May my words and my thoughts be acceptable to you, O Lord, my refuge and my redeemer. (Psalm 19:14)
SEASON: Pentecost 18A
PROPER: 21A
PLACE: St. John's Parish, Kingsville
DATE: September 26, 1999
TEXT: Matthew 21:28-32 - Parable of the Two Sons
"What do you think? . . . . . he changed his mind. . . . . Which of the two did the will of the father?"
ISSUE: This parable, as obvious as it may seem in terms of who does the will of the Father, is about change. The one son who says "No" to his father does in fact change and do what he is asked. The parable is also a challenge to the Pharisees who are questioning Jesus' authority and his honor status. He answers them with the fact that there is new standard. It is not honor that counts so much as those who actually do the will of God. He is doing it, and the tax collectors and harlots are also changing and stepping into the Domain of God before them. The parable challenges the religious establishment of our own age. Do we merely honor God, or do God's will working in the world vineyard?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
This parable of of the Two Sons seems to us to have a very obvious answer. A father has two sons. He commands them to go and work in the vineyard. The first son says "No" that he will not go, but later changes his mind. The second son says that he will go, "Yes." But he does not. Which one does the will of the father is the question that Jesus asks. The people respond, "The first," that is, the son who said "No" but then changed his mind. The response seems so obvious that it is hardly worth Matthew recording the story. We might say that anybody in his right mind would know the answer to that question. However, understanding the story in the context of Matthew's gospel account, and in terms of what the story meant in Jesus' time puts a new light on to the story.
The parable of the Two Sons follows very shortly after Matthew's account of the Cleansing of the Temple. Recall that Jesus had made a triumphal entry into Jerusalem, where the people cried out, "Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord." He proceeds to the Temple and begins the cleansing process. The tables of the money changers are overturned, and the stools of those who sold pigeons and sacrifices. He begins then to heal, or restore,the blind and crippled in the Temple. The temple authorities, the chief priests then challenge Jesus' authority. Who does he think he is doing these things? They challenge him: Who licensed him, gave him permission to do these things? He has not been licensed or given any authority to do these things by the Temple leadership. They are challenging hsi honor, which is something that could be given to him by other honorable persons. Jesus had no honor by virtue of his birth. He's merely a rebellious son of a carpenter from Nazareth. They challenge the fact that he has no status or authority.
Then Jesus responds with this insulting parable and saying. What do you think? He challenges their sense of logic. A man had two sons. Which did the will of the father, when the father sends them to the vineyard. The one who says "No" but chabnges his mind and later goes, or the one who says "Yes" but doesn't go. They have to answer to their dismay, the one who said "No" but later did go. If Jesus had said which is the more honorable son. They would have had to say, the second. The more honorable son is the one, who even though he doesn't do what his father asks, does not say "No" to his father in public. In public he honors his father with the positive verbal response. "Yes, father I will work in the vineyard." The dishonorable son is the son who says "No" to this father in public, even though he later goes. He dishonors his father and himself by this rebellious behavior in public. Remember the commandment, which these people knew very well: Thou shalt honor thy father and thy mother."
What Jesus is saying is that he is no longer buying into their system of empty honorableness. They are challenging him when they themselves pay great tribute to God the Father, but do not really do his will. And doing the will of God is what really counts. Jesus is saying that there has to be change in the system in terms of what is really important. It's not all this phoney honor that counts, but doing the will of the God the Father, that's what counts.
In the story of the Two Sons. The one son says "yes" that he'll go into the vineyard to work, but he really has no intention whatsoever, even though he has giving the honorable response. The son who says "I will not" is changed, and as the text says: "but later he changed his mind and went." He changed. That's the issue. The chief priests and elders, the Temple authorities are challenging Jesus as to his honor and status, but Jesus is saying to them that's not what counts. What counts is being changed enough to do the will of God the father. He rubs salt into their wounds and literally insults his adversaries when he says to them: "Truly I tell you, the tac collectors and prostitiutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you." In a sense he saying that those whom they consider last are going in first. He's saying to them, "Not everyone who calls me 'Lord, Lord," enters the Kingdom of God, but only those who do what my Father in heaven wants them to do." Jesus raises the question which one did the will of the Father, and the answer is easy enough, but in his own time is was a significant challenge to the ways, and thinking of the time. Jesus is doing away with what looks right and honorable, and he's saying essentially it is the actions that speak louder than words and the ability of people to shape-up and change. That's exactly what the tax collectors and the harlots were doing. Yet, the religious leaders were challenging Jesus' honor, his status, his authority. He was stepping out of line, but he was doing, as were so many following him, not what was honorable, but what was the will of the Father.
