Last week in preparation for next Sunday ‘s sermon, I looked back at what I had said on the appointed epistle reading for the day the last time it formed the basis for my sermon. I found a sermon I preached nine years ago and thought it made interesting if sobering reading nearly a decade later.
The following sermon obviously did not have much success. Even in my own small community, the past nine years has seen division, separation, and departure. Certainly, on the global scale in the worldwide Anglican Communion, recent years have witnessed significant and tragic tearing of the fabric of our life together.
SUNDAY SERMON August 10, 2003
A COMMUNITY THAT GROWS TOGETHER
Ephesians 4:25-5:2
Some of you here this morning may be aware that there is a measure of turmoil astir in the life of the worldwide Anglican Church.
In the Anglican Church we are part of a large community of faith. And, inevitably, the larger the community, the greater the potential for differences of opinion on even extremely important issues.
The important thing when we see conflict, unrest and turmoil in the church, is to avoid thinking that somehow this is unusual or strange. The truth is there has never been a time in the history of the Christian faith when the church has not been deeply troubled by disagreements over major issues. The church is made up of fallen human beings and, whenever flawed human beings are involved, there is always an opportunity for disagreement and deep conflict.
We must avoid the temptation to look back to some imagined romantic past when everyone in the church was in blissful harmony and agreement about everything. You only need to read any of the letters written to the earliest Christian church, in the New Testament, to know that tension, unrest, turmoil, and conflict have always been part of the church’s experience.
You clearly do not write a letter, for example, like Ephesians to a community where everything is going absolutely smoothly. If you read through the letter you will find many signs that the writer is trying to smooth over certain tensions between members of the community. Listen to some of the advice contained in this letter.
Think about the kind of people you would likely be writing to if you felt the need to say these kinds of things to them:
I ask you not to lose heart
I pray that God may grant you to be strengthened with power through his spirit in your inner being.
I urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
There is one body and one Spirit – just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call – one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbour, for we are members one of another.
Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger.
Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up.
Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you along with all malice.
Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.
These are not words you need to write to a community in which there are no problems. The picture in Ephesians is of a community that is having difficulty holding together. It is a community at risk, a community in which things are being said that are hurtful and in which members are failing to recognize the bond that unites them in Christ.
In this context the writer has a pretty clear bias in favour of hanging in there and working things out together. He says, “having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another.”
It is interesting how quickly we often rush to the part about speaking the truth. We assume that we are being instructed to set our neighbour straight. We are being told that we know the right thing and our responsibility is to correct the other person.
But, before we hurry to proclaiming the truth, we need to hear the whole verse. First we are told to “put away falsehood.” This means, before we ever dare speak a word to anyone, we need to search our own hearts deeply and honestly. We need to start by examining our own lives. We need to ask ourselves – is there any hypocrisy, any compromise, any deception in my life? Are there any places in my life where I am not fully living up to the demand of Jesus that I should “be perfect as my Father in heaven is perfect”?
Only after I have taken a serious moral inventory of my own life and made sure that I detect no falsehood, do I even begin to be free to assume that I may “speak the truth” to my neighbour. Truth speaking always begins with deep self-honesty. It is far too easy to focus on the sins of others that are so serious and so wicked, while ignoring the little deceptions and dishonesties in my own life.
It is important to remember that there is no gradation of sin in the Christian understanding. Paul says in Romans, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Perhaps if I was more concerned with my own falling short, I would be slower to judge the sins of others.
The second warning this verse includes is that, in any word of truth I might speak, I must recognize that I am one with the person to whom I am speaking. The writer says categorically, “we are members one of another.”
Notice, as we have seen throughout the letter, there are obvious disagreements in this community. The writer is not saying that we all agree. He has recognized that there are problems. But, in spite of the problems, in spite of serious disagreements and tensions, he still affirms that “we are members of one another.” And therefore we are called to “Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.”
How did God in Christ forgive me?
