September 6, 2020 | Worship

I’m setting out to keep this morning’s message short and concise: I know we have plenty of other things on our minds today, so I’m going to try to honor that reality without preaching a 25 minute sermon.

            How have you been handling discord? I ask this assuming that you, like most Americans, have strong feelings about the political and social climate we’re living in at this moment in time. Strong feelings may not even begin to cover it, no matter which side of the political aisle you are coming from there is one thing that we all have noticed: things are very, very broken. So how are you handling those conflicts as they arise with your friends, family, acquaintances, facebook strangers in a comment thread…?

            I ask this because this morning’s readings deal with conflict, and give us some direction regarding how we should deal with conflict. While #cancelculture is big, there are a lot of temptations to simply shut out the voices we disagree with and cut off those who make us mad. And yes, there are sometimes good reason for creating those boundaries, especially when a person has become belligerent or abusive and one’s health and wellbeing are directly affected by their continued presence. However, the decision to #cancel someone or something should not be something that is taken lightly. But ugh, it’s SO MUCH EASIER just to mute the voices we don’t want to hear, right?

            We come to our Matthew reading this week needing to keep our minds open to the fact that this teaching likely did not come from Jesus’ ministry while he was alive, but it instead is Risen Christ wisdom that grew out of the community which this book of Matthew was written. Confusing? Maybe, but just imagine being in Jesus’ cohort where capital C Church was not yet a thing, and having these instructions given. Just a few chapter ago, Peter was called the Rock, the church had it’s foundation, so how within just a few short pages, is the foundation already cracking? Rather, knowing that the Gospels were written out of oral traditions by communities who were documenting the experience of both the historical Jesus and the resurrected Christ gives us an important reminder that Jesus was not a one-time thing, but is continually working in our lives and providing guidance and insight.

            There are a few approaches to this reading, one that reads it as the discipline section of an employee handbook and another that reads it as reconciliatory in nature. One reading can be hurtful and exclusionary, the other is filled with redemption, love, and inclusion. I think you can probably guess which direction we’re going to take.

            “If a member goes against you…” this is how it starts. Member is sometimes swapped with the word “brother” in other translations, both words are important considerations. Aside from being gender-neutral, member is open to any in a group, however, having the word brother, or “sibling” reminds us how connected we are to one another as children of God, and that connection isn’t just because we have matching bowling shirts or membership cards. The connection is deeper than sending in your annual pledge card or wearing name tags. I can throw my church name tag in the trash if I get mad enough, but I cannot escape the fact that in beloved community such as this you and I are linked together by the fact that our salvation is in Christ. This sets up the way we are to deal with one another when we disagree. It places emphasis on relationship.

            So in relationship, when another member goes against you, it is advised to handle the grievance when it is just the two of you. This is not an easy task. One on ones are notoriously avoided, it’s so much easier to submit anonymous feedback or to talk to everyone else about it, hoping that it’ll get back to the person eventually. We like to shield ourselves from the way the person will take the news, from potential backlash, from the embarrassment of realizing one’s missteps. We also aren’t always up for the discussion that is likely to follow, and the potential for being told how our own actions have been harmful. However, to maintain relationship, a one-on-one is best because it avoids gossip and give the other person an chance to clear up where there may have been a misunderstanding. As explained in the commentary on Saltproject.org, “This approach implicitly says: I respect you enough to give you space to rectify this, without embarrassing you in front of others; and I’m humble enough to realize I may have misunderstood something, or may have something to learn.” When we think about one-on-ones, sometimes I think we are worried we have to be confrontational about it, that there’s a certain “get in their face”-yness about it that we have to have. It is liberating to come at it from the angle of “I just want to understand more clearly” rather than “I’m mad and that’s it and you’re a bad person!” This approach distinctly avoids that kind of confrontation. No one wants to listen to a lecture about their moral failings. People are much more open to a heart-to-heart that listens as much as it explains. This is the first suggestion because, as we read in Matthew, “If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.” It’s the most direct approach to reconciliation.

