Building Bridges

It is extremely dangerous to erect walls against those we disagree with, rather than finding ways to merge for better understanding.

A challenge we face in our increasingly polarized secular society is finding ways to build bridges that connect. Sir Isaac Newton wrote, “We build too many walls and not enough bridges.” It is extremely dangerous to erect walls against those we disagree with, rather than finding ways to merge for better understanding.

Bridges were an essential development in history. When immovable obstacles separate two communities, both suffer, and the potential of sharing commerce and culture is not fully realized. Bridges facilitate larger communities, ones that are more robust and interdependent. Myths about those once separated are dispelled as trust and awareness are realized.

Golden Gate Bridge Project

There was a perceived need for bridges to link the San Francisco Bay communities as far back as the 19th Century. The lack of a bridge impeded travel for San Franciscans. Communities like Oakland, San Jose, Marin, and Sonoma Counties suffered from the lack of safe and convenient passage. Traveling into and out of the city relied on ferry boats that shuttled workers, often in an angry seas. Tragic collisions occurred when boats collided in the dense fog. A bridge would eliminate over ninety miles round-trip for a Marin County resident. The need was clear.

In the 1920s, the San Francisco City Civil Engineer, M. M. O’Shaughnessy, decided to do something about the need. He designated a 420,000-acre watershed area that could be explicitly districted for constructing such a bridge. He contacted an experienced bridge builder, Joseph B. Strauss, to design a bridge connecting San Francisco with Marin County. Mr. Strauss experienced significant political and environmental objections over the bridge’s design. Some in the affected communities thought it would be too expensive. Others felt the deep waters would make the bridge too risky and unsafe. Finally, a few communities argued that the changes likely resulting from the bridge might bring unwanted and detrimental consequences to their community and culture.

Mr. Strauss weathered these objections, collaborating with a team to design a proposed suspension bridge, with an estimated cost of $27.1M. The final proposal wasn’t officially presented until 1930, at the peak of the Great Depression. The bridge that the US Army Corps of Engineers wouldn’t support, the bridge that had to rely on local funding during a time of great uncertainty, the bridge that “could not and should not be built,” was approved. Construction began three years later, and the bridge was completed in just over four years. Today, it stands as a monument to these men. A beautiful orange bridge that is the longest suspension bridge in the world. It transformed these communities and continues to serve motorists to this day. Marin and Sonoma Counties have since developed and become important to the Bay Area economy and tourism.

Lessons for Our Community

The Golden Gate Bridge project is an interesting case study for our faith community. We must appreciate that disconnected communities can never reach their full potential. The change required to build bridges is difficult, and we should never anticipate that bridge building will be a stress-free and easy pursuit. There will always be objections to change. Communities will have deep concerns about what connecting to other communities might bring. To undertake bridge building, we must, like Joseph Strauss, wholly focus on how this work will ultimately serve the greater good of our communities. It is not only about one community and one community’s concerns. The vision must be compelling and one that we are willing to sacrifice for.

There is a tendency for the flesh to want to avoid those with whom we disagree. We can build thick walls to separate ourselves. It can lead to grossly inaccurate assessments about the other community because we don’t really know them and don’t feel we can trust them. We don’t have vital dialogue to help us understand another opinion. Solomon wrote, “Fools have no interest in understanding; they only want to air their own opinions.” (Proverbs 18:2 NLT).

First Century Lessons

However, such stubbornness is not the lesson of the first-century believers. They were divided on several key doctrinal issues, though they all accepted the work of the Lord and his resurrection. Some argued that Gentile converts must keep the Law of Moses to be saved, including circumcision. The conference in Jerusalem only asked for Gentiles to jettison pagan practices. There were separations over who their teacher was and who baptized them. There were informal, yet powerful, segregations based on their nationality and culture. These differences resulted in significant difficulties in emerging ecclesias. Paul often found that after he left an ecclesia, those with differing perspectives would infiltrate it, leading some to have their faith “shipwrecked.”

It seems reasonable to assume that when Paul prayed three times for the “thorn in the flesh” to be removed, it was about those who were the source of much of the conflict, likely the party of the circumcision. The message was, “My grace is sufficient for thee.” (2 Corinthians 12:7-9). Paul wanted to spare the ecclesias from the grief and disruption of those who taught differently on such matters. Wouldn’t the ecclesia be better off without these annoying and destructive views?