The Christian model of forgiveness is the cross. Jesus looked down from that cross upon his tormentors and prayed, “Father; forgive them, for they know not what they do.” This is the only basis for Christian community. Christian community is not based upon agreement. It is not based upon being right. Christian community is based upon the costly, sacrificial act of forgiveness.
In Christian community, it is the one who is right, the one who is innocent, who extends unconditional acceptance to the one who is wrong and deluded. Jesus knew the truth. Jesus was the innocent victim. Yet it was Jesus who looked upon those who were wrong and did not cut them off, but prayed that God might welcome them with openness and forgiveness.
It is easy to be church when everyone gets along, when we all agree and share the same understandings and insights. It is harder to be church when we see others crucifying Jesus. But these are the ones God calls us to love. We are called to lay down our lives for those who seem to us to hate God, as Jesus laid down his life for those who nailed him to the cross.
Being right and hanging out with people who agree with me all the time is easy. Staying part of a community in which I am challenged every day to be gentle, forgiving and forbearing is a lot more difficult. But being part of such a struggling, wrestling messy community as the Christian church, is the only recipe I know for spiritual growth and maturity.
17 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 9, 2012 at 7:04 am
Steve
Amen.
August 9, 2012 at 11:36 am
Steve
In light of your comments, I’ve already given you my “amen”, but there is something else I have to say. There is something inside me that does not want to admit it; I think it is probably a pride thing, and I pretty sure my “fundamentalist” brothers would probably not approve if they knew I was saying this, if I may foreshadow a bit.
My orientation should be clear by now to anybody who reads my comments. I am an old fashioned orthodox Christian; many here would call me fundamentalist, they would say I am “one of those”. The truth is in one sense I am, in another sense I’m not. I guess you all know that by now. The major problem I see with post modernistic views I have heard expressed here and elsewhere is there is no middle ground between the two views, in my estimation and that of many others at least. Both sides are entrenched. That is discouraging to me. There are other rifts in the church, I am at odds with many fundamentalist but we do have a common denominator, a common world view, a common reference point and I think a middle ground can be found. Of course any good postmodernist will try to tell me there is no such thing as a world view. And so it goes.
There have been many times when I have decided chasm between us is too wide and too deep and it is of no profit to me or to those who read your blog for me to be here. I get frustrated when having discussions with those who do not accept the inerrancy and authenticity of the Bible because I don’t know which part they accept and which part they reject. And I know if there are any postmodern minded people reading this you are saying to yourself right now, “He doesn’t get it”, and you would be right. I have spent countless hours trying to see if I am missing something but to no avail. I’m probably just a trouble maker and nobody is interested in my antique beliefs; well, that’s how I feel sometimes anyway. I mean that respectfully, not as a self deprecating remark, truth is I am very comfortable in that role. I’m still not sure about the truth of the above statement but in any case circumstances in my life have changed and I definitely will not have as much time as I’ve had in the past.
So here is the hard part and the most important part. I have always felt something spiritual going on here, for me at least. I can’t deny it. It’s like a dynamic tension. For some reason I keep coming back, I don’t know why. So the moral is, if there is a middle ground, it lies here, in the spiritual realm. I don’t know what the implications of that statement are but right off the bat this verse comes to mind, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” I think I and like minded people would do well to grab that thought, keep it in our hearts, and not limit God. I’ll be thinking about it in the future. My thoughts are already racing. The important thing, to reinforce what Christopher has already said is forgiveness and reconciliation. That is the message of Jesus, that’s the message we are here to spread. We have to get things in order in our own house before our words will mean anything. Until we become the shinning light on the hill I think our numbers will continue to dwindle and this at a time when the world needs us so badly. Right here, in this blog and others, and anywhere peoples hearts and minds are opened is where that will begin to happen. We’re talking about it.
I have grown because of this blog, there is good in everything if you just give it a chance, but I’m pretty sure you already know that. I am thankful for the experience, not that it’s over, and I hope that the same is true for somebody else, either those who participate in the discussion or maybe there are lurkers who are reading this and have been affected positively. I will pray for that to be the case.
