![\"The](\"https:\/\/images.saymedia-content.com\/.image\/ar_16:9%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_auto:eco%2Cw_1200\/MTg2MDU0NzYzNjQ3ODcwMDgx\/the-inquisition-fact-vs-fiction.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The challenges associated with the Identity Trap make leading a faith community increasingly tricky. We see increased tension when we add the complexity that the Bible is often at odds with popular societal thinking. In 2013, the Telegraph printed an article in which Amber Dillon writes, \u201cI can\u2019t help thinking that some of the Bible\u2019s teachings are irrelevant to modern day life and I feel that it is time for Christianity to move on, and that Christians should accept the Bible as a product of its time\u201d[1]<\/a>. To say something Biblical contrary to popular opinion is to run the gauntlet that ultimately leads to the new inquisitor\u2019s chair. The inquisition into the faith community is more than an external threat; the threat also comes from within. Increasingly, new members raised in a society steeped in Identity politics find themselves at odds with contemporary thinking and conservative theological teaching. A new generation of internal inquisitors has arisen, keeping faith leaders in check. Consequently, there is more identity politicking in leadership circles within faith communities. How does a faith leader navigate the difficulty of leading a generation of inquisitors?<\/p>\n I wish I had read this book in 2020. The book\u2019s academic insight and historical context in the identity trap make the book compelling. The challenges in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in 2020 and the ensuing global outrage were fuelled by the injustice of the moment and the perfect storm associated with the growing popular appeal of cultural Marxism and identity synthesis.<\/p>\n The church I lead has 103 nationalities in it. Throughout the challenge of 2020, the church that had journeyed with my wife and me, and us with them over the years, cultivated a strong foundation of trust. However, just prior to 2020, I also became the national leader of a church movement that had historically been a majority-white movement. While it still is majority white, 33% of our ministers now represent a non-white demographic. In 2020, the problem within the movement was that I needed to build more trust with the group because I had only been in charge for a year. Navigating our many varied churches through that season was difficult. Thankfully, my master\u2019s degree had prepared me academically for 2020. However, the emotional pressure of leading in 2020 resulted in burst blood vessels in my right eye, subsequent surgeries and 70% loss of vision.<\/p>\n While attempting to hold a clear line of thought that gently defied the CRT propositions, including the long walk through the institutions[2]<\/a>, the challenge, though real, was evident. \u00a0Yes, we should always show empathy and understanding to those facing trauma[3]<\/a>, but we should not bow to the bullying tactics of the media and the baying mob. When it comes to moments of mass awakening by the population on social issues, I am often reminded of the mob in Acts 19: 32 \u201cThe assembly was in confusion: Some were shouting one thing, some another. Most of the people did not even know why they were there\u201d. Recent marches with the chant \u201cFrom the River to the Sea\u201d are highly contentious, and I expect the majority would be horrified if they knew what the chant meant. Perhaps they \u201cdo not even know why they are there?\u201d It is encouraging to know that \u201conly a small number adopt extreme views.\u201d [4]<\/a><\/p>\n Parallels are drawn between issues associated with Identity Politics and the Inquisition of the 12th Century, which was established to identify and destroy heresy in the Catholic Church through the use of persecution, culminating in torture and execution. Madeline Grant says, \u201cThe mob requires \u201csinners\u201d to confess their crimes, and preferably to perform their shame and penitence publicly. Of course, no one is burnt at the stake, but lives and reputations can be irretrievably destroyed in contemporary witch-hunts \u2013 and the punishment is often utterly out of proportion to the crime in question\u201d [5]<\/a>. She adds, \u201cThis new morality-by-mob phenomenon, then, mirrors religion \u2013 only without any of the charity and forgiveness we might associate with faith\u201d [6]<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Identity Trap speaks into the mob culture\/inquisition with great aplomb. The Author\u2019s concluding chapter entitled \u201cHow to Escape the Identity Trap\u201d provides helpful, practical steps for countering the Identity Trap, which he says will lead to continued exacerbation and ultimately failure[7]<\/a>. Perhaps this is where Mounk\u2019s encouragement for \u201creasonable people to stand up\u201d [8]<\/a> speaks to the church. In keeping with Mounk\u2019s practical steps, Lily Arasaratnam suggests a framework of six helpful keys in framing conflict navigation[9]<\/a>, which may prove useful for those leading faith communities.<\/p>\n Firstly, maintain contact. The natural desire for many to withdraw from conflict negates humans\u2019 core expression of attaining peace through communication. The challenge with identity politics is the blurring of lines between relational and content communication.<\/p>\n The second key is to Assume Best Intentions. Arasaratnam suggests, \u201cIt is good practice to first assume that the behaviour was the result of a cultural misunderstanding rather than malicious intent”[10]<\/a>.<\/p>\n Thirdly, provide a safe platform. Arasaratnam rightly states that while \u201cyou may not have control over someone else\u2019s insecurities, you do have control over how you treat their moments of vulnerability\u201d.[11]<\/a><\/p>\n The fourth step is to involve a mediator. Shared needs and interests enable those in conflict to find common ground and enjoy continuing dialogue. An effective mediator can use commonality as an anchor in conversation.<\/p>\n Fifthly, consider the relationship. It is questionable whether it is possible to win an ideological battle whilst retaining a positive relationship with the losing party. The challenge is the blurring of relational and content communication. If maintaining a relationship with the contending party is the optimum priority, then an obliging, compromising, or integrating approach is desirable.<\/p>\n Lastly, consider moving on. Arasaratnam contends, \u201cMoving on might involve obliging, abounding, compromising beyond what you had initially hoped or merely letting go of a relationship if it is the cause of prolonged and destructive conflict\u201d.[12]<\/a><\/p>\n In summarising the principal flaw of Identity synthesis, Mounk says its vision is neither realistic nor desirable.[13]<\/a> I must agree. Any ideology with \u201cpost-modernism, postcolonialism and critical race theory\u201d[14]<\/a> as its starting point will inevitably have a complex life itself.<\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Dillon, Amber. 2013. \u2018Christianity Is Not the Problem. The Bible Is.\u2019 The Independent. 10 February 2013. https:\/\/www.independent.co.uk\/voices\/comment\/christianity-is-not-the-problem-the-bible-is-8487636.html.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Mounk, Yascha. 2023. The Identity Trap: A Story of Ideas and Power in Our Time<\/em>. New York: Penguin Press. 97.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Ibid, 283.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Ibid, 276.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Grant, Madeline. 2018. \u2018In the New Politically Correct Religion, Being Male Is the Original Sin and Forgiveness Is Impossible\u2019. The Telegraph<\/em>, 8 September 2018. https:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/2018\/09\/08\/new-politically-correct-religion-male-original-sin-forgiveness\/.<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Ibid.<\/p>\n [7]<\/a> Mounk, 239.<\/p>\n [8]<\/a> Ibid, 272.<\/p>\n [9]<\/a> Arasaratnam, Lily A. 2011. Perception and Communication in Intercultural Spaces<\/em>. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America. 51.<\/p>\n [10]<\/a> Ibid, 61.<\/p>\n [11]<\/a> Ibid, 62.<\/p>\n