In Everything, Give Thanks - Thanksgiving, 2022

 One of the traditions many church people practice around Thanksgiving is, in the words of an old hymn, to “count your blessings, name them one by one.” We name the things for which we are thankful. As a pastor, I was often a part of this reciting of blessings for which we were thankful. My experience of this tradition is the blessings we commonly named fell into one of three categories: our family, our health, our country and the material blessings we enjoy by living here. In all the years of listening to this reciting of blessings, I have no memory of anyone being thankful for how God had worked in their lives the past year or how their lives were different because of that work. In other words, the identified blessings were always material blessings, never spiritual ones.

(This focus on the material says something about us as the followers of Jesus. It stands in marked contrast to what Jesus taught. But that’s the subject of another blog.)

This focus on material blessings raises a question in my mind: what do we do when we no longer have these blessings? What happens when we lose loved ones – a spouse or parent or child or cousin or friend? What happens when we reach the stage of life when health is always a challenge and we are constantly dealing with one issue or another? What happens when our financial resources become limited?

The words of the apostle Paul in 1 Thessalonians come to mind: “in everything, give thanks” (1 Thessalonians 5:18). You will notice that Paul did not command us to give thanks for everything, but in everything. The difference between for and in is significant. Life presents us with any situations we do not welcome – times of challenge, difficulty, heartache, loss, pain, etc. Paul does not ask us to give thanks for these kinds of situations. Rather, he calls us to give thanks in those situations.

The challenge, difficulty, and pain of our situation can blind us to anything but our situation. We become preoccupied with it to the point that it consumes our focus, our attention, our thoughts, our energies. Giving thanks in such situations lifts our attention from the situation back to God. Giving thanks in such situations helps us refocus. It creates within our spirit an openness to God and to God’s work in the situation.

This exhortation about giving thanks is actually one part of a trilogy of exhortations Paul wove together: “Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, in everything give thanks; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you” (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18). Rejoice, pray, give thanks. Each command carries an adjective that communicates continuously - always, without ceasing, in everything. The three are interrelated and intertwined. You can’t have one without the other two. One will always lead to the other two.

In these three commands, Paul in not describing behaviors we are to constantly repeat. Rather, he is describing an inner disposition – an inner attitude and spirit – out of which we as the people of God and the followers of Jesus are to live. We are to live out of a spirit of joy and gratitude that flows out of an openness to God.

To give thanks is to respond with gratitude to God’s grace and goodness. Gratitude flows out of our experience of God’s grace and goodness. We first respond to such grace with thanksgiving to God. But our response does not stop with thanksgiving. The gift we receive flows through us in generosity to others. Gratitude produces generosity. Gift produces giving. The grace of God we receive produces a spirit of generosity expressed in giving to others. As the followers of Jesus, we live with thanksgiving that goes beyond “when life is good.” In everything, give thanks.

The experience of grace that produces a spirit of thanksgiving within us creates an openness to God. Paul’s exhortation to pray without ceasing points to an attitude rather than to an action. We live each day, sharing life with God and attentive to God. We live expecting God to be at work in ways we cannot see and to bless us in whatever comes our way. We live in eager anticipation, open and receptive to receive. As the psalmist said, “Surely goodness and mercy will follow me all the days of my life” (Psalm 23:6a). “In all things God works for the good of those who love him” (Romans 8:28). As the followers of Jesus, we live with an openness to God and an expectancy of God’s blessing. An openness to God is a natural companion to a spirit of thanksgiving.

As a result, we rejoice always. In Philippians 4:4, Paul said “Rejoice in the Lord always.” We rejoice in who God is and in God’s redeeming work. As the followers of Jesus, we live with a spirit of joy because of the steadfast, faithful love of God, because we know God is at work to transform every experience into something good in our lives, because we know God’s love never fails, because God always has the last word. As the followers of Jesus, we live with joy.

“For this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you” (1 Thessalonians 5:18b). Living out of an inner disposition of thanksgiving and joy, coupled with an openness to God’s goodness and grace, is how God wants us to live.

Without this threefold inner disposition, our lives are shaped by the challenges and struggles we encounter. Instead of being thankful for God’s goodness and grace, we become preoccupied with what we think we need and with what we don’t have. We want more – more than what we have. This desire for more (what the Bible calls greed) can never be satisfied. Consequently, we turn to God out of our desire for more, not out of our desire for God. We tell God what to do and what to give us rather than trusting God’s wisdom in giving. We live out of an inner spirit of anxiety and fear, laced with frustration and anger, which is constantly striving after something more.  