August 9, 2012 at 9:42 pm
lindsay
Steve, I’m glad you’re here. It feels like it’s been a tough week here in blogland and it’s only Thursday … I’m going away for a couple of weeks and I’m kinda hoping that when I get back I can ask you about life in the South … you mentioned it feels like a war zone, and I’m trying to figure out why that? … What are people afraid of? What’s word on the street?
Umm, in a nutshell I think I might be post-modernist … except I don’t really know what it means … I tried to figure it out from an earlier conversation you guys were having on the blog, but never really managed to make much sense of it … sometimes I guess I’m moderate but not in everything … I think I’d be classified as radically left from a Christian perspective but not evangelical … politically here in BC Canada I’m more conservative than socialist but if I lived in the US I’d vote for Barack Obama … I believe in gay rights and marriage … I don’t believe in divorce-on-demand except in exceptional circumstance yet I am myself divorced, I believe in family in the widest possible context and children’s rights, I believe in early abortion, and euthanasia and I’m not excited about the death penalty … I don’t believe in guns … Oh, and I believe Madame Mary, the palm reader, has as much right to her spiritual beliefs and practices and to be respected for her beliefs as everyone else … I believe we do ourselves a disservice when we don’t heed what our fundamentalist brothers and sisters are saying … and I agree … with God all things are possible …
August 9, 2012 at 11:36 pm
jaqueline
” I believe we do ourselves a disservice when we don’t heed what our fundamentalist brothers and sisters are saying”
If we were heeding fundametalists we would not be able to have Gay marriage early abortion, euthanasia, Madame Mary , divorce, or Barack Obama.Family would only mean those born of your own blood, and the death penalty would not even be debated..
I think not heeding fundamentalists is a pretty smart move.
But then being liberal, post modern relativists means that we do have to put up with those who disagree with us, it means we get to tolerate those who do not tolerate. Aaah the price of world peace.
August 10, 2012 at 9:23 pm
jaqueline
“If we were heeding fundametalists we would not be able to have Gay marriage early abortion, euthanasia, Madame Mary , divorce, or Barack Obama.Family would only mean those born of your own blood, and the death penalty would not even be debated..”
I wish to elaborate on two ‘issues’ that conservatives are focusing on these days…on the surface I look like I agree with Lindsay, or that I am what a fundo would label a liberal but It is more complicated than that.
I do not value abortion. I abhor it. I think it is a cruel choice to have to make and I think it is a waste of life. But when I questioned myself whether I could be anti abortion the answer was “no”. I also realised that the very people that were militantly anti abortion, were also the people who were pro gun and pro war…and I thought…if you are pro life..you need to be pro LIFE. I thought ” how is the necessity of sending a child to war at 18 less a disrespect for children and life than a mum who is facing grave difficulty if not for the option of abortion?” Contrary to popular belief abortion is not a convenience, nor is it an easy decision. Our society has made a provision in the light of the horrors that faced women prior to the right of abortion…our job is not to remove that right , but to work to make the need for abortion unnecessary…working to end poverty is one such issue And on that note , the issue of poverty and neglect and abuse are far more a danger to the life of children and mothers than anti abortion conservative politicians care to admit to.
I support the rights fo Gay people…but I
I have been deeply challenged by trying to sort out whether it is sin or nature etc. I decided long ago to err on the side of mercy and support gay people and how they think and feel about themselves rather than impose my own feelings and judgements about their life. But I was doubly confirmed in my decision to be accepting and supportive when I realised that the so called biblical foundation for being anti gay was as solid as the biblical foundation for slavery and the subjugation of women and the hatred of Jews. Being too aware of the fallacy of those ‘standards ‘ which our society used to take for granted, I could not in good conscience base my attitude toward a group of people on ‘biblical’ principles.
Do I believe some crimes deserve the death penalty? Absolutely.