The story for us today is a call to an awakening. It calls for repentance, change even in our world today, and it challenges us as well, I think, to make the attempt to rediscover what does it mean to work in the vineyard of God, and what is our status. Are we honorable but ineffective, or are we maybe not so honorable but willing to change and enter into the Domain of God and to what is God's will?
When we are children, there comes great independence when we come to appreciate what "No" means and that it has a kind of power to it. Children go through that stage of saying "No" and challenging the parental authority in their lives. Yet as we grow older and sometimes wiser we realize that saying "No" to all authority has consequences. to be co-operative and to support the family and community of which we are apart has real benefits to it.
When we are sensitive to the world around us we know only too well that there is much to be done in the vineyard of God. There is significant suffering and pain around the world. People suffer from earthquakes and hurricane flooding. There are people that are lonely and without family and support in nursing homes. Violence in our society is rampant and increasing numbers of people are suffering from its consequences. Fortunately there are many organizations and churches that find for themselves significnat ministries to answer human need. There are many individuals who lead very active lives in the servanthood ministry. Inspite of the fact that people's resources are sometimes limited, or their time is limited. We have to say "No" to many things. Yet the needs persist, and lives have to be examinined, and we have to wonder what God is calling us to do beyond our own personal needs.
One of the great examples in our society is the tremendous work that is done by A.A. members. They recognize that it is by the grace of God that they find healing from the awful disease of alcoholism. Sometimes a significant part of their lives is saying "No" to God or to their higher power. Once aware of that they must change their lives or die, and recognize there is a saving grace that can come from God, they move eventually into the steps of making amends and of assisting others. They go through a real process of change, coming to their senses, and then moving into a more joyful meaningful life of serving others. sometimes they are stepping into the realm of God long before those religious types who give lip service to God, who say Yes and do honorable things, but are not really into doing the will of the Father.
All of us as Christians, as members of the church have to be awakened occasionally and have to examine our lives. Do we go merely through religious motions, or are we finding the ministries to which God calls us? Sometimes I think we can become settled into a very comfortable group of people, who are good people, and comfortable with one another. We become and are, indeed, very respectable and reputable people. However, we can become very turned in on ourselves as opposed to serving God's world with specific ministries and without much in the way of sacrificial giving and support of Christ's church so that it can effectively do it work amd will in the world. We see ourselves as the privileged, and think that everybody else must change when maybe it is us that needs the changing.
Jesus says to that crowd around him, "What do you think?" then he proposes the story of the two sons. He calls his followers and those who challenge him to thinking and reflection on their lives. While it is obvious who is the one doing the will of the Father, we sometimes miss it's relationship to ourselves and to our lives. All that honor stuff, respectability and privilege, is not what life is about. It is about doing the will of the Father. It is about change, repentace, and taking stock. of our lives as Christians, as followers of Jesus Christ in the world. Sometimes the least among us, those you might not expect, are the very ones who are stepping into the realm of God ahead of us. Some of us are identified in this world as hypocrites, play acters at religion. It could well be that sometimes that is a very fair consideration. Sometimes it is not. But, what do you think? What do you think about your life as a son or daughter of the Father, and as a member of Christ's church in the world?
Sunday, September 26, 1999
Sunday, September 12, 1999
Pentecost 16
May my words and my thoughts be acceptable to you, O Lord, my refuge and my redeemer. (Psalm 19:14)
SEASON: Pentecost 16
PROPER: 19A
PLACE: St. John's Parish, Kingsville
DATE: September 12, 1999
TEXT: Matthew 18:21-35 - Parable of the Forgiving King
ISSUE: The issue of resolving conflict and forgiving one another continues. Peter's request in terms of how often to forgive a fellow disciple is related to interpersonal relationships. Forgive without limit. The parable deals with communal issues, that is, this is what the Kingdom of God is like. It is like a place where the king is totally merciful, and the tenants act in accordance with their compassionate Lord. Forgiving one another from the heart in and with and awareness of how we are forgiven is what it means to step into the Kingdom of God.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
In last week's Gospel passage from Matthew a formula was given for resolving conflicts within the early church. In an agonistic or feuding kind of society, if the fledgling early Christian church was to survive, conflicts had to be readily resolved for the sake of unity and perseverance in a hostile world. Thus, there were stages: try to solve problems privately - have several witnesses enable a settlement - if you have to bring together the whole church. Finally, if resolution could not be found and a person was fix in non-resolution then excommunication or shunning, exclusion from the community was advocated.
