Proper 18
Sunday, September 6, 2009
St. David’s Episcopal Church, DeWitt NY
The Rev. James C. Bresnahan, Interim Rector
“Disagreements”
Mark 7:24-37
From there he set out and went away to the region of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know he was there. Yet he could not escape notice, but a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately heard about him, and she came and bowed down at his feet. Now the woman was a Gentile, of Syrophoenician origin. She begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter. He said to her, "Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children's food and throw it to the dogs."
But she answered him, "Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." Then he said to her, "For saying that, you may go--the demon has left your daughter."
So she went home, found the child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.
Then he returned from the region of Tyre, and went by way of Sidon towards the Sea of Galilee, in the region of the Decapolis. They brought to him a deaf man who had an impediment in his speech; and they begged him to lay his hand on him. He took him aside in private, away from the crowd, and put his fingers into his ears, and he spat and touched his tongue. Then looking up to heaven, he sighed and said to him, "Ephphatha," that is, "Be opened." And immediately his ears were opened, his tongue was released, and he spoke plainly. Then Jesus ordered them to tell no one; but the more he ordered them, the more zealously they proclaimed it. They were astounded beyond measure, saying, "He has done everything well; he even makes the deaf to hear and the mute to speak.
As you well know, the Episcopal Church has been embroiled in controversy over issues of sexuality.
We should not be surprised that Christians differ over matters of ethics and of faith. Differences have existed from the beginning. Today’s Gospel text, as we shall see later, reflects one early division.
When Constantine co-opted Christianity and made it the religion of the Roman empire, there were divisions over whether Christians could serve as soldiers and kill. Some argued Yes; others, No.
In the fourth century theological debates erupted: Were sacraments performed by morally unworthy priests still valid? Was Jesus the first of God’s creations or himself eternal?
Later came disputes over papal authority and over the filioque clause in the Creed. A major split took place between what is now the Western church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. This split has lasted a thousand years and has not yet been healed.
In the 16th century the church was divided over reform. Reformers were excommunicated. Most of northern Europe went one way against papal authority, while southern Europe remained loyal to the pope. Those divisions remain still and have spread worldwide.
In Germany and Switzerland some radical Christians took to smashing statues of the saints and destroying stained glass and other visual representations of the faith. In their mind, such art smacked of Roman Catholicism. The legacy of this controversy can be seen in how most mainline churches embrace art and symbolism, while in most Baptist churches, sanctuaries are bare.
More recent divisions have centered on issues of equality and human dignity – like slavery and after that civil rights, and then whether women may be ordained as clergy. When I was in seminary, women were barred from serving as ordained ministers. Many argued that women were not stable enough emotionally to do the work of a pastor. Others said, The Bible forbids it. Eventually, support for women as pastors won out. Now, a good percentage of pastors and priests are women.
The newest divisions, as you are aware, have to do with issues of homosexuality. Opinions are strong in this regard, and divisions are deep and deeply emotional. Again some argue on the basis of what the Bible says, while others argue that the Bible is not meant to be a rulebook. Some say homosexuality a choice. Others say it’s genetic.
Some Christians can have calm conversations with those who espouse a different point of view. Some don’t choose to.
Now I have always thought of church as family – the family of God in Jesus Christ, into which we are brought in Holy Baptism and made to be spiritual sisters and brothers. And when you are family, you don’t walk away because you differ with another family member. Nor do you demonize those with whom you do not agree.
My brother-in-law, until the day he died, was a racist, avowedly so. He spouted the vilest things about non-whites. Though I ribbed him and argued with him, neither of us let our views come between us.
That’s my understanding of family – we work at talking to each other and listening to each other. At the same time, we don’t bury our own convictions or live untrue to our own values. We stand for what we believe while giving space for others to stand for what they believe.
All that brings me full circle to our Gospel reading and the first controversy that Christians dealt with when the church was a community of Jews who believed in Jesus. The controversy had to do with including Gentiles in this new religious movement born of Jesus. Some said, We can and need to be a mixed Christian community of Jews and Gentiles. Let’s find ways and accommodations to be together. Others said, No! Let Gentiles first become Jews through circumcision; let them abide by our laws and rules. Then we can eat at the same table.
St. Paul espoused the more open view; Jesus’ brother, James, a restrictive view. Peter, Paul claimed, went back and forth. When Paul founded Christian communities in an open way, other Christians followed him to counter his message and undo his work by attacking him within his congregations. The division was deep.
This earliest of controversies lies beneath today’s Gospel text within the story of the syrophoenician Gentile woman who comes to Jesus begging for help from this Jewish healer. In the story, she is rebuffed by Jesus, “It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs,” he says to her.
Dogs! Why call Gentiles dogs, this woman a dog? It had nothing to do with character. It was all about food at the table. Gentiles are like dogs because they eat anything and everything. But Jews, following the commandments, eat kosher only, not pork or blood or anything else unclean. Gentiles don’t eat at their table.
In its present form the story so far is testimony to how early on many Christians were closed to including Gentiles within the Christian movement without their first becoming religious Jews. The dismissive words on Jesus’ lips represent their position that Jesus came for Jews only.
But this is not the end of the story. As the story continues, the other side in the debate surfaces. The Gentile woman persists. Despite what Jesus has said in rebuff, she will not give up wanting what she wants and needs from Jesus. She comes back at him. Yes, we Gentiles don’t eat at your table or adhere to your table prohibitions, yet even dogs get to eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table. A crumb, I’m asking for a crumb. Amazed by her tenacious faith, Jesus reverses himself and does what she wants. Here, then, is the other side in the debate – Gentiles are blessed by Jesus without their first becoming Jews.
Eventually, one side in that debate won out. Which is why you and I are part of the church and eat what we want to, despite what the commandments of God to Israel say.
Now this story speaks to me powerfully, by how it holds two things in balance.
First, it affirms the importance of persistence. If you believe in something, want something, stand for it. Be a passionate advocate for what you believe in. And don’t pull back when you are rebuffed or in the minority or because no one seems to be listening. Yell at God if you need to, cry, scream; stand for what you think is right, good, or necessary, like this syrophoenician woman
Balancing that is this. If Jesus changed his mind, we need to be open to changing ours. Despite all our sure convictions, our certainty and adamant claims, we may need to have our mind changed by careful listening.
As we look toward a new Rector for St. David’s and thinking about the kind of parish we want and need to be, some will be saying this, and some that. And that’s all to the good – these differences – so long as we as family have both the conviction to speak and the humility to listen.
One of my goals this month and in the next few months is to gather people together for conversation about our future, the leadership we want, the vision we individually have. You will be getting an invitation to one such gathering. I’ll be asking that at every gathering one or more people from the Search Committee be present for them to listen carefully for them to be guided by your wisdom. So, please come when you are invited – to speak, to listen, to learn as family, so that when a new rector is called, it will be a wise and discerning choice. Amen.