Do I believe that any human being has the right to take another’s life even if their crime deserves death? Absolutely not.
do I think war is a solution to our worlds dillemmas? No. Do I beleive we need to support our troops and do I beleive we need to have a healthy defence force?..yes. Do I believe asking our young to be killers on our behalf?…no. Do I believe EVERY one of us ought to be trained to be a capable solder should a dire time come?. yes.
..just to give a clearer ( ha) picture of one of those relativist post modern, liberals. …
August 11, 2012 at 7:33 am
Steve
Jacqueline, I much more respect you thought out beliefs that I do those of people who only believe what they want to with no regard for the facts. I have had them say to me “You have your truth and I have my truth”. in the face of me pointing out the facts. The implication is either there are two truths or no truth and I cannot accept either. That’s a postmodernist concept and I have no use for it. There is objective truth and for someone to say there is not is a self contradictory statement.
Also, your beliefs about what fundamentalist beliefs are not entirely accurate. We evangelicals take a more liberal view and do not consider ourselves fundamentalist and I am a little offended to be called that. Among evangelicals my beliefs would be considered liberal and many evangelicals would call me a liberal Christian. That’s why I have said in the past that I live in a lonely place. . Fundamentalist are extreme in their beliefs and take a literal view of the Bible. I am very much against their views and the behavior that is the manifestation of it. Fundamentalist represent only a small portion of the Christian community, the rest are mostly evangelical.
While we are clearing the record you should know I am opposed to the death penalty, I am on the fence over gun control and most of the other issues you mention except abortion and euthanasia. I would put my life on the line over these two. Also, on some of the issues I have a split view, that is under our constitution people have rights and I would fight to protect those rights even though my conscience keeps me from accepting them as my own beliefs. I don’t believe in same sex marriage but that does not necessarily mean that I think it should be illegal. The constitutionality of same sex marriage has not been determined and it will be a very trick issue once it goes to the Supreme Court and I think that is inevitable. I believe it will hinge on whether credible evidence can be produced to show it has a detrimental effect on society.
It is the postmodernist who are trying to marginalize if not rid Christianity and its influence on society and I hate it for that if nothing else. It is they who seek to divorce our constitution from its basis in natural law and that has dire consequences for society, that is, a constitution that has as its basis a floating standard.
Madame Mary has a constitutional right to do what she does, she is not even an issue for the church to be discussing.
It has just occurred to me that you don’t live in a constitutional republic and may not completely understand the First Amendment, the one that protects Madame Mary.
One has to understand the history of the U.S. to understand the tension between the protestant church and liberal anything. Most of the extreme behavior you hear about is a result of backlash from the intrusion of secularism into a society that has been a de facto theocracy for the past 200 years. It is a hard transition for us to make and the political right doesn’t understand things will never get back to what they used to be nor should they. It is really important for you to understand that in order to understand the current culture war that is going on.
August 11, 2012 at 9:35 am
jaqueline
just to be clear AGAIN I have not identified YOU here as a fundamentalist. You have been very clear that you do not identify yourself that way.
Fundamentalists are not necessarily extremists. Extremists are those who take to violent extreme whatever philosophy they belong to. What you call extremism is what Fundamentalism looks like under pressure.
Fundamentalism is identified with an either / or mindset, and adherence to an outward standard.that excludes those who disagree with it. I have already described it, and it has been described elsewhere on this blog. However I do not know any fundamentalist who identifies themselves as such…probably for obvious reasons.
Let’s just ignore labels shall we? If what others describe as fundamentalist ‘standards’ sound like yours..then perhaps it is time to come to terms with how what you describe as evangelical appears to the rest of society. wow..
However, ( even if they are not , in your defintion ) fundamentalists, ERRC ( Evangelical Religious Right Conservatives ) still seem committed to imposing their ideals and values and standards on society as a whole through right wing political aggression.
Those Christians who do not agree with it do so because we believe that human beings have the right to sort out their lives any way they wish within the context of ‘loving your neighbour.’ That we stand against it does not make us the opposite of you, it makes us different to you.