Keeping unity in the church was very important to the early church, as it is today in our world. Without it the church loses strength for its mission and power of its witness to love. It loses its uniqueness and becomes like the world.
The theme is continued when Peter comes to Jesus and asks, "How many times should he forgive another member of the church? As many as seven times?" Jesus' response to Peter is that within the church we forgive one another not just seven times, which is a lot, but seventy-seven times, or seventy times seven times, which simply means that being a forgiving person is unlimited. Jesus goes on to set up a parable about the Kingdom of God, the Domain of God, or what it is like to live in the Kingdom of Heaven. It is dramatically different from the world.
Jesus says there is a King who called in his servants for an accounting. One servant (bureaucrat) owes him 10,000 talents. The king orders that he and his family be sold as settlement. The slave, however, falls on his knees and pleads for mercy assuring the King he'll work harder and pay up all that he owes. The 10,000 talent debt is enormous. It represents 164,000 days wages. He'll never be able to repay such enormous debt. The parable reflects the fact that all peasants of the time were enormously head over heals in debt. The king is truly and honorable man. He takes pity and offers great compassion by forgiving the entire debt. Such a king or lord would have great honor among his servants. And, honorable servants would normally and naturally treat others in the same way that their honorable lord treated them.
However, the forgiven servant is owed a meagre 100 denarii, a debt, but nevertheless a pittance in comparison with 10,000 talents. Yet the forgiven servant has a very hard heart and is not a man of mercy and compassion. He refuses to forgive the meagre debt and had him thrown into debtor's prison. The forgiving King is dishonored by this behavior. This hard heartedness dishonors him, and he has no choice but to have the unforgiving slave handed over to being tortured, until his relatives come up with what is owed. The Kingdom of God is a place where honor is found in compassion and mercy. Everyone is indebt, but God forgives indebtedness as would an honorable friend. The passage reflects the Lord's Prayer, "Forgive us our debts (trespasses), as we forgive those who are indebted to us. (or have trespassed against us.)
The parable reveals the enormous grace of God. However indebted we are to the great bounty of God, forgiveness abounds. If God can forgive the indebtedness, the trespasses of each of us, then are we not obligated to be gracious to one another? That kind of forgiveness is not always reflected by the violence and rage expressed in our modern culture. Taking revenge, and eye for an eye is still often the model of our time. To take revenge or getting even is what is more often seen as honorable. Road rage relects the inability of people to be forgiving. Yet, who has themselve not done something dumb behind the wheel of an automobile? Who has not offended and been foolish? But clinging to hostility and old sores and hatreds keeps the fires of feuding and violence burning in our homes and in countries around the world. Hell's fires prevail in the world. Without mercy and compassion we are all condemned. But praise be to God, who establishes a new domain, a new place, where forgivenss and graciousness abounds, into which we are invited. To be compassion and forgiving is a process of developing heart felt relationship and friendship. Being forgiving, merciful, and compassionate in an unlimited way brings a whole new dimension to the world, the dimension of the God of love. Jesus teaches Peter a powerful lesson, in a revenge oriented world, for participating and proclaiming the Kingdom of God.
SEASON: Pentecost 16
PROPER: 19A
PLACE: St. John's Parish, Kingsville
DATE: September 12, 1999
TEXT: Matthew 18:21-35 - Parable of the Forgiving King
ISSUE: The issue of resolving conflict and forgiving one another continues. Peter's request in terms of how often to forgive a fellow disciple is related to interpersonal relationships. Forgive without limit. The parable deals with communal issues, that is, this is what the Kingdom of God is like. It is like a place where the king is totally merciful, and the tenants act in accordance with their compassionate Lord. Forgiving one another from the heart in and with and awareness of how we are forgiven is what it means to step into the Kingdom of God.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
In last week's Gospel passage from Matthew a formula was given for resolving conflicts within the early church. In an agonistic or feuding kind of society, if the fledgling early Christian church was to survive, conflicts had to be readily resolved for the sake of unity and perseverance in a hostile world. Thus, there were stages: try to solve problems privately - have several witnesses enable a settlement - if you have to bring together the whole church. Finally, if resolution could not be found and a person was fix in non-resolution then excommunication or shunning, exclusion from the community was advocated.
