Haidt\u2019s research is not simply theoretical or psychological. As a social psychologist and New York Times best selling author, Haidt has dedicated his life\u2019s work to examining \u201cthe intuitive foundations of morality, and how morality varies across cultures.\u201d[2]<\/a> \u201cHe uses his research to help people understand and respect the moral motives of people with whom they disagree\u201d[3]<\/a> and has multiple websites and TED talks accessible to the public.[4]<\/a><\/p>\n Haidt\u2019s work is extremely necessary in today\u2019s polarized culture that is highly emotive, though emerging out of an enlightenment era where most assume they operate primarily from a rational paradigm. Using the metaphor of a small rider (reasoning) on a huge elephant (intuition), Haidt shows that \u201cthe rider\u2019s function is to serve the elephant. Reasoning matters, particularly because reasons do sometimes influence other people, but most of the action in moral psychology is in the intuitions.\u201d[5]<\/a> His argument is that intuition, or the elephant, is what drives reason. Reason can help to guide or give clues but intuition, loaded with cognition and emotions, is truly the larger and more forceful of the two.<\/p>\n In my research on discipleship, I have been interviewing pastors, which has led me to have many more conversations around the subject. One aspect I did not think much about when I began was the concept of discipleship and the other, relating to discipling people who are different from us and the potential separation within discipleship of certain groups by those in positions of leadership. I was not intending to ask practitioners about the who<\/em> but more about the what<\/em> in regard to content of discipleship and their practice. But in one of my first meetings I had the inclination to ask a question not in my notes, being whether or not the leader discipled people of the opposite gender or only the same gender. Although I was not shocked by their response, I did begin to take note and ask the other pastors interviewed the same question. Their answers have varied but there is a theme emerging among them. Most women interviewed disciple both men and women. The men primarily disciple other men.[6]<\/a><\/p>\n Beyond the interviews, I have seen other trends fitting into the conversation on who<\/em> is being discipled. While at lunch with a group of Wesleyan Holiness regional leaders the topic of Bill Hybels and the recent news of his alleged involvement with multiple women from his church came up. I decided to ask about how the #metoo movement and all of the allegations against men in leadership were affecting their male pastors and their leadership with the women in their churches. They all began to nod and note the \u201cBilly Graham rule\u201d of not being alone with a woman one is not married to[7]<\/a> and how their male pastors are becoming even more careful (some said hesitant) around the women in their churches.<\/p>\n There are multiple reasons for th Many more questions\u00a0 arise around the topic of discipling the other for me to investigate but Haidt\u2019s work on moral psychology has opened possibilities for underlying divisions within my own and other egalitarian denominations and why like tends to disciple like, whether in gender or ethnicity, or both.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion<\/em>. New York: Pantheon Books, 2012, 59.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Haidt, Jonathan. \u201cThe Richteous Mind\u201d Bio. http:\/\/righteousmind.com\/about-the-author\/biosketch\/ (April 5, 2018)<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Ibid.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Public access to Haidt\u2019s work: moralmind.com, CivilPolitics.org, http:\/\/righteousmind.com\/<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Haidt, 108.<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> This study does take into account group discipleship as well.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/170px-Billy_Graham_bw_photo_April_11_1966.jpg\")
<\/a>e Billy Graham rule and pastors choosing to only disciple the same gender, particularly when referring to male leadership. However, each of the leaders I have spoken with serve in denominations that offer all of the same leadership opportunities to both women and men based upon their theology. As I read Haidt, I couldn\u2019t help but ask if the reasons for not discipling the opposite gender are more based on the elephant than the rider, more on intuition and not reason. Perhaps the fears of the culture have once again crept into the church causing leadership to make decisions without fully recognizing personal bias. Once blind spot are present the leader becomes the \u201cself-righteous hypocrite\u201d unable to embody the very theology they teach to the detriment of the whole church.<\/p>\n