
One of the hardest parts of the season we have all walked together is the spirit of outrage that sits in the public sphere and at the dining tables of our neighbourhoods. Last Monday we were on the way to our weekly home group and my son started talking about the recent election that happened in our hometown and the politics of the representatives and who gained a place in a lower house seat in WA.
It was the first time I had heard my son talk openly about what is happening in local politics, even though he’s now a teenager; secondly, the shift in our nation’s politics is historically stark. So we chatted openly, and we carried the conversation inside to our dinner table. The men sat around with Max, debating what they thought was the right framework in the current environment, and every person at the table had a completely different standpoint.
The power of open conversation was palpable, even though every person at the table had very different political viewpoints.
I loved seeing teenagers being drawn into the conversations and adults listening, discussing and trying to find a pathway through. The table wasn’t in agreement, but we listened, debated, and had hard conversations. The next generation of leaders in our community need to see public debate in a way that is honest, but also not fueled by rage.
Sitting at a table with someone with whom you disagree does not mean you are partisan in your approach. Jesus invited himself to the home of Zacchaeus, a chief tax collector in Jericho, sparking public outrage from the crowd who viewed Zacchaeus as an unworthy sinner and political collaborator.
Can you have a different perspective from your neighbour and still love them anyway?
I believe there is a clear, simple reason the spirit of offence runs so deep in our public discourse. It is hard to listen to someone with a different opinion when we are not self-aware of our own voice, projections, and offence.
Often, we are ushered away from introspection or reflection; however, I have come to understand that self-awareness is one of the greatest gifts to community. Your voice develops through accountable conversations, people who challenge your worldview, and journaling, which I’ve found to be an essential tool for reflection for anyone in a leadership position.
In a world of much disinformation and rhetoric, it is important to create perspective between your ideas, ideologies, and beliefs.
When was the last time you really journaled through your beliefs and questioned them from all sides?
Our worldview shapes how we react in conflict.
We can often have very firm boundaries around what we believe and what we repel. We fight from this place of threat and think everyone should share our views. Yet we all approach conflict and public debate from different life experiences, and the beauty of diversity is our ability to sit present with one another and practice radical acceptance.
Radical acceptance in public debate means fully acknowledging a disagreeing viewpoint without trying to fight, judge, or forcibly change it.
It does not mean agreeing with or condoning the other side. Instead, it is the conscious decision to stop fighting the reality that another person holds a fundamentally different worldview.
We can be so consumed with being heard that we can’t listen to the heart and life of the person sitting in front of us. We must shift our focus from “winning” to understanding. Radical acceptance isn’t about the viewpoint; it’s about letting other people have their own opinions and beliefs, without changing our own for peacemaking or acceptance.
*Your role in conversations is not to convert people to your standpoint. When we become self-aware, we stop entering debates with the sole goal of changing someone’s mind.
*Acknowledging their current reality. You accept that, at this exact moment, the other person genuinely believes what they are saying based on their own life experiences, values and logic.
*Separating acceptance from approval. You can accept that the viewpoint exists and is deeply held by someone else while still voting against it, speaking out against it, or believing it is wrong.
Radical acceptance has a limit, and the limit is honesty.
A really difficult part of this conversation is the way we shape and change our narrative to fit the environment we find ourselves in. Lying is rampant in our current cultural moment. Just scroll Instagram for a second.
Often, I have found in organisations, community endeavours, or church environments that lying is accepted more than truth-telling. This is the dark side of leadership. Shaping narratives, not allowing a diversity of voices and opinions.
Calling it out is difficult: little white lies, filtered for performative acts of power. Saying that something is more compelling than it is. Changing our worldview in different environments for acceptance. Even silence becomes a weapon, used to avoid correcting a moment of opposition.
How we listen matters:
Your ability to listen is shaped by family of origin and upbringing. In my house, there was a lot of conflict and debate. Yelling was normalised, and we never sat down to talk without debate. I grew up in a conservative church, and with that came very firm boundaries around belief systems.
I believe it is important for a young adult to wrestle and rumble with their own worldview, and to find pathways forward in their own values and beliefs. Here are some ways that I have learnt to listen for acceptance of the person, rather than the point of view.
Active, non-judgmental listening: You listen to understand their internal logic rather than listening just to find flaws and formulate your next counterargument.
Validating the emotion, not the claim: You can acknowledge the feelings driving their perspective (e.g., “I understand that you feel anxious about economic stability…”) without agreeing with their proposed solution.
Curiosity before conclusion. Ask one more question than feels comfortable before you answer. “What happened to you that made you see it that way?” is a question almost nobody asks anymore, and almost everybody wants to be asked.
Holding your view without holding it over someone. I can be certain and still be kind. Certainty is not a licence. My conviction does not need your agreement to stay true. Brené Brown says it this way: “People are hard to hate close up. Move in”.
Letting the silence sit. I am learning that the pause after someone finishes speaking is not empty space for me to fill. It is often where the real thing gets said.
That is the table I want to set in my home.
When we walked home from connect group that night, nobody had changed their vote. No one had won. But a teenage boy watched a room full of adults disagree with each other and stay at the table, and that is a form of discipleship our neighbourhoods need.
The spirit of outrage is loud. It needs you agitated to survive, and it cannot withstand someone who has done the honest work of knowing their own heart and how they emotionally respond under threat.
So before your next hard conversation, take fifteen minutes and a blank page. Ask yourself:
Where did this belief of mine actually come from, and who gave it to me?
What would I have to give up if I turned out to be wrong?
Who is the person I find hardest to listen to, and what is it in me that they disturb?
Where have I softened the truth this week to be accepted?
What am I defending, and what am I protecting?
“Search me, God, and know my heart; test me and know my anxious thoughts. See if there is any offensive way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.” Psalm 139:23-24.
Blessed are the peacemakers. Not the peacekeepers, who smooth it over and say nothing. The peacemakers, who stay in the room, tell the truth and love anyway.


