Keeping unity in the church was very important to the early church, as it is today in our world. Without it the church loses strength for its mission and power of its witness to love. It loses its uniqueness and becomes like the world.
The theme is continued when Peter comes to Jesus and asks, "How many times should he forgive another member of the church? As many as seven times?" Jesus' response to Peter is that within the church we forgive one another not just seven times, which is a lot, but seventy-seven times, or seventy times seven times, which simply means that being a forgiving person is unlimited. Jesus goes on to set up a parable about the Kingdom of God, the Domain of God, or what it is like to live in the Kingdom of Heaven. It is dramatically different from the world.
Jesus says there is a King who called in his servants for an accounting. One servant (bureaucrat) owes him 10,000 talents. The king orders that he and his family be sold as settlement. The slave, however, falls on his knees and pleads for mercy assuring the King he'll work harder and pay up all that he owes. The 10,000 talent debt is enormous. It represents 164,000 days wages. He'll never be able to repay such enormous debt. The parable reflects the fact that all peasants of the time were enormously head over heals in debt. The king is truly and honorable man. He takes pity and offers great compassion by forgiving the entire debt. Such a king or lord would have great honor among his servants. And, honorable servants would normally and naturally treat others in the same way that their honorable lord treated them.
However, the forgiven servant is owed a meagre 100 denarii, a debt, but nevertheless a pittance in comparison with 10,000 talents. Yet the forgiven servant has a very hard heart and is not a man of mercy and compassion. He refuses to forgive the meagre debt and had him thrown into debtor's prison. The forgiving King is dishonored by this behavior. This hard heartedness dishonors him, and he has no choice but to have the unforgiving slave handed over to being tortured, until his relatives come up with what is owed. The Kingdom of God is a place where honor is found in compassion and mercy. Everyone is indebt, but God forgives indebtedness as would an honorable friend. The passage reflects the Lord's Prayer, "Forgive us our debts (trespasses), as we forgive those who are indebted to us. (or have trespassed against us.)
The parable reveals the enormous grace of God. However indebted we are to the great bounty of God, forgiveness abounds. If God can forgive the indebtedness, the trespasses of each of us, then are we not obligated to be gracious to one another? That kind of forgiveness is not always reflected by the violence and rage expressed in our modern culture. Taking revenge, and eye for an eye is still often the model of our time. To take revenge or getting even is what is more often seen as honorable. Road rage relects the inability of people to be forgiving. Yet, who has themselve not done something dumb behind the wheel of an automobile? Who has not offended and been foolish? But clinging to hostility and old sores and hatreds keeps the fires of feuding and violence burning in our homes and in countries around the world. Hell's fires prevail in the world. Without mercy and compassion we are all condemned. But praise be to God, who establishes a new domain, a new place, where forgivenss and graciousness abounds, into which we are invited. To be compassion and forgiving is a process of developing heart felt relationship and friendship. Being forgiving, merciful, and compassionate in an unlimited way brings a whole new dimension to the world, the dimension of the God of love. Jesus teaches Peter a powerful lesson, in a revenge oriented world, for participating and proclaiming the Kingdom of God.
Sunday, September 5, 1999
Pentecost 15
May my words and my thoughts be acceptable to you, O Lord, my refuge and my redeemer. (Psalm 19:14)
SEASON: Pentecost 15
PROPER: 18 A
PLACE: St. John's Parish, Kingsville
DATE: September 5, 1999
TEXT: Matthew 18:15-20 = Conflict Resolution
"For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them."
ISSUE: This passage would indicate that the early church had to deal with significant conflict. Conflict was a significant part of the Middle Eastern cultural structure. At one point there is the call to treat unrepentant sinners as Gentiles and tax collectors. Yet Jesus himself both ate and associated with Gentiles and tax collectors, and advocated forgiveness seventy times seven. The passage reveals the tension between having to stand up for justice, and yet doing so with great interpersonal compassion. Struggling with issues will be as much of being Christian as taking up the cross. The passage also reminds us of the constant presence of Jesus Christ with us, and we live ourlives with his presence in mind.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Today's passage of Scripture from Matthew might be described as a hard nut to crack. It appears to be a statement by Matthew about how people might deal with conflict. It gives a formula for dealing with disputes. However, at the end if the dispute cannot be resolved according to the formula than the offending persons is to be treated as a Gentile or tax collector. They are to be excommunicated and a declared an outcast. What is peculiar, however, is that Jesus had a relatively strong affection for Gentiles and tax collectors, even in Matthew's account of the Gospel. This is not a particularly easy passage to interpret. Yet, to have some idea of the culture of the period is helpful.
