By Brian Foreman

I play this guessing game with my wife. When she is talking and pauses to collect her thoughts, I interject mine; or when she is searching for a word, I fill in the blank for her. This is not a game she enjoys and, for my own health, I try to avoid playing this game too often. Reading Proverbs 18 explains why it is best to not do this. “A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion” (18:2); and “If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame” (18:13).

As we continue to consider the importance of engaging in sacred and courageous conversations, we must remember the importance of listening and seeking to understand multiple layers of what is being expressed by the person we are talking to. In her book, High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out, Amanda Ripley makes two very important points about listening and understanding:

First, she says, “Listening doesn’t mean agreeing. It doesn’t mean legitimizing or amplifying what other people say. I still decide what to put in the story—and what to keep out. Listening deeply does not mean creating false equivalencies.” When we listen and can summarize what we are hearing, our conversation partner can confirm that we are hearing them correctly. This is not an admission of agreement, but rather a step towards demonstrating that we are seeking to understand and that the partner is heard.

Second, she adds, “Understanding people doesn’t change them. It’s not narly enough. But almost no one changes until they feel heard. That’s the third paradox of conflict. People need to believe you understand them, even as they realize you disagree, before they will hear you.”

If we are going to create conversation involving two people, both should seek the right to be heard. That comes with how we treat the person before us. Many conflicts can be lessened when people simply feel heard and understood.

Years ago, I asked Chuck, chair of deacons where I was serving at the time to explain what he thought responsible gun laws meant. Chuck is a gun owner. I am not. Chuck lives in a rural area. I do not. His response was not a defensive one because my question was a curious one. Chuck talked about emergency response and protecting his family compared to what it would be for me in an urban environment. I understood. Whether I fully agreed or not was beside the point. As a result of that conversation, we were able to have hard conversations about church safety and protection in the wake of a mass shooting at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. The church was equipped for this conversation because the two of us had already laid the groundwork based on understanding and were able to model it well.

Rather than finding ourselves arguing as a church about policy issues, we were able to discuss the issue the church faced, absent of politics. We were concerned with care and compassion, which included hearing the fear people expressed and how it was expressed. We weren’t fools expressing our opinions steeped in folly and shame; rather we were able to embody James 1:19, “My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry.”

Listening, seeking understanding and demonstrating a capacity to hear did not make the issue easier to address, but it did lead it to a consensus on a decision to address safety and fear concerns across the many aisles of the church.

May we all strive to be quick listeners, deliberate speakers and people who demonstrate Holy Spirit mannerisms—even in hard conversations.

Brian Foreman serves as Coordinator of Congregational Ministries for the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.