But if they don’t listen, if the conversation doesn’t open the door to healing and reconciliation, there are other avenues. Remember, we can only control the way we respond, we have no control over how others react. There can be so many factors that lead to why reconciliation is not possible yet with just a one-on-one. There are layers of trauma or hurt to consider, there can be biases that they or we are clinging to that prevent moving forward, there are so many environmental and personal factors that could come into play that there may need to be other angles to approach the issue from. That’s where the next part of this advice comes in. Take a few members with you to act as witnesses. Not like, five people. Not a whole committee. Just one or two people who can either hear both sides without bias or who can act as mediator. A third-party can bring more insight and perspective and help to find common ground. Relationship is still priority.

            This next step is where I worry that a lot of churches can do a lot of damage. It screams public humiliation to then take a grievance to the whole church. I mean, I just picture the stocks and pillory out in the public square. Or every teen movie ever where one character prints a zillion flyers exposing another character and lines the school hallways with them. That’s not what is intended here. Exposing someone’s shortcomings so that everyone can be warned not to trust them or to embarrass them back into submission is not the point of this. Instead, it is to avoid airing grievances with just those who will agree with us. If I take my two BFFs and approach someone, there will still be some bias, it’ll be an echo chamber. However, once an issue is out there for everyone to weigh in on the likelihood of everyone siding only with me goes down, and the ability for someone else to connect with the other person goes up. This kind of conflict resolution has to be done with great care so that it doesn’t ostracize the other, but instead invites in accountability all around. This isn’t just blasting someone on social media. This is about coming together as a collective to find a way forward together.

            So we come to the most fascinating part of this pericope in my opinion, “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.” By tradition, Matthew was a tax collector. As we’ve noted over the last few weeks, Jesus’ ministry had made the dramatic shift from being directed towards Jewish people only to ministering to gentiles, as we saw in the story of the Canaanite women who challenged him to help her daughter. Jesus’ ministry has gentiles and tax collectors seated at the table with him. When we read this without considering that shift, it is easy to read some #cancelculture into it. Even if they don’t listen, there still has to be room for reconciliation. There can be boundaries made, especially if someone is relentlessly destructive, however there should always be a path back into the fold. The message should be to step away from this community until this destructive behavior has stopped. But we also know that forgiveness is an important part of what we are asked to do as a community of Christ followers. Spoiler alert: forgiveness will come up again in next week’s reading.

            When we come up against these times where someone’s behavior seems to grind against the Church, it is an important time to reflect on why exactly that behavior made us so gosh darned mad. This is an opportunity to examine whether we are living out God’s love to the fullest extent possible. This is an opportunity for the binding and loosing. God’s love is a living thing, the scriptures are not just dried ink on paper, but give us guidance to face complex issues that come up in our time, and the provision for binding and loosing allows us to continually keep love at the center of our ministry. It allows us to look at a modern problem though a modern lens instead of holding the Holy Spirit hostage in the first century. Binding and Loosing is what helps us to choose a path that is love-affirming even if we have scriptural backing to commit atrocities. Binding and loosing is what overcame the assertion that slaves should obey their masters in Ephesians, because you cannot love fully while holding that others have less humanity than you. It is what allows me, a woman, to stand at the pulpit. Binding and loosing doesn’t dilute the bible, it instead discerns the movement of the Spirit in each new age, abandoning the things that have become harmful and deadly as time marches on. Binding and loosing cannot be done by just one person alone, it must be done in community so as to not be arbitrary or more hurtful.

            In the UCC, we take covenant seriously, and part of covenantal living is honoring relationship, emphasis on reconciliation, and above all else leaving a door open rather than excommunicating or #cancelling. This work is done in community. And if, as a community, we ever wonder which direction to take, we can turn to today’s reading from Paul’s Letter to the Romans, which clearly spells out our most important consideration in handling conflict: “Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law.” So how do we deal with discord and conflict? Is it a loving approach? Does it leave room for reconciliation? Is it humble enough to know when it’s our problem? If so, then we’re the right path. May God bless our understanding of these sacred guidelines for maintaining relationships.