In Jesus' time conflict was a significant part of the culture. There was a lot of feuding that went on. It was a culture where the highest value was a person's honor. To have someone diminish your honor by name calling, or gossip, or by not giving appropriate status were insults. The use of dishonorable actions or words against another person was what it meant "to sin" against them. It was then appropriate if not expected that the offended person would attempt to defend their honor and maintain their status. This defensive action could lead to perpetual feuding, violence, blood shed.
For the early Christians, and for the early fledgling church community that was struggling to survive in the midst of a hostile environment where they were accused and persecuted, it was very important that they have within the community ways for resolving conflicts among fellow Christians who were referred to as brothers. Here are some of the kinds of things that had developed along the lines of preventing bloodshed and perpetual feuding within the group.
1. Jesus himself was known to fume and threaten but did not take any violent action. In Matthew 11:20-24, Jesus is in the town of Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Caperanum where Jesus performs a number of miracles he is met with unbelief, or disloyalty. His honor is threatened, and he declares that God's judgment will come down upon them. Jesus fumes and threatens that it will be better for evil Sodom on the day of judgment than for these ungrateful and dishonoring towns. There is threat but no action on Jesus' part. Ventilating anger had its value then as now.
2. Jesus also taught in Matthew 5:38-41 that if someone insults you or slaps you on the cheek, it was better to turn the other cheek. If someone takes you to court to sue for your shirt, give him your coat as well. If the Roman military wants you to carry their pack for a mile, carry it two miles. Rather than continue in perpetual agitation, violence, and feuding, it was thought better to take a more pacifist role. All this seems to be an effort in the teaching of the early church to bring an end to the perpetual violence of the time.
In this agonistic (feuding) culture, it was certainly likely that the early church made up of human beings would not escape contention. Moments of dishonoring one another were likely to happen. Thus, a formula for settling such disputes was instituted:
A. If you felt someone had sinned against you, dishonored or insulted you, you were to go to that person and talk it over. The issue was to be dealt with privately. To make a public issue of an insult was much more likely to lead to the violence that came from having to save face in public. If the alleged dishonoring could take place in private no one loses face publicly. Such incidents may well have been unintentional or simply a mistake. Keeping the Christian community in tact was a high priority.
B. More help is spelled out. If you cannot settle some dispute private, then you call witnesses. You take two or three other people who witnessed the situation. The role of witnesses was very important in the ancient world. Rmember the commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor. If a witness was caught lying, they were to receive the same penalty of the accused person. Witnesses had a lot of clout. If you could not settle issues alone, then you would be expected to honor the testimony and recommendations of the witnesses for settling the dispute.
C. If the dispute were still not settled, you called on the gathering of the whole church, which would have the final say, and there was no further recourse. The final say of the community would be binding. What was decided by the church gathered in community would be binding and respected in God's heaven, the Kingdom, God's domain. And if the accused person would not be respectful of the church's decision and recommendation then that person was excommunicated, thrown-out, treated as a Gentiles and tax collectors were treated by Jewish communities of the time. They were shunned, and considered outcasts. In this time that was a very serious penalty. It was essentially a death penalty. You could not survive in that world without a family or community support system.
The passage gives us a clear indication that the early church was desperate for being an agent of reconciliation. Where two or three are gathered, Jesus Christ is there. It is as if the Christ who calls for turning the cheek, giving more than is demanded, and who calls for walking the extra mile is present always with the church and its members calling them into negotiation and reconciliation. "Blessed are the peacemakers, God calls them his children." (Matt. 5:9)
This Jesus, who is present when two or three are gathered together, is the same Lord who embraced the outcasts, the Gentiles and the tax collectors. Matthew was one of those tax collectors who becomes a disciple. Jesus converses with and heals the Roman soldier's servant. (Matt. 8:5-13) Jesus converses with and restores the Canaanite woman's demonic daughter. He responded to the mother's plea: "Yet even the dogs gather up the crumbs from the master's table." (Matt. 15:21-28) What we seem to have here is the need for the early church members to be disciplined enough to respect the means by which judgments are made for the purpose of reconciliation, and for the stands it must make to maintain its identity as a Christian community. At the same time, Jesus immersed the church in a sense of, or heightned the value, of being a negotiating, gracious, and compassionate community.
