September 7—Discipline and the Disciple

"If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again, truly I tell you, if two of you agree on earth about anything you ask, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.” –Matthew 13:15-20

When I was in college, several friends of mine went to a large and very popular church near campus. I remember hearing a story once about how their church had used this passage to handle an incidence of adultery within the congregation. The church leaders attempted to talk with the man in private, and when he refused to give up his affair, they brought him before the entire church one Sunday and publicly cast him out of the congregation. There’s no doubt that they took this passage seriously.

I remember feeling rather ambivalent about the whole thing at the time. Certainly I’ve never been okay with adultery, and kicking people out of the community for sin is found in scripture—in addition to this passage, there is the common refrain found in Deuteronomy, “ So you shall purge the evil from your midst” (Deut. 13:5, 17:7, 19:19, etc.), and Paul’s rhetoric on the contaminating effects of sin in 1 Corinthians 5. At the same time there seemed something rather harsh to me in simply throwing the man out of the church. Granted, I didn’t know this situation from the inside, and perhaps pastorally, such strong consequences were necessary for the person to acknowledge his own behavior. But I wondered how likely it was that this man would ever begin to address the broken relationship and hurt that his actions had caused if he were summarily cut off from his faith community. If the lines of dialogue were closed, how would the offender ever grow? How would the offended ever heal?

When I looked again at today’s lectionary passage in Matthew, a passage upon which many such protocols are based, I realized that Jesus’ rules for church discipline aren’t about punishment or rejection. Nor are they meant to preserve unity in the church at the cost of disagreement or diversity. Rather, they are all about relationships within the community. Notice how, in verse 15, the question is posed as “If another member of the church sins against you…” (italics mine). Now, those two little words set the tone for the entire passage. If they are not there, then the passage can be taken to address generic activities that contradict the church’s moral or ethical code. In some ancient sources, these words are indeed missing from the passage, suggesting such a general interpretation.

But if the two words are part of verse 15, as other ancient sources attest, then the entire passage becomes all about holding my Christian sibling accountable when her actions have broken our relationship. For in this the Apostle Paul is right—“a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough” (1 Cor. 5:6), and the bitterness and anger that results from an open wound between two people eventually poisons the whole community. So in this interpretation, Jesus’ plan sets up a way for the community to address broken relationships so that justice and reconciliation can take place. For when the community comes alongside one who has been wronged, confronts the breach, and calls for justice, it is not about enforcing uniformity of doctrine or belief. It is about being a disciple of Jesus—for just as Jesus came to heal humanity’s relationship with the Creator, members of his church are called to heal relationships with one another. And that healing cannot take place if we don’t address our brokenness with honesty and authenticity.

Yet what if someone refuses to acknowledge his wrong and try to mend fences? Is that the point at which we cast him out? In the past, when I’ve read the words, “let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” (v. 17), I assumed that this was meant as a rejection of the offender. But as New Testament professor Mark Allan Powell points out in his commentary on Matthew, Jesus is saying quite the opposite—Gentiles and tax collectors were the outsiders of the Jewish community, to be sure, but they were also some of the people Jesus most persistently reached out to during his ministry. Treating someone as a Gentile and tax collector is not a call to cut off the wrong-doer, but a call to deeper and more persistent engagement with that person. For ultimately, the goal is unity—a reconciling unity, in which Christ himself is present among us (v. 20). And that requires not uniformity of opinion, but uniformity of loving, grace-filled care toward one another.

Our business as a church, then, is not about casting out and cutting off. But at the same time, it isn’t about discreetly overlooking the broken relationships within our community—from the petty fights and painful betrayals buzzing within local congregations to our failure as a Christian faith community to love and serve all humanity. Reconciliation cannot happen without justice, just as justice is empty without healing and reconciliation. And in Jesus’ discipline for the church, he gives us a practical, everyday starting point for practicing both.

Kelsey

PS-- The image above is of the Zaccheus story, one of the most famous stories of Jesus reaching out to a tax collector to bring him to discipleship.