Hence my annoyance of you describing those who think differently to you as a post modernist relativist liberals (as though trying to cover all the bases of what opposite means ).
“It is the postmodernist who are trying to marginalize if not rid Christianity and its influence on society and I hate it for that if nothing else.” ( what the…? )
Being Post Modern does not mean being anti Christian.
The habitual use of the term post modernism in the way many Christians ( and not just ERRCS ) do betrays 1) ignorance of what post modernism is and 2) a useful catch all for anything they don’t agree with or are uncomfortable with in current times.
On a side note: What is often mistaken as post modern and relativist is actually pluralism which has been around for CENTURIES.( ie in the time that we describe pre- post modern. )
……………………………………………………………………………………………
“It has just occurred to me that you don’t live in a constitutional republic and may not completely understand the First Amendment, the one that protects Madame Mary.”
that’s right, no other country but America has free speech or democratic rights to the pursuit of happiness..
“One has to understand the history of the U.S. to understand the tension between the protestant church and liberal anything.”
…so you mean Christian standards were NOT responsible for America’s basic freedoms?… that conservatives have always been Christians and liberals always been not? ( even when there was nothing else but a Christian religious influence in society for the longest time ? )
Sorry, I must have missed that in my intake of American History and culture through school, documentaries, movies, TV shows and personal reading..
I mean, you guys should really try to export your history and culture to the rest of the world a little more effectively.
August 10, 2012 at 12:27 am
jaqueline
That was really beautiful Steve…
( except for the assumptions about post modernism of course )
August 10, 2012 at 6:59 am
Steve
Jacqueline, you just made my day, coming from you that’s about the nicest thing anybody has said to me in …well, a long time. Not only that but that’s twice in as many weeks a liberal minded person has said something nice to me. I feel like I’m already seeing evidence of “all things are possible”.
My conviction is that if we, those who call ourselves Christian, would, rather than put any beliefs in the forefront, just keep them to ourselves and put the love of Christ in the forefront it would go a long way towards diffusing the contentiousness.
Just now, in the course of thinking about that statement and looking for the passage in Roman about what we eat I ran across a verse that about knocked me down. I was getting very close to seeing this when this verse popped out at me. As is usually the case, I’m not sure if it is that I’m the last person to understand this or one of the first. Here’s how I interpret this passage. All the contentious issues that we, liberal and conservative, have locked into are stumbling blocks. The passage says that God will put a stone in Zion that will make people stumble. That stone is those things you just mentioned:
“If we were heeding fundamentalists we would not be able to have Gay marriage early abortion, euthanasia, Madame Mary , divorce, or Barack Obama.Family would only mean those born of your own blood, and the death penalty would not even be debated..”
He has placed these things there on purpose. There is no resolution between the two camps. We aren’t united in what we believe but we are united in Christ. We both are neither right nor wrong and we won’t find favor with God just because of what we believe. It is faith and faith alone that makes us right. Those who trust in Him are the righteous ones, not those who have the correct beliefs. In other words, we can continue to have our conflicting beliefs but we are united in faith, not in what we believe. Only those who have a correct understanding of Christ and faith in Him will not stumble. Christ is The Reconciler not beliefs. I feel so stupid for not getting that after all this time; it has been right in front of my face.
Is anybody following me here?
“So what does all this mean? It means that people who are not Jews were made right with God because of their faith, even though they were not trying to make themselves right. And the people of Israel, who tried to make themselves right with God by following the law, did not succeed. They failed because they tried to make themselves right by the things they did. They did not trust in God to make them right. They fell over the stone that makes people fall. The Scriptures talk about that stone:
“Look, I put in Zion a stone that will make people stumble.
It is a rock that will make people fall.
But anyone who trusts in him
will never be disappointed.””
Romans 9:30-33
August 10, 2012 at 6:55 am
Christopher Page
“We have to get things in order in our own house before our words will mean anything.” – Thanks for this Steve and for your courageous exploring and willingness to struggle openly and honestly. I believe that where there is such openness the Spirit of Jesus is present guiding us into all truth. We may not be quite there yet, but we are on the journey.
