Once upon a time two brothers who lived on adjoining farms fell into
conflict.

It was the first serious rift in 40 years of farming side by side,
sharing machinery, and trading labor and goods as needed without a hitch.

Then the long collaboration fell apart. It began with a small
misunderstanding and it grew into a major difference, and finally it
exploded into an exchange of bitter words followed by weeks of
silence.

One morning there was a knock on John's door. He opened it to find a man
with a carpenter's toolbox. "I'm looking for a few days work" he said.

"Perhaps you would have a few small jobs here and there I could help
with? Could I help you?"

"Yes," said the older brother. "I do have a job for you. Look across the
creek at that farm. That's my neighbor, in fact, it's my younger brother.

Last week there was a meadow between us and he took his bulldozer to the
river levee and now there is a creek between us. Well, he may have done
this to spite me, but I'll do him one better. See that pile of lumber by the
barn? I want you to build me a fence - - an 8-foot fence -- so I
won't need to see his place or his face anymore."

The carpenter said, "I think I understand the situation. Show me the
nails and the post-hole digger and I'll be able to do a job that pleases you."

The older brother had to go to town, so he helped the carpenter get the
materials ready and then he was off for the day. The carpenter worked hard
all that day measuring, sawing, nailing.

About sunset when the farmer returned, the carpenter had just finished
his job.

The farmer's eyes opened wide, his jaw dropped. There was no fence there
at all. It was a bridge -- a bridge stretching from one side of the creek
to the other! A fine piece of work handrails and all -- and the neighbor,
his younger brother, was coming across, his hand outstretched.

"You are quite a fellow to build this bridge after all I've said and
done." The two brothers stood at each end of the bridge, and then they
met in the middle, taking each other's hand. They turned to see the carpenter
hoist his toolbox on his shoulder. "No, wait! Stay a few days. I've a lot
of other projects for you," said the older brother.

"I'd love to stay on," the carpenter said, "but, I have many more bridges
to build."

Don't know who wrote it, however, it reminded me of the World Parliament of Churches, the Global Dialogue Institute, of the work of William Johnston, SJ, Jim & Tyra Arraj, Phil and our Heartland Sisters, among many others, Merton, Rohr, and on and on. And truly, whatever their tools, whatever their materials, whatever their tricks of the trade, whatever their rules and guidelines of artful carpentry --- that all falls by the wayside at the moment of reconciliation, of healing, of renewal and reunion, of unitive life and beatific vision.

Merci beau coups,
jb

That's really a great story, John! Thanks for sharing it, and for the affirmation implied.

Depending on how this thread develops, it might do better in the Christianity Today forum. Mr. OCD here!

Bridge-building is not an easy matter, that's for sure. To me a first step is always to be honest about what one believes and why, then to see how that connects with others and where bridges can be built.

The story's been told many times about the Buddhists who walked out on the Christians at some inter-religious dialogue because the Christians were spending most of their time being very PC, apologizing to the Buddhists for the past wrongs of the Church (very few of which were committed against Buddhists, btw), the "arrogance" or proclaiming Christ as the definitive revelation of God (even though Buddhists believe no such thing about Buddha), etc. The Buddhists' objection was that these Christians weren't entering dialogue from a Christian perspective. We've got to watch out for that one.

Phil

Depending on how this thread develops, it might do better in the Christianity Today forum. Mr. OCD here!

OCD ??? When did you profess as a Discalced Carmelite ?

Congrats!
jb

Phil wrote: The Buddhists' objection was that these Christians weren't entering dialogue from a Christian perspective. We've got to watch out for that one.

Yes, I have heard Rohr tell that story. Of course I believe (and know you'd agree, so stay with Arraj's thread ) the most salient point is not that one can't sit down with any perspective they truly possess. Rather, it meets both the demands of charity and the legitimate aims of dialogue to use previously-established vocabulary, labels, definitions and position statements, or, in other words, language conventions. Accordingly, we utilize the time-honored understandings of definitions for metaphysical positions, theological definitions and mystical language. Now, I don't know the whole story and what their "walking out" actually entailed. I could understand them saying: "Why don't we change the subject because we are not going to accomplish what we set out to do here due to an unfortunate misunderstanding." and then proceeding to pleasantly enjoy their tea and crumpets over chatty east-west silliness, like you and I did over beer and oysters, last week

Yeah, I clearly see what you are saying, Phil. Thanks for the follow-up.
jb

Living in a competitive world as we do (which I do not bemoan) it is extremely difficult to give in � to build that bridge - particularly if one feels wronged. To unilaterally build that bridge gives the other person a perceived advantage, a reward even, for doing wrong when at best they deserve a draw, and at least to make amends themselves. And building that bridge requires one�s own righteousness to go unacknowledged and unrewarded. No wonder there are so few bridges built. But those who do build bridges (without pomp and circumstance) touch on something that is probably best described as holy. There�s no evolutionary or social advantage or other self-interest hidden in many acts of bridge-building.

Out of one hundred people, ninety-eight may think of the bridge-builder as a sucker or as being weak and subordinate. And one may build a bridge and be stricken down in the process � trampled by those who do not recognize the act for what it is and take further advantage. Pity the poor bridge-builders. And for those who go on constructing even after the first one has been washed out � amazement.