Articles
Mixed Messages
At various times in my children’s lives they have developed illnesses which were accom-panied by fevers that lasted an unusually long time; Aubrey in particular seems inclined to-wards this. Most of the time we’re told it is an adenovirus and not much is recommended besides the usual remedies for controlling fevers and discomfort. Of course, you can’t go to school with a fever, everyone knows that. You’re not supposed to return until it has been 24 hours from the time at which you last recorded a fever. So, the kids miss some school.
Laura and I have “laughed” to ourselves on a few occasions when the school has seen fit to mail us letters threatening us with charges of truancy and visits from Child Protective Ser-vices. So, out of one side of the mouth they tell you not to bring your child when they are sick, and out of the other side they speak of all the threats that will be carried out if you don’t bring your child back to school—who happens to be still sick. Do you want them or not?
Obviously, there are abusive and neglectful parents, but that ain’t us! Surely there must be a step that comes before threating decent, loving parents.
The occasion has me wondering if in the church we are ever guilty of the same kind of double-speak.
Job’s friends are good examples of this duplicity. They said, we’ve come to “mourn with you, and to comfort you” because we care about you Job (2:11). We’re here to help was the original message, and the “help” that they offered had Job saying such things as: “Miserable com-forters are you all! (16:2) “I am one mocked by my friends… (12:4). “How long will you torment my soul, and break me in pieces with words? These ten times you have reproached me. Are you not ashamed that you have wronged me” (19:1-3)? They may have claimed early on that their actions were noble and their intent sincere, but their behavior afterwards demonstrated an irreconcilable variance.
In the New Testament we may find numerous instances of duplicitous speech, but we find a singular instance of the Greek word: “di-logos”, and in 1 Timothy 3:8, translated double-tongued. Strong’s thesaurus defines it: “telling a different story.” In it’s most literal form it appears to be “two words” (with the implication being two different words.)
Interestingly, the context is that of the office of a deacon. The men who fill this office are not to be “double-tongued”. Let’s take Acts 6 as an example and imagine the problem that would have been created by double-tongued deacons. There was a complaint that certain widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. He speaks to the widows and their families and completely commiserates with them, expressing disdain for the oversight. He enthusiastically apologizes for the hurt that was caused and assures them that it won’t happen again. Then, when meeting with those responsible for dispensing the assis-tance he sneers at the complaining being done by the widows. He com-ments how entitled or unthankful he has seen them in the past, and questions how legitimate really is their request for assistance. It is clear that such a man would be wholly unfit and dangerous in such an im-portant service role.
We could cite the speech of Peter and Barnabas among the Gentiles, and note the contrast when around Jews. I think we get the point.
So, how else might we “double-speak in the church? Have you ever known a person who agreed with whomever he was talking to at the moment? This reminds me of the Bible class teacher who teaches one thing, and then when comments start coming from his audience that are at variance with what he just taught, there is no rebuttal, correction, nor call for clarification. One comment seems as good as another. Instead, teachers should be prepared to say such things as: “Well, we know that can’t be the case because…” Or, at least: “I’m not sure about that. I’m going to have to think on that more.” As much as we may hope to be able to offer positive feedback to class participation, there is something even more important—TRUTH!
We could speak of and pray about how thankful we are to have good elders, but then when something happens with which we disagree how quickly our words can turn to bitter criticism (compare Ex. 4:29-31 with Ex. 16:3; 17:3).
I once sat in a church auditorium with a man who learned in an an-nouncement at the conclusion of a worship assembly that the elders had decided he was being withdrawn from. “Surely, there must be a step that comes before...”
With great swelling words we may proclaim each of us our love for one another, or of our intention to leave the ninety-nine for one lost sheep. Do we speak the same word in private, or do we speak “two words?” Maybe we don’t speak anything at all when the time comes to speak. Mixed messages! Someone says: “We need more elders, preachers, teachers, or wives for these men.” How often have we heard that? How often too have we heard complaints of such leaders, criticisms of such speakers, and prohibitions of our daughters from dating one? “We need to encourage the young,” and then we complain, “I don’t like all the new songs.” (Not that liking new songs is partial to young people, I’m 45!) On, and on we could go.