We each have a piece of the puzzle and need to be encouraged to add our part to the whole. The beauty of the whole depends upon the inclusion of parts that may not at first appear to fit well and the accommodation of other pieces to embrace the bits that may seem at times to be out of place.
I am challenged by Paul’s sobering reminder that “now we see through a glass, darkly… and now I know in part” (KJV), but encouraged by his promise that there is a time coming when we shall “see face to face” (I Corinthians 13:12).
The love of Christ unites us. The Jesus in whom we trust and who holds us in love is so much bigger than our language, formulations, doctrines, or images. The wind of God’s Spirit “blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” (John 3:8) God’s Spirit blows creatively and beautifully in our lives and through the church.
I pray that we may be able to honour the working of God’s Spirit in each others’ lives and continue to encourage one another to be deeply open and responsive to the unique way God is at work in every heart that opens and trusts in the power and light of Love. Bless you.
August 10, 2012 at 7:03 am
Steve
Oh my, I feel like God has spoken.
It seems that as you were writing this I was writing my reply to Jacqueline above. Uncanny!
August 10, 2012 at 3:01 am
jaqueline
Christopher…could ‘put away falsehood’ be interpreted as putting away all the covering up we do; the facades, the deceits, the constraints we put in place to avoid relating to each other honestly?
August 10, 2012 at 6:56 am
Christopher Page
absolutely… I think you have just scooped a big part of my sermon for this coming Sunday!
August 10, 2012 at 2:21 pm
Steve
Earlier in this post I made the statement “The major problem I see with post modernistic views I have heard expressed here and elsewhere is there is no middle ground between the two views, in my estimation and that of many others at least. Both sides are entrenched.” I did not read your sermon close enough. I think you laid out very eloquently the common ground, if there is one. My question is can we (liberals and conservatives) agree on this, what you laid out? This is a serious question I think, it forms a basis for reconciliation. The Cross of Jesus is the summation of just about anything a person needs to know about Christianity. So is what you say above acceptable to a postmodernist?
If the vast majority of the Christian church could rally around this basic theology, then we could stand together against those who call themselves Christian but blatantly live and even worse preach heresy like that nut job Charles Worley of the Providence Road Baptist Church in the video. Not to be contentious but in so doing we can’t have that “who gets to decide what the truth is” mentality or if I am misunderstanding the postmodernist mindset somebody please correct me.
I don’t mean to be taking jabs, I’m just trying to understand.
August 11, 2012 at 1:36 pm
jaqueline
Hi Steve..
these links below give the best understanding of post- modernism there is that makes sense to lay people, not just academics.
This confusion about Post Modernism ties in with my argument that it is a a big mistake to call those born in the very late 50′s and sixties as part of the ‘Boomer’ cultural phenomenon. Yes they are a post war cohort…but our experience is about disillusion, not purpose, anti hero than hero, a lack of, rather than sense of identity, etc. The first cohort, those I call the Woodstock Generation are the last of the modernists… there is still an idealism, and sense of purpose, a sense of ability to change the world… which post modern experience just does not share. So I am not surprised it is not understood..by it’s very nature Post Modernism defies definition.
so..grab your headphones and have a listen:
( some of these have transcripts )
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/counterpoint/has-postmodernism-run-out-of-steam3f/3731512
I include this one as it informs about where our democratic values ( such as the rule of law ) come from:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/saturdayextra/enlightenment/3932542
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/post-modernism-explained/3553034
and this one I haven’t heard yet…but the title is intriguing so I thought I would throw it in:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/uncertainty-and-demonising/3521540
August 12, 2012 at 2:55 pm
jaqueline
http://prolifeliberals.blogspot.com/
Pro Life liberals…who knew?
August 12, 2012 at 7:34 pm
Steve
Restores my faith in humanity. Still working my way through the audio’s.