Attitude of Acceptance

However, on closer examination John 3:18 is curiously worded. Condemnation is not contingent on believing that God has a Son, or that he is the one and only Son, or that the son is Jesus of Nazareth. It is contingent on believing in the “name” of the Son. In ancient times the “name” referred to a person’s character rather than to a spoken or written word. To “believe” was to have the mind-set that something was true. Today we use the word “believe” in significantly different ways. The statement, “I believe in the force of gravity,” signifies that the force of gravity is part of the speaker’s life paradigm. If this person jumped out of an airplane, he would not expect to go up. However, we also use the word “believe” as a statement of opinion or supposition such as in this contrasting statement: “I believe the Titanic will safely cross the ocean.” The two uses of the word “believe” confuse our perception of the scripture. Scripture uses “believe” to refer to a life paradigm. Consequently, this seemingly divisive sentence invites every human on the planet, including the physician champion, to adopt the charitable and self-sacrificing character of Jesus of Nazareth and make it a personal reality. Found in a charitable and self-sacrificing character is an accepting attitude toward people of other faith traditions. That this should be so is supported by the oft-quoted verses:
John 3:16-17 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”
Saving the world sounds like a very accepting attitude toward people. An accepting attitude is a matter of the heart and therefore a matter of personal spiritual formation.

Attitude of Acceptance

Among the most divisive texts in Christian scripture is this:
John 3:18 “Whoever believes in him (Jesus) is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.”
Many Christians believe this means that God immediately and finally condemns those who do not accept central Christian tenets. This belief can block an accepting attitude, and it is a formidable barrier, especially for people from evangelical faith traditions.

How can health workers avoid these barriers in the workplace and remain true to their personal beliefs?

Praying with Patients

The question often arises: "Is it alright to pray with patients?" Dr. Jason Salagubang, from Florida Hospital Apopka, came up with an ingenious and inexpensive way to deal with that question in the hospital. On admission patients are asked if they want staff to pray for them. If they respond with "yes", they receive a purple bracelet with the words "Trust" "Belonging" and "Hope" imprinted. Any staff member then already knows the answer to the question "Is it alright?" A bookmark accompanies the gift and provides details:
Trust - as you come to know we really and truly care about you as a person.
Belonging - because while you are with us, you are family.
Hope - because we join with you, mind, body and spirit to affect a wonderful future.

Doctrinal Concerns

An accepting attitude toward people of other faiths incites some devout persons to fear doctrinal erosion. However, an accepting attitude does not imply doctrinal compromise from either the hospital or the physician champion. A close alliance is required between foundational doctrines for the physician champion and the hospital. They need to be compatible because this is the direction of spiritual growth that the physician champion will be fostering in the medical staff. Spiritual compatibility, however, is not synonymous with theological unity, nor is theological unity even a goal.

Religious Language

Religious language can impede spiritual conversations in the workplace. An approach to this language problem relates to the practice of using religious jargon as shorthand for a more detailed concept. One strategy is to put such expressions in the “longhand” form. For example,using the expression of “being under the blood of Jesus,” would probably border on being offensive to a Hindu. Instead restate the concept in longhand form: “In my Christian faith, I see how I have behaved contrary to God’s will and how that has separated me from God. I believe that Jesus sacrificed his life to reconcile me to God.” This style of conversation is understandable and does not ordinarily alienate those of another faith. Rather I think it improves their understanding.

What language examples have you experienced that impede or promote spiritual dialogue?

Endorsing a Candidate

Most important for a candidate is God’s endorsement. I cannot predict how that endorsement might appear. Some would interpret the candidate’s popularity or their ability to recruit physicians as hallmarks of endorsement. I wonder.

How do you discern God's endorsement?

Language of faith

Focus not on a particular religious tradition, rather on spirituality. So, the spirituality that gives meaning and purpose to the physician champion may require an investment of time and prayer to become responsive to the needs of this ministry. That spirituality must allow dialogue with people from a wide variety of faith traditions and with those not having any faith tradition. This capacity is partly embedded in an accepting attitude toward people of other faith traditions, but it also requires a break from some of the language of faith traditions. In fact, our language can be one of the greatest barriers to interfaith dialogue. For example, a Christian who speaks of “being under the blood of Jesus,” will likely close the door to further spiritual conversation with a Hindu. Van Kaam used a new vernacular that he called a “meta-language” to mediate between the jargons of different faith traditions.

What language works well for you? What language seems to impede spiritual conversations?