Sermon
Title: Why can’t we learn to disagree?
Sermon
Date: June 26, 2005
You only have to read the news to
know that Christians everywhere have disagreements. Yesterday’s paper told us about the issues
facing the Presbyterians. The same issue
we are facing, by the way. But consider
being voted out of your church because you did not vote for the pastor’s choice
in the last presidential election.
It happened in Waynesville, North
Carolina when Pastor Chan Chandler of East Waynesville Baptist Church said at a
business meeting that if you planned to vote for John Kerry you should either
repent or leave the church. Some took
him up on it in October by leaving the church.
Others found themselves voted out of the church more recently.
And of course, this was on the
news…major television networks, radio stations, newspapers, internet. It was there.
And since then Pastor Chandler has resigned. Some said it was a misunderstanding. Still it was a disagreement.
Doris
Wilson, one of Chandler's neighbors and a member of First Baptist Church in
Waynesville, said God doesn't play partisan politics. "I hate to see the church suffer like
that," she said. "God doesn't care whether you're a Republican or a
Democrat. It just hurts to see that going on."
We will probably never all agree
….even as Christians. The early church
was a prime example.
It had been about 18 years since
Jesus was crucified, resurrected and ascended into heaven. In less than two decades the early church was
created when the Holy Spirit entered Jesus’ followers on the day of
Pentecost. Ananias and Sapphira were
struck dead for lying about giving to the church. Stephen addressed the synagogue of Freed
Slaves, as it was called, then stoned to death while Saul, a Roman citizen,
watched. Saul went from place to place,
dragging out both men and women and throwing them in jail for their
beliefs. Philip baptized an Ethiopian
eunuch. Saul became the Apostle
Paul. Peter changed his mind about what
food is acceptable and what is not due to a vision from the Holy Spirit. The Gentiles heard the Good News and received
the Holy Spirit. James, brother of
John, was killed and Peter was imprisoned, yet escaped. Paul was sent out on his first missionary
journey and some time later he found himself embroiled in a conflict, not the
first conflict of the early church but a major one --- over the subject of
circumcision.
It
began in the days of Abraham, a sign of the covenant between God and
Abraham. This covenant continues today
each time a Jewish baby boy is circumcised in a service called a “bris.”
I attended such a service when Rabbi
Audrey Pollack’s new son was circumcised several years ago at Temple
Israel. This ritual takes place on the
eighth day of the baby's life. It is usually
done by a Jewish practitioner, known as a “mohel” who specializes in
circumcisions. Gentiles have been
circumcising baby boys for a long time as well, but not for religious reasons.
Today there are major disagreements
whether baby boys, particularly non Jewish ones, should be circumcised. In fact, the number of boys being circumcised
is declining with less than 60% of parents opting for the procedure. But that is today. Paul was dealing with it for reasons other
than hygiene and conformity. Some of the
followers of Jesus were insisting that the Gentile believers would not be saved
unless the men were circumcised. But
Paul stood up for what he believed in and said “NO.” And when they could not come to a decision,
they called a meeting to decide.
Paul and Barnabas were sent to
Jerusalem, along with some other believers, to deal with this conflict. Luke says it was no small debate. This had the potential to be a deal breaker
between the two groups. A church split
was on the horizon.
Paul and Barnabas believed that the
Gentile Christians were not to be held to same rules and regulations as the
Jewish Christians were. They had already
dealt with issues of food, but “it is always something.”
For the Jewish Christians, salvation
was now connected to circumcision because “they had always done it like
that.” So they held a convention to talk
about it. They sent delegates to
Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas came from
Antioch to represent their point of view.
In Jerusalem they were greeted by the
whole church, apostles and elders included.
They read the minutes of the previous meeting, and gave reports from
each of the ministry teams. But then,
under ”New Business” the men who had been Pharisees made the motion that the
Gentile converts must be circumcised and be required to follow the Law of
Moses. After a second, the moderator
called for a discussion. And there was a
long one.
Peter
asked why they were burdening the Gentiles in this way, especially if they all
believed that they were saved by Jesus’ special favor.
Paul
and Barnabas then spoke of the wonderful things God was doing through them
among the Gentiles.
After
they had finished, James, possibly the brother of Jesus and head of the
Jerusalem church, quoted from the prophet Amos that the kingdom of David would
be restored so that humanity – Jew and Gentile – might find the Lord. He urged them to send letters to the Gentile
communities encouraging them to abstain from eating meat sacrificed to idols,
from sexual immorality, from consuming blood or eating the meat of strangled
animals.
Since
it does not say that any vote was taken, we might assume that being good early
Quakers, they agreed by consensus, meaning that no one disagreed with
James. There was agreement.
This
might have been one of the first denomination conventions and averted a split
in Christianity. And here is how they
did it - they called a Jerusalem Council, came together and talked about it
. While it doesn’t mention it, I’m sure
they prayed. I’m sure they invited God
into the midst to help them to hear each other and listen with open
hearts.
