Being practical

What does it mean to be “practical”? I think our first assumption is that being practical means “finding the best ways to make something work.” If you need your carpet cleaned, the practical thing to do is to vacuum it or have it shampooed. It would be impractical to get down on your hands and knees and pick up specks of dirt, one by one. That would take too long, would be an inefficient use of your time, and wouldn’t get the carpet as clean.

To take this further, you might consider buying the latest vacuum that promises to clean even deeper and faster than the previous model. In less time you can get your carpet clean like never before. At least, until the newer model comes out.

In decision-making, practicality reigns as well. “Roberts’ Rules of Order” is an efficient way to allow for debate but to move forward with consensus. It allows dissent to exist but not as a roadblock to progress (usually). Voting in the US works similarly: the person with the most votes wins the election (George W. Bush being an exception). The winners are the majority, the losers are the minority. All for the sake of progress, efficiency, and effectiveness.

This kind of “practical” thinking dominates American Evangelical churches, too. At our church, we operate our boards based on Roberts’ Rules, and usually everything is unanimous. I have heard of situations of disagreement, but in the end, the “yeas” have it, the gavel slams, and the decision is made. Period.

Does this kind of “practical” thinking create space for the prophetic voice? Does it allow for a minority voice to sway the majority? Does Christianity, founded by a man who was crucified as a common criminal (crucifixion being a practical way of controlling the population through fear), simply ask for majority rule, or does it allow space for the small minority voice to sway the majority?

For example, suppose a church board of 10 met to discuss an important decision. Of the ten, nine agreed with one course of action, and one agreed with a different course. In a church where efficiency, practicality, and consensus are the watchwords, the majority rules and everyone moves forward. But in a church that isn’t so intent on quick decisions, that wants to discern the Holy Spirit, perhaps the lone voice would sway the rest. This is horribly inefficient—Jesus had a way of being so, too—but it strikes me as profoundly countercultural and therefore worth considering. We too often assume that because things are going well and there is consensus, God must behind all of it. But perhaps we have pushed God completely out of it. Thankfully, God’s grace can resist our attempts to refuse it.

There is another sense of being “practical.” It doesn’t ask “what works” but rather “what must I do?” This is practical in the sense of practice. Spiritual practices aren’t about efficiency and results. Rather, they are faithful, active responses to God’s grace, which will not be confined to our understandings of success, effectiveness, and growth. In other words, God’s ways may not always seem best to us, but that is no excuse to follow them.

The Gospel is counter-intuitive. We say, “Pursue life, liberty, and happiness.” Jesus says, “Take up your cross and follow me.”