Living with a spirit of gratitude and joy, consciously open to God and God’s work, keeps us from focusing on and becoming preoccupied with life’s challenges. It prevents us from being consumed by or defeated by what happens to us. As the followers of Jesus, the inner disposition of our lives is shaped by the faithful love of God, not by the challenges and struggles we encounter.

“Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, in everything give thanks; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you” (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18). 

One of These Days - Christ the King Sunday, 2022

One of these days … It is something most of us have said at one time or another. It is also something the ancient Hebrew prophets would say. Isaiah said “In the days to come” (Isaiah 2:2). Jeremiah said “The days are surely coming” (Jeremiah 31:27, 31, 38). Their words look beyond what is to what will be. They point beyond the present situation to the future that God is creating - with our help, of course. One of these days.

Isaiah and Jeremiah both said “one of these days” during a time of national crisis. Isaiah spoke during the uncertainty following the death of King Uzziah. His long, fifty-two year reign had been filled with prosperity and international peace. As his untested son inherited the throne, the nation of Assyria invaded and destroyed Judah’s northern neighbor Israel and, then, marched against Judah. Judah survived, but barely. She paid an exorbitant tribute annually to Assyria to avoid the same fate as Israel. Jeremiah’s “one of these days” was spoken as the armies of Babylon overwhelmed Jerusalem, bringing about her downfall and the destruction of the Temple. In the midst of chaos and challenge, destruction and pain, both prophets looked beyond what was to what would be.

The prophets’ confidence in what would be was rooted in their deep trust in the steadfast, faithful love of the LORD. They believed the LORD’s love never wavered. They believed the LORD would never give up on them or abandon them. They believed the current crisis was not greater than the LORD’s faithful love. They believed LORD would continue to work in the midst of what was to bring about what would be.

Isaiah spoke of a time when the nations would move beyond their reliance upon war. “Nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more” (Isaiah 2:4b). No more war colleges or military academies! Instead, the nations would learn to negotiate, looking to the LORD to arbitrate between them. Their energies and resources would be invested in producing goods to feed the world rather than in manufacturing implements of war (Isaiah 2:4a). One of these days we’ll learn to do things differently, Isaiah said.

Jeremiah also spoke of doing things differently. He spoke of a new way of relating to the LORD – a new covenant – that would produce different results (Jeremiah 31:31-32). God’s grace and forgiveness would replace the focus on obedience to the law, i.e., behavior (Jeremiah 31:34b). That grace and forgiveness would free us to know and relate to the LORD personally (Jeremiah 31:34). That grace and forgiveness would produce a transformation of our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). One of these days we’ll learn to do things differently, Jeremiah said.

The prophets’ words were words of hope. By looking beyond what was and pointing to what would be, these prophets encouraged the people to endure – to keep on keeping on – knowing the chaos and challenge, the pain and suffering were but for a season. Then … after this season has passed.  It’s not always going to be like this. One of these days.

But hope is about more than endurance. Hope that sees what can be, what will be motivates us to work to bring about what will be, even in the midst of the chaos and challenge, the pain and suffering of what is. Hope calls us to be God’s partner in creating the time when we will do things differently.

Hope is the forward look of faith. Hope looks beyond what is to what will be because of the steadfast, faithful love of God. One of these days. We can say it because of our faith in God, because we trust God’s steadfast, faithful love.

This Sunday is Christ the King Sunday – or, if you prefer, the Reign of Christ Sunday. It is the last Sunday of the liturgical year. It invites us to look beyond what is to what will be. It reminds us of hope - the forward look of faith - the quiet assurance of what will be but is not yet. It calls us to give ourselves anew to being God’s partner in bringing into reality what will be when we finally do things differently. After all, doing things differently has to begin sometime, somewhere. Why not with us?

Christ the King Sunday reminds us that one of these days ….

Rebuilding

Moving beyond loss involves rebuilding — rebuilding our lives without that one who is missing. What is involved in this rebuilding? What does it look like?

While it looks different for each one, rebuilding involves the same challenges (translation: opportunities) for all of us.

The biggest challenge is establishing a new identity. Who am I apart from this one who is no longer a part of my life? This opportunity allows me to redefine myself, claiming an identity not based up or built around the other person. It allows me to explore who God created me to be and who God is calling me to be as I move forward. It allows me to identify and live out of my unique gifts and passions. It offers me the opportunity to express those gifts, lived out in my area of passion, in new and different ways.

Whenever I refer to myself — label myself — as widow or widower or divorced, the one who is gone or the role I played with them continues to be a part of my identity. How can we allow someone to be a part of our past without them defining our future? How can I be more than the role I had in that one relationship? Discovering our identity apart from them does not discount them or dishonor them. Rather, it honors who God created us to be. In the splintering of The UMC, those who have been labeled as progressives can no longer define themselves in comparison to those who have been labeled as conservatives. (“I’m not like that” is a fundamental way we humans define ourselves.) A stronger, deeper-rooted identity is needed. The splintering offers us the opportunity to reestablish and reclaim that deeper identity.