In our world and our time we are not always as gracious in our deliberations with one another as we might be. We are not as respectful of the community as in times past. Graffitti in public places, road rage, violence against one another are symptoms of our time. We are individualistic and are often set in what we believe. One of little childrens' first sentences is, "Make me!" People of differing persuasions simply walk out on one another and discount one another. This kind of acting-out occurs in marriages, families, and other friendly relationships.
Even the church today does not deal well with the issues of conflict. We are not always particularly good listeners to the prophets among us who call for justice. We get locked into a rigid way of thinking that compounds violence and unhappiness. American Christians absorb pop-culture. The banners we fly say: "I'll got it alone." or "I gotta be me." or "Do it my way." or "See if I care." If we feel uncomfortable about what happens in one church community, we just pick up and go to another church. At that rate nothing is ever resolved, and the Christian community in the world doesn't look any different than anything or anybody else. It becomes absorbed by the world's indifference, and appears fractured, weak, and without clear authority that gives meaning and hope for an already disheveled, violent, and dishonoring world.
We might keep in mind the words of an old hymn: "New occasions teach new duties, Time makes ancient good uncouth." ("Once to Every Man and Nation" - Hymnal 1940, #519) Christians have a responsibility to stand for justice and what is right. That has always been the prophets work, and Jesus was himself a prophet. The church shares in that role. At the same time we must always be aware that what was sometimes considered acceptable and right in one age becomes dated and inappropriate in modern ages, and our understanding of what is truly Christian is altered. Take for instance the way in which women and slavery have been regarded in ages past. New enlightenments do come.
The early church knew only to well that there would be conflict. The Book of Acts speaks of conflict, especially between Paul and Peter. We know conflict still exists today in the church, but the formula of the church calls for negotiation. The church stands for certain things, which we believe to be in keeping with standards from ancient times. We need to stand up for them. We have to make a stand on certain issues. That is sometimes very tough to do. Why there was not more of stand taken by the church in Nazi Germany when Hitler came to power is questioned today. There were those that did, but it was done by a small minority easily extinguished by the Reich. The church was slow to stand up to Governor Wallace of Alabama, and against racism in general, and Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia. Sometimes the church in the world misses its prophetic calling for standing for justice. We are slow today to address violence and gun control in our time.
At still other times we do face uncomfortable issues that create tensions. We face litugical issues like changing Prayer Books. We face issue of the place of women in the church and in the ordained ministry. Much more needs to be done around strengthening marriages and families. The issue around the gay and lesbian issue creates heated debate and conflict for the church.
Sometimes the church has to take a strong stand, and we're not always comfortable with that. Conflict, however, is not to be avoided. It is to be entered into with negotiation, and testimony, with people witnessing, and entering into prolonged debate. At times the church must make its clear decision on issues that either appear or at odds with the world, and at odds with what we as individual think and believe. But we are called upon to be constantly alert to being reconciling. We are called upon to respect the judgments and deliberations of the councils of the church, and we are to remain forever compassionate, open, understanding, as Christ himself was and is. At all costs we need to avoid bigotry, and a self-righteousness that is all consuming, closed, and without sensitive listening, problem solving, and compromise.
Our belief, as we find it in the Scripture, is that Christ is with us whenever the community is gathered, and in whatever conflicts we may face. Christ is there bearing witness to his own suffering, to his own conflict, to his longing for what what just and right in his ministry. He is there with his great compassion and understanding. Last week, we learned that we needed to take up our cross and follow him. We sometimes have to die to our old ways in order tyo truly live with Christ a meaningful existence. For the Christian there is no giving up of the cross. At the same time there is no giving up the struggles, the conflicts in our lives and in the life of the church. We persist in negotiating, listening, witnessing, and being compassionate. We prevail in being forever reconciling, as Christ himself was the great reconciler in the early church as well as in the church of today.
SEASON: Pentecost 15
PROPER: 18 A
PLACE: St. John's Parish, Kingsville
DATE: September 5, 1999
TEXT: Matthew 18:15-20 = Conflict Resolution
"For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them."