I attended a modern day Jerusalem
Council last winter. The ABC minister’s
council held 21 of them attempting to help us listen to each other on another
subject – homosexuality. Even the
pastors disagree on the subject and to date we don’t know if they have worked
or not. It is not easy to disagree when
you feel strongly about a subject. And I
don’t have a quick answer to change that.
Today General Board representatives
are heading to Denver, CO to prepare for the beginning of a meeting that may
change the structure of the ABC. If you
have been reading the newsletters you know that some regions, ours included,
are asking for changes in the bylaws that cannot be voted on at this particular
biennial. The changes are, in some
minds, creedal and we Baptists have long believed that the Bible is
sufficient.
My biggest worry is not that we will
split as a denomination. My biggest
concern is that in our disagreements we will hurt the cause of Christ. Can you imagine what the early Gentile
Christians felt when their leaders were arguing as to how they would show their
faith in Jesus Christ? Can you imagine
how the 100 million unchurched feel when they watch us on television being
mean-spirited? Can you imagine how
confused believers feel when they read the hateful letters to the editor in our
local paper? That is why I wrote the
letter to the editor in April. However
they did not publish all of it. I shared
the letter with the builder’s class and we had a rousing discussion – proving
that we can disagree, even passionately, and still not treat each other badly
in the process. Here is my entire
article:
Why can’t we
learn to disagree?
Let me first admit that I do not speak
for my congregation. I have no idea if
the majority would agree with me.
However disagreeing and staying together is part of who we are.
Our
American Baptist congregation disagrees on many issues – worship styles,
homosexuality, abortion, gun control, gay marriage, or whether Terri Schiavo
should have been kept alive or not, to name a few. Still we worship together. Our common goal of worshiping and serving God
works to keep us centered on what is important.
I am weary of all of those -- politicians
and religious leaders included -- who basically say we are doing it wrong. They have the final word on what it means to
be a Christian. Now we heard from some
well-known religious leaders that essentially to be a Christian means a vote
for certain candidates, or you could be known as being hostile to people of
faith.
So it has come to this. In this land of the free and home of the
brave, we can no longer disagree. To be
considered a Christian we must agree on everything. There is only one way to think, one way to
act, one way to respond as a Christian.
And if I disagree, I must not be a Christian, right? Wrong.
It is our right and privilege to stand up for the things we believe
in. The right to speak out, to protest,
to stand up for what one believes must be protected, even when one disagrees
with our leaders.
It feels like we are
drifting farther from the things that are most important --like fighting
poverty and prejudice, protecting children, helping un- and under-educated
adults to find the tools to be able to support themselves and their
families. And I believe that helping
people find faith in a loving God is very important too.
I wonder why so much
energy is being invested on attacking each other's religious beliefs trying to
define “the final word” when so many people are coping with issues like
poverty, domestic violence, child abuse, or inadequate health care. I wonder why we spend so much time and energy
on preventing gay marriage and so little on the rapidly spreading addictions to
pornography that affect more families, Christian and otherwise, than we can
even imagine. I wonder why we spend so
much time deciding which time zone in which to live and so little on helping
children and teens understand why not being sexually active is actually
beneficial for them, instead how it hurts and demeans them.
I certainly believe that as
Christians there are many common ways we are to live and respond but being
hateful as we disagree is not one of them.
I’m pretty sure that this kind of Christianity isn’t at all what Jesus
had in mind. (for J&C)
I hope you will join me by praying
each day for the general board delegates and our leaders as they gather for yet
another form of the Jerusalem
council. I am confident they will pray,
they will speak, they will share scriptures as we did at the Jerusalem Council
at Franklin College. But I am not
confident that they will leave the room agreeing. In fact I think we can be sure they will
not. But then one of the goals of being
in fellowship together is to allow room to disagree on others and to do it in
ways that help us to live out Jesus’ commandment to love your neighbor as
yourself.
In a June 17 New York Times column,
Episcopal priest and a former Republican senator from Missouri, John C.
Danforth spoke of being a moderate Christian and said, “religion should be
inclusive, and it should seek to bridge the differences that separate
people. We do not exclude from worship
those whose opinions differ from ours.
Following a Lord who sat at the table with tax collectors and sinners,
we welcome to the Lord’s table all who would come. Following a Lord who cited love of God and
love of a neighbor as encompassing all the commandments, we reject a political agenda
that displaces love. Christians who hold
these convictions ought to add their clear voice of moderation to the debate on
religion in politics.” (NY Times, June
17, 2005, “Onward, Moderate Christian Soldiers”)
I wish I could end this message
today with a brief and foolproof method for disagreeing as Christians but I
don’t have one either. I’ll just end
with Jesus’ way of handling it – “do unto others as you would have others do
unto you.” Even in disagreement, treat
others as you would like to be treated.
And remember that God is watching.
Art Linkletter was asked years ago
why children on his show behaved so well.
He said, “don’t you behave better when you are dressed up and people are
watching?”
God is watching us in our
interactions with others. God is
watching as we work together. And God
also loves us regardless of how well we succeed and even fail in being
witnesses of the faith in our own worlds.
Thanks be to God.