity of heart?

“But”, Richard Beck says, “hearts aren’t easily changed. You can’t change hearts with pep talks, protests, podcasts, Facebook rants, tweets, or a really good sermon. Hearts require spiritual formation through habits and practices that directly address the social and psychological dynamics at work that keep us from seeing and welcoming each other.”