ISSUE: This passage would indicate that the early church had to deal with significant conflict. Conflict was a significant part of the Middle Eastern cultural structure. At one point there is the call to treat unrepentant sinners as Gentiles and tax collectors. Yet Jesus himself both ate and associated with Gentiles and tax collectors, and advocated forgiveness seventy times seven. The passage reveals the tension between having to stand up for justice, and yet doing so with great interpersonal compassion. Struggling with issues will be as much of being Christian as taking up the cross. The passage also reminds us of the constant presence of Jesus Christ with us, and we live ourlives with his presence in mind.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Today's passage of Scripture from Matthew might be described as a hard nut to crack. It appears to be a statement by Matthew about how people might deal with conflict. It gives a formula for dealing with disputes. However, at the end if the dispute cannot be resolved according to the formula than the offending persons is to be treated as a Gentile or tax collector. They are to be excommunicated and a declared an outcast. What is peculiar, however, is that Jesus had a relatively strong affection for Gentiles and tax collectors, even in Matthew's account of the Gospel. This is not a particularly easy passage to interpret. Yet, to have some idea of the culture of the period is helpful.
In Jesus' time conflict was a significant part of the culture. There was a lot of feuding that went on. It was a culture where the highest value was a person's honor. To have someone diminish your honor by name calling, or gossip, or by not giving appropriate status were insults. The use of dishonorable actions or words against another person was what it meant "to sin" against them. It was then appropriate if not expected that the offended person would attempt to defend their honor and maintain their status. This defensive action could lead to perpetual feuding, violence, blood shed.
For the early Christians, and for the early fledgling church community that was struggling to survive in the midst of a hostile environment where they were accused and persecuted, it was very important that they have within the community ways for resolving conflicts among fellow Christians who were referred to as brothers. Here are some of the kinds of things that had developed along the lines of preventing bloodshed and perpetual feuding within the group.
1. Jesus himself was known to fume and threaten but did not take any violent action. In Matthew 11:20-24, Jesus is in the town of Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Caperanum where Jesus performs a number of miracles he is met with unbelief, or disloyalty. His honor is threatened, and he declares that God's judgment will come down upon them. Jesus fumes and threatens that it will be better for evil Sodom on the day of judgment than for these ungrateful and dishonoring towns. There is threat but no action on Jesus' part. Ventilating anger had its value then as now.
2. Jesus also taught in Matthew 5:38-41 that if someone insults you or slaps you on the cheek, it was better to turn the other cheek. If someone takes you to court to sue for your shirt, give him your coat as well. If the Roman military wants you to carry their pack for a mile, carry it two miles. Rather than continue in perpetual agitation, violence, and feuding, it was thought better to take a more pacifist role. All this seems to be an effort in the teaching of the early church to bring an end to the perpetual violence of the time.
In this agonistic (feuding) culture, it was certainly likely that the early church made up of human beings would not escape contention. Moments of dishonoring one another were likely to happen. Thus, a formula for settling such disputes was instituted:
A. If you felt someone had sinned against you, dishonored or insulted you, you were to go to that person and talk it over. The issue was to be dealt with privately. To make a public issue of an insult was much more likely to lead to the violence that came from having to save face in public. If the alleged dishonoring could take place in private no one loses face publicly. Such incidents may well have been unintentional or simply a mistake. Keeping the Christian community in tact was a high priority.
B. More help is spelled out. If you cannot settle some dispute private, then you call witnesses. You take two or three other people who witnessed the situation. The role of witnesses was very important in the ancient world. Rmember the commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor. If a witness was caught lying, they were to receive the same penalty of the accused person. Witnesses had a lot of clout. If you could not settle issues alone, then you would be expected to honor the testimony and recommendations of the witnesses for settling the dispute.
C. If the dispute were still not settled, you called on the gathering of the whole church, which would have the final say, and there was no further recourse. The final say of the community would be binding. What was decided by the church gathered in community would be binding and respected in God's heaven, the Kingdom, God's domain. And if the accused person would not be respectful of the church's decision and recommendation then that person was excommunicated, thrown-out, treated as a Gentiles and tax collectors were treated by Jewish communities of the time. They were shunned, and considered outcasts. In this time that was a very serious penalty. It was essentially a death penalty. You could not survive in that world without a family or community support system.