August 31—Turning Toward the Burning Bush

Passages: Exodus 3:1-15; Psalm 105:1-6, 23-26, 45c; Romans 12:9-21; Matthew 16:21-28

Have you ever planned and eagerly anticipated a vacation or a visit from friends, only to be disappointed by the results? Perhaps you’re more pragmatic than I am, and have never felt that way, but I have certainly experienced this sensation many times. I set up all sorts of expectations for what something will be like, and then the experience of it loses all joy when it differs from those expectations. In contrast, some of the times I have most enjoyed in my life were the moments I never expected anything from—a simple bike ride down the Minuteman Trail, Swedish meatballs at Ikea, talking with my grandfather at the kitchen table. The moments in which I loosen the controlling stranglehold I attempt to keep on my life, perhaps, provide just enough room for the Divine Mystery to enter in.

This phenomenon seems to also hold true even in some of the major courses my life has taken. The internship that eventually set me down this crazy divinity school path? Started as a mock job interview project for a college class. My first encounter with the person who would become my life partner? A rather unremarkable introduction at the Kentucky State Fair. I expend considerable energy attempting to chart my life course, but in retrospect, the significant moments often come when I’m not looking for them at all.

If we consider Moses’ story a prototype for God’s call, then perhaps God is usually found where we least expect it. In our lectionary passage today, Moses is really minding his own business when God encounters him. You could say that Moses has already tried to make his stand for justice and failed—in Exodus 2:11-15, we are told that Moses kills an Egyptian who was beating one of his fellow Hebrews. The result? Moses’ authority as a leader of the Hebrews is explicitly rejected in 2:14, and he has to skip town.

So when God encounters Moses, he has prudently chosen to lie low in the wilderness more or less indefinitely. Alienated from both his Hebrew tribe and his adopted Egyptian family, stripped, like the Joseph of a few weeks ago, of the power and privilege of his royal upbringing, Moses is truly “an alien residing in a foreign land” (2:22) at the beginning of chapter 3. The opening verse tells us that Moses “led his flock beyond the wilderness” (v. 1), suggesting that metaphorically, if not literally, Moses is lost and adrift at this stage in his life.

That’s when Moses comes upon God—or more accurately, God reveals God’s self to Moses. Upon seeing a bush that is burning but not consumed, Moses remarks that he must turn aside to see the strange sight. Now, I still don’t think Moses quite gets the significance of what he is seeing here. His tone is one of awed curiosity, like the tone you get when you go to Yellowstone National Park and see your first wildlife up close: “Would you look at that, kids?! That’s a real, live buffalo crossing the road!”

But then God speaks from the bush, and Moses finally gets it. Like Joseph before, like Samuel and Isaiah afterward, Moses responds to God’s call with the words, “Here I am.” Before he even knows what might be asked of him, Moses has already presented himself before God for the task ahead. It is paradigmatic of the life of faith, really. If you’re in a tradition that practices infant baptism, then other people signed you up for Christian faith. But even if you came to faith later in your life, of your own accord, you probably had no real notion of what the Christian life would entail. You responded to God’s call with your own “here I am,” just as clueless as Moses to what God might actually tell you to do. God surprised us, and continues to surprise us, just as that burning bush came unexpectedly upon Moses in the wilderness.

If you’re like me, you’ve probably wished for God to give you a burning bush experience that will tell you what to do. We all want to stop stumbling our way along, being confronted with ambiguous forks in the road where we’re not sure what to do next. And yes, it is true in this passage that God tells Moses exactly what the Holy One is going to do and how God expects Moses to be a primary player in it. So are we doing something wrong if our call isn’t always that clear cut?

I don’t think so. Think of it this way—how many times would Moses have led his flocks through that same wilderness, far from home? Perhaps he had wandered past Horeb before, wondering whether the God of his ancestors was merely a myth, asking why this fabled God did not do something to end the Israelite oppression. Yet as passage clearly points out later in verses 13-15, our attempts to control the wild, mysterious divine presence are futile. Just as God will not be named, will not be put into our boxes and conformed to our labels, God will not spit out answers to the challenges of life like a magic eight ball.

Rather, like Moses, we can only be open to the unexpected and receptive to the call as it comes. Because we don’t know when we will catch sight of that burning bush out of the corner of our eye.

August 24-- Greater Than the Chaos