Jesus never intended to establish a church, despite the reading on August 27th about Peter being the Rock, the foundation, of that church. The Jesus movement was a thoroughly Jewish reform movement! And so it is highly unlikely that these words read today go back to Jesus. But that being said, as always, the Spirit of the Lord is not missing here.
Conflict. Conflict in an ancient middle east tribal culture was dangerous. Easily, a disagreement could escalate into violence, which would often lead to a generations-long clan feud. The Hebrew scriptures which mandate an “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” (Exodus 21:23-26) sounds barbaric to our ears, but was actually quite progressive. It established the principle of proportionality.
The conflict resolution scheme in today’s gospel sought to set out a process to minimize conflict within the church. This is for us insiders.
When Matthew says “If a brother sins against you,” he’s speaking of an interpersonal offense of one member against another. When that happens you should, as the aggrieved member, go to the other person in private. Why? Because the goal here is, in this oriental culture, to avoid losing face.
If that strategy fails, you are to go to your brother or sister member with 2-3 negotiators in a semi-private conversation.
Hebrew Law clearly mandates that it takes the testimony of at least 2 witnesses for their testimony to have standing. Further, the penalty for bearing false witness – the 9th of the 10 Commandments – was severe. Verse 19, “If two of you agree about anything”, the Greek word literally means “litigation”. So this is serious stuff, for what they decide is legally binding.
But if that fails, let it be taken before the whole church community. We’ve obviously moved from a private conversation, to a semi private one, to now a very public one. Verse 18 reads “whatever you” – and here the word you is plural – “whatever [y’all] bind or loose, God ratifies.
In the text on August 27th, the power to loose or bind was given to Peter and in that context it meant to Discontinue or Retain Jewish cultic practices: circumcision, Keeping the Sabbath, eating Kosher, etc., in Matthew’s Jewish Christian community in Damascus.
In this story, Loose or Bind means to settle a conflict between two members by absolution (Loosening) or condemnation (binding). In the worst case scenario, the unrepentant members are to be excommunicated.
Today, to us, reared in a very individualistic culture, we can barely comprehend the seriousness of such an adjudication. Let that person be to the community like a tax collector or a Gentile. That is, to be an outsider – which is more evidence that this passage likely does not go back to Jesus, who treated tax collectors and Gentiles with compassion, right?
But to be an outcast in a group oriented culture was like a death. It meant loss of a network and loss of community support. It meant being accounted among the enemy. This is grave business indeed.
The passage ends with the assurance that when in this process, when 2 are together privately or 2-3 more semi-privately, or the whole assembly is together, Jesus’s Spirit is there, and God will ratify the resolution of the conflict. No appeal.
How many of you don’t mind confrontation, raise your hands… Most of us try to avoid confrontation as much as possible. The word itself means “with face.” I well recall my son’s Godmother, who was a school psychologist, saying to me that it was important to literally get down on my son’s level, to look him in the eyes, when administering punishment. To get in someone’s face is an intimate but also a deeply vulnerable act.
Over the years, as a Pastor, I have occasionally dreaded conversations I would just as soon avoid. Times when things that needed saying or things frankly, I might not want to hear, hung heavy. But in those fraught moments, this last verse always bubbled up – Jesus is here, here to enable these difficult conversations, to enable reconciliation if not agreement.
A story from my ministry scrapbook. At a Vestry meeting back in 1998, our senior warden at the time challenged us to do something – I wish I could remember what. Sarah, God rest her soul, was a deeply religious person; working part time and living simply in order to be free to serve as a volunteer chaplain at the hospital.
In response to Sarah’s bold challenge, Susan, the Vestry member who was elected to preserve the prerogatives of the choir, said “Well, that’s easy for you to say Mother Superior!” Nervous twittering… But something unanticipated: Sarah said “Susan, why did you say that to me?” Her response: “Oh, I was just kidding…” “No, you weren’t & that really hurt my feelings & I want to know why you said that to me!” Even angels on the head of a pin stopped dancing and were still.
In the end, Sarah said “We don’t need to resolve this tonight, but we do need to because I can’t sit at this Vestry table with you with this between us.” Susan was absent at the next Vestry meeting. The Vestry sent a letter since phone calls weren’t being returned, asking Susan to come to the next Vestry meeting. A public offense needed to be resolved publicly. Susan would come late on Sundays, ascend to the choir loft and then depart before the last organ note sounded. In the end, Susan sold her home and moved to San Diego. To this day, I cling to the legacy of Sarah’s spiritual maturity and courage.
The Rev. Denis Brunelle arrived at St. Luke’s Long Beach in the mid 1990’s. He found a parish tradition of hosting the works of local artists along the aisles of the sanctuary. One of these “shows” was strongly anti-war and a few members found the images disturbing. They complained publicly including to the local press. A difference of opinion within the church had become a scandal in the larger community. Denis, who had been a Roman priest, was not a novice in dealing with conflict. He tried persuasion but to no avail. Later, he revoked the licenses of those who were eucharistic ministers, saying “Your ministry is an extension of my own and we are not at peace with one another at this time. Please refrain from stirring up conflict in the congregation and community.” That disciplining was but tossing gasoline on a grass fire.
Finally, Denis excommunicated these people and our bishop supported this severe action, hoping this would lead to repentance and amendment of life. Not so much. What happened?
The excommunicates threatened to sue the Rector for slander and defamation of character because the prayer book states that persons could be excommunicated who exhibit a “notoriously evil” life. Denis hung in there and over time, the malcontents left. Exhausted and stressed, Denis resigned but left behind a healthier parish for his successor.
In both these stories, the goal of restoration and reconciliation was not met but, in both instances, the effort was righteous.
Where was God in all of this? I remember (because I’m an old man), the deep conflict over women’s ordination back in the 1970’s. The moderates suggested tabling the whole issue indefinitely because, they said, God’s voice could not be heard over all the shouting. A group of faculty from Nashotah House Seminary held a meeting at my parish in Milwaukee and then they issued a paper declaring that they saw no theological impediment to the ordination of women. They further declared that in the midst of conflict and strife is precisely when the Holy Spirit speaks. Read your Bibles…
How has St. Matthias handled conflict in the past? More importantly, what is your plan for handling it in the future?
How can I be so confident that there will be strife and conflict? Simple. Look around. You’re human.
Amen.