The passage gives us a clear indication that the early church was desperate for being an agent of reconciliation. Where two or three are gathered, Jesus Christ is there. It is as if the Christ who calls for turning the cheek, giving more than is demanded, and who calls for walking the extra mile is present always with the church and its members calling them into negotiation and reconciliation. "Blessed are the peacemakers, God calls them his children." (Matt. 5:9)
This Jesus, who is present when two or three are gathered together, is the same Lord who embraced the outcasts, the Gentiles and the tax collectors. Matthew was one of those tax collectors who becomes a disciple. Jesus converses with and heals the Roman soldier's servant. (Matt. 8:5-13) Jesus converses with and restores the Canaanite woman's demonic daughter. He responded to the mother's plea: "Yet even the dogs gather up the crumbs from the master's table." (Matt. 15:21-28) What we seem to have here is the need for the early church members to be disciplined enough to respect the means by which judgments are made for the purpose of reconciliation, and for the stands it must make to maintain its identity as a Christian community. At the same time, Jesus immersed the church in a sense of, or heightned the value, of being a negotiating, gracious, and compassionate community.
In our world and our time we are not always as gracious in our deliberations with one another as we might be. We are not as respectful of the community as in times past. Graffitti in public places, road rage, violence against one another are symptoms of our time. We are individualistic and are often set in what we believe. One of little childrens' first sentences is, "Make me!" People of differing persuasions simply walk out on one another and discount one another. This kind of acting-out occurs in marriages, families, and other friendly relationships.
Even the church today does not deal well with the issues of conflict. We are not always particularly good listeners to the prophets among us who call for justice. We get locked into a rigid way of thinking that compounds violence and unhappiness. American Christians absorb pop-culture. The banners we fly say: "I'll got it alone." or "I gotta be me." or "Do it my way." or "See if I care." If we feel uncomfortable about what happens in one church community, we just pick up and go to another church. At that rate nothing is ever resolved, and the Christian community in the world doesn't look any different than anything or anybody else. It becomes absorbed by the world's indifference, and appears fractured, weak, and without clear authority that gives meaning and hope for an already disheveled, violent, and dishonoring world.
We might keep in mind the words of an old hymn: "New occasions teach new duties, Time makes ancient good uncouth." ("Once to Every Man and Nation" - Hymnal 1940, #519) Christians have a responsibility to stand for justice and what is right. That has always been the prophets work, and Jesus was himself a prophet. The church shares in that role. At the same time we must always be aware that what was sometimes considered acceptable and right in one age becomes dated and inappropriate in modern ages, and our understanding of what is truly Christian is altered. Take for instance the way in which women and slavery have been regarded in ages past. New enlightenments do come.
The early church knew only to well that there would be conflict. The Book of Acts speaks of conflict, especially between Paul and Peter. We know conflict still exists today in the church, but the formula of the church calls for negotiation. The church stands for certain things, which we believe to be in keeping with standards from ancient times. We need to stand up for them. We have to make a stand on certain issues. That is sometimes very tough to do. Why there was not more of stand taken by the church in Nazi Germany when Hitler came to power is questioned today. There were those that did, but it was done by a small minority easily extinguished by the Reich. The church was slow to stand up to Governor Wallace of Alabama, and against racism in general, and Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia. Sometimes the church in the world misses its prophetic calling for standing for justice. We are slow today to address violence and gun control in our time.
At still other times we do face uncomfortable issues that create tensions. We face litugical issues like changing Prayer Books. We face issue of the place of women in the church and in the ordained ministry. Much more needs to be done around strengthening marriages and families. The issue around the gay and lesbian issue creates heated debate and conflict for the church.
Sometimes the church has to take a strong stand, and we're not always comfortable with that. Conflict, however, is not to be avoided. It is to be entered into with negotiation, and testimony, with people witnessing, and entering into prolonged debate. At times the church must make its clear decision on issues that either appear or at odds with the world, and at odds with what we as individual think and believe. But we are called upon to be constantly alert to being reconciling. We are called upon to respect the judgments and deliberations of the councils of the church, and we are to remain forever compassionate, open, understanding, as Christ himself was and is. At all costs we need to avoid bigotry, and a self-righteousness that is all consuming, closed, and without sensitive listening, problem solving, and compromise.
Our belief, as we find it in the Scripture, is that Christ is with us whenever the community is gathered, and in whatever conflicts we may face. Christ is there bearing witness to his own suffering, to his own conflict, to his longing for what what just and right in his ministry. He is there with his great compassion and understanding. Last week, we learned that we needed to take up our cross and follow him. We sometimes have to die to our old ways in order tyo truly live with Christ a meaningful existence. For the Christian there is no giving up of the cross. At the same time there is no giving up the struggles, the conflicts in our lives and in the life of the church. We persist in negotiating, listening, witnessing, and being compassionate. We prevail in being forever reconciling, as Christ himself was the great reconciler in the early church as well as in the church of today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