The Sufficiency of Grace

But with all of the variations of understanding in the first century, it was all clearly under the control of the Lord, and Paul would learn this. The Lord’s grace and power would overcome the confusion and disagreements, even the destructive behavior of some. In less than ten years, the powerful Jewish influence was eliminated when Rome sacked Jerusalem. The need at the present was not to build walls, but to save as many as possible, even if they were not fully like-minded.

It is fascinating how Paul would realize the sufficiency of God’s grace at a time of personal vulnerability. Alone in Rome, only two brothers ministered to him. In Colossians 4:10-11, we read that John Mark and Justus were the helpers. How ironic! It was because of John Mark’s desertion in Pamphylia that Paul and Barnabas split, as recorded in Acts 15. Now John Mark is present, assisting the Apostle when he is most in need. Who then is Justus? It turns out he is from the party of the circumcision! These men, whom many might have discarded years before, became Paul’s “fellowworkers.” Even when you don’t think you need a bridge, it may be the Lord’s will to bring help and encouragement from that unlikely direction.

What would have happened if Paul had burned the bridges between those men who had previously let him down, or had a different view of ecclesial requirements? These men were essential for Paul at a time of great need. Truly, the Lord’s grace was sufficient. He was in control.

Our Need for More Bridges

Why do we resist building and maintaining bridges? It is usually fear-based. We fear rejection. We fear criticism. We may have had past negative experiences and anticipate that things won’t change. These attitudes lead to isolation. Isolation leads to declining trust. Declining trust erects impenetrable walls. We gather “evidence” and concoct stories that reinforce our slanted perception of those on the other side of the bridge. A clear view of what God told Paul is missing in all of this: “My grace is sufficient for thee.” Our Lord wants us to connect with other believers, despite differences. He is the one with all power and authority, not us. If we trust him, we will inevitably learn to trust one another.

Unity is not some abstract theological concept. It requires dogged determination by bridge builders and those who maintain the bridge. Unity is a Divine construct, not of human origin. All the metaphors used in Psalm 133 about unity are top to bottom. It is the oil that runs down Aaron’s beard. It is the dew that descends on the mountains of Zion. God has designed unity for us. It is, as the psalmist wrote, “good and pleasant.” (Psalm 133:1)

Differences do exist between communities. They have always existed. But conceding these obstacles as insurmountable and retreating inwardly is inconsistent with our Lord’s intentions for the body. We must work to stay connected. It is critical to maintain the highways that lead to the bridges. This means that all communities must value the greater good of what the bridge can bring.

The Bridge Completed

Returning to the Golden Gate Bridge story, it is relevant that the decision to proceed with the bridge was made at the beginning of the Great Depression. The bridge cost exceeded much of San Francisco’s total property value. Surely, other investments were needed. Men were increasingly out of work, and families were at risk. Maybe they needed a bridge, but wouldn’t it be better if they took care of the community?

Because of their foresight, the investment made in connecting communities has benefited citizens of the region for almost one hundred years. The cost of building was much lower in 1937 than it would ever be later on. Waiting also comes at a price. For us, it may be at the risk of our young people.

On May 28, 1937, men, women, and children could pay a quarter to walk across the new 1.7-mile bridge. The estimate is that more than 200,000 made the journey. It would change their lives, opening up new opportunities for them and their families. What a joyous occasion this must have been. Today, it serves as a landmark, a symbol of beauty. But ultimately, what it did was bring people together. That’s real beauty.

May we all, brothers and sisters, join hands as we walk across new bridges that connect our community. It requires a fundamental trust that the Lord is in control and that trust and love will ultimately overcome our differences. Our Lord will ensure that the body is cared for and nourished. Unity will improve our witness in this age of darkness. Most of all, it will glorify our God. What we will find is that we have always needed one another. The bridge helped to make this evident. It will stand as a landmark for years to come.

One way to realize the benefits of joining communities is for the two communities in North America to resolve that the longstanding separation is not serving either. It is now time to get on with forming a lasting bridge, and each community needs to show the love of Christ by taking initiative to make this happen. I dare say, some are already pursuing unity and are forming local bridges. May we now seize this opportunity to build a robust and lasting bridge, by the Lord’s grace, to usher us into a better tomorrow. His grace is sufficient.

Dave Jennings