Esther Lightcap Meek writes a small but mighty book called A Little Manual of Knowing. In this book, she groups knowing ventures into two approaches. According to her, we either approach knowing through the lens of love, which she terms the “loving-to-know approach,” or through knowledge, also known as the “knowing-as-information approach.”
She writes,
“The knowledge-as-information approach is about power. It lives up to Francis Bacon’s sixteenth-century summons to modernity: Knowledge is power. The point of knowledge is to eliminate wonder and mystery. It’s to put humans in control of the world.
Knowledge as information lends itself to commodification. Knowledge is quantifiable, usable to bring wealth and mastery. This approach obviously targets and reaps results. But results and shalom are two different things. Results, over time, can lead to damage, even as power corrupts. We live in a results-driven society. It seems that to work with the society you have to be about results.”
Meek says the loving-as-knowing approach brings about shalom through “resolution, healing, relationship, joy, and peace.” 1
I’ve been thinking about this because of three different personal scenarios, each problem relative to knowing. (Each problem lands differently - some okay and some not too good.)
The one I will talk about today is less personal but still a part of me. Growing up in the Southern Baptist Church, I was never involved with the convention or political side of things.
Like most people, I was a person in a Baptist church who trusted where she was and the belief systems there. But being a woman with a call to ministry has affected me over time. I never felt it was okay to be the person I thought I was designed to be. Perhaps more than that, there was little to no ministry affirmation, encouragement, or mentoring, and I spent years trying to pretend I wasn’t called.
I know that all Christians are called to minister, but unless you’ve felt a call that burdens you and won’t let you go, no matter what you do, you may not understand what I mean when I say called. The intensity of being called has been great. Perhaps I am no Beth Moore, and maybe the anointing was quiet and gentle, but it does not preclude it.
If you are growing, midlife shrugs off all the false identities so that you (your true self) can begin to truly shine. You’re no longer satisfied being the dancing monkey, performing, or looking for applause. You want to sit down inside yourself and be you (you with God). All sense of ego and the glory of the false self can go. You are willing to let people say what they say about you if they have anything to say at all. It’s really why I’ve made so many decisions to let go. I’m running out of time to waste on pretenses.
What I experienced affected me and drove me to know more about the SBC from a wide lens, a big-picture view, not just from my small, limited experience. I was invested in knowing almost everything about SBC life for a season. I knew every scandal and many SBC grievances. Knowing, it seemed, fed my distrust, and I didn’t know what to do with all I knew. In addition to what I knew from the big picture, I was also experiencing this knowledge on a small scale in my real life.
As I’ve leaned into spiritual formation, I’ve mostly wanted to let go of knowing anything that goes on in the political scene of the SBC. Maybe if I don’t know, I can pretend none of it exists. I can go on my way, do my thing, and be free.
To be sure, in my last Residency at Friends, our guest speaker, Deb Hirsch, said she couldn’t make every social injustice her cause. To her, too many people are dying without knowing the goodness of the kingdom of God. Yet, google her, and you will see she does have a side cause: human sexuality. She often explores how our thoughts about sexuality either deny or include people on the fringes of society from the gospel. The main thing is the main thing with a side of sexuality.
I am part of a group of women probably known as “the liberal SBC feminists,” my self-description (none of us are liberal or feminist). 🥴 Sometimes, when they send me stuff I used to want to know, I cringe inside. Who cares? What does it matter? Why do I need to know? (They probably feel similarly when I send the things.) I waffle between who I was, who I want to be, and who I am. I want to practice holy indifference and walk away from knowing anything. Like Deb Hirsch, I want to say, “Let’s keep the main thing the main thing,” but I can’t help but wonder if not wanting to know is akin to stuffing my emotions, feeding the false self, and isn’t really for the common good.
recently wrote a post called “To Burn or Not to Burn: That is the Question.” Her current argument and point of view is that the building is burning, there are children inside, and someone needs to get them out. It’s a strong argument. In her post, she links to several news articles offering the latest in the SBC on Paul Pressler and his abuse of children.I still refer to my old church as my church because there are people I know and love there, and I don’t yet have a new place to belong. No one was willing to talk about the SBC the entire time I was there, and if you did, it was a hush-hush person-to-person thing. I understand that sometimes, the preacher speaks about them in his sermons, so maybe curious discussions are being had on what is going on with the SBC. The reality is nothing changes as long as we are taught to keep secrets - big or small, to feed any ego - male or female.
For a little SBC history lesson, before 1979, the SBC was filled with conservatives, moderates, and even liberals. The SBC even had a resolution on abortion, allowing for abortion in the case of rape, incest, or deformity.2 This position would be unheard of today in the SBC, and anyone with such a view is not often welcome to share.
However, 1979 was the year of the conservative resurgence. I am NOT a historian and don’t have references to give here. The leaders driving the resurgence were responding to cultural issues of the day and tightening up their theology on several issues, including women in ministry. One fallout is that they drove moderates and liberals from the SBC. Forcing one type of ideology is a loss for everyone. We are best when we learn from everyone, even if we disagree.
The men who led the resurgence are the same men who have been caught in severe sexual abuse scandals, as Karen mentioned in her post - even rape of children. Being someone who cares about formation, I can’t help but wonder how those men have shaped Southern Baptist life in a way we can hardly dissect. That matters to me, and women’s freedom to come out from a formation that was misshapen matters to me. There needs to be freedom for all the young girls like me - called but unsure what to do with it.
But here’s where I’m landing. I’m not going to know everything, and you breathe a sigh of relief, write all the things. It’s not going to be my main mission. I am going to keep the main things the main things. I will speak out against things that affect formation. I will advocate for women and encourage them to explore what the Bible really says about them. I want to take the loving-as-knowing approach.
What I’m learning is that when we lean into becoming our most authentic selves (the selves we are with God), the people in power may want to fight you tooth and nail to get you to go back to the false persona so that they can have power. Our becoming makes them come undone, but it takes courage and conviction. Think about Jesus - the purest of the pure. He was his true self at all times. They crucified him. Being your truest self is not a call to the easy life.
But you, as your truest self, are for the common good. We all win when we show up as our true selves, even if it initially ignites a war. It brings reality, and reality is the kingdom of God. The kingdom is the truest of the true. As Meek writes, “A fresh integration redraws reality to help its pieces work together. It solves problems. Good knowing can unleash reality itself to be more itself.” This is how the ones who abuse power come undone - you becoming.
Esther Lightcap Meek, The Little Manual of Knowing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Baptist_Convention_conservative_resurgence#The_abortion_issue
If you made it to the end of the post, what a trooper! If this work speaks to you, please consider sharing!
I am *really* intrigued by this knowledge-as-power vs. loving to know idea. I wonder if that's involved in the first temptation. I no longer believe God was holding out on us and denying us knowledge. But I suspect He wanted us to come to know things more slowly, over time and in love. Whereas the serpent tempted them with knowledge-power.
Jamie, I love this! I have landed in almost exactly the same place. I cannot unsee what I have seen, but neither do I want to be in a place where I see it all the time or choose to make it my focus. I love the two descriptions of knowledge. Looks like a book I would like to read. Thank you!