Rebuilding involves redefining who we are. This redefining (or clarifying) who we are allows us to live out of who we are rather than in reaction to or adaptation to another.

Another opportunity rebuilding offers is that of clarifying and reaffirming our purpose. Redefining who we are is asking “Who am I?” Clarifying our purpose is asking “Why am I here?” When our identity is tied up in a relationship or in a role we played, our sense of purpose is gone whenever we lose that relationship or role. Rebuilding presents us the opportunity to rediscover — or perhaps discover for the first time — the core purpose of our lives. It is that purpose that guides us and gives meaning to our lives going forward.  

The splintering of The UMC offers us the opportunity to refocus on our purpose and recommit to living out of that purpose. The controversy and conflict over LGBTQ+ issues, with its focus on the opposing side, has distracted us from that purpose. Rebuilding offers us the opportunity to evaluate and restructure our lives around that purpose rather than simply doing what we have always done in the way we have always done it.

Redefining our identity and clarifying our purpose requires us to get clear about the foundational truths upon which we build our lives — the third challenge and opportunity. These truths shape our identity and clarify our purpose.

Rebuilding means reengaging life. It is continuing to live fully and deeply — without the one who is gone, with a redefined identity, with a renewed sense of purpose, with a renewed clarity about the foundational truths upon which we build our lives.

Such reengaging can be challenging, even intimidating. It requires us to learn, to adjust, to develop new skills, to develop a new sense of independence. It requires us to grow beyond who we were. If we shrink back from the work of rebuilding and reengaging, we will remain stuck, our lives defined by the past and the one who is gone.

Rebuilding and reengaging offer us the opportunity to live out our faith. We do the work in dependence upon God for wisdom, guidance, and strength. We undertake the journey trusting God’s steadfast, faithful love. We shift our focus from the past that was to the future that God has for us — a future we help create by rebuilding and reengaging.

Lamenting ... and Moving On

In dealing with any loss, there comes a time to move on. To move on is to quit focusing on the loss, allowing it to dominate our focus and control how we live. To move is to begin the process of rebuilding. To move is to learn to live without that which we loss.

Before we can move on, however, we must grieve what we loss. We must face it, name it, own the pain of it, grieve it. Only then can we truly move on. If we attempt to move on without doing the hard work of grieving, we will carry the grief and loss with us in unconscious ways. Any loss that is not consciously grieved — that is, is left unaddressed and unresolved — will get dumped onto others in the form of anger, criticism, judgment, and conflict. Unresolved grief will sabotage our relationships as we move into the future.

 The polarization in our nation and the splintering of The UMC suggest unrecognized and, consequently, unaddressed and unresolved pain in our inner lives. This unnamed, unaddressed, and unresolved pain is being dumped onto others in the form of criticism, blame, judgement, and condemnation. Those we target with our judgment are the scapegoats we use to carry our unaddressed and unresolved internal pain.

 The lament psalms give us a model for dealing with the pain of our grief. They teach us to pray our pain, expressing our anger to God (as opposed to dumping it onto others). Sixty of the one-hundred-fifty psalms are lament psalms — that’s forty percent of them! These psalms invite us to bring our anger to God in prayer. “How long, O LORD?” (Psalm 13:1). “Why!?” (Psalm 22:1). The lament psalms invite us to lay our pain, our grief, our anger, our struggle before God. In doing so, we open this inner pain to God. We put ourselves in a position for God to work on it.

 Each of the lament psalms follows a pattern: complaint (Psalm 13:1-2), petition (Psalm 13:3-4), trust (Psalm 13:5-6). The psalm begins with an expression of the psalmist’s pain in the form of a complaint. After voicing the complaint, the psalmist asks God to respond, addressing his need. That petition gives way to faith as the psalmist expresses her hope in God and God’s steadfast, faithful love.

 Consciously addressing our grief, facing and feeling its pain, opens the door to healing. Praying it allows God to be a part of that healing. That healing work is what allows us to let go of the pain of what and who we loss. It frees us from our constant focus on the loss. It allows us to begin to rebuild, moving into a new reality apart from what or who we loss. It allows us to move on.

 Grief is never really over. It has a way of resurfacing, even when we have consciously addressed it and resolved it. Such resurfacing is normal as what or who we loss is never really gone from our lives. The one we loss and what we loss lives on in our memories. The loss is a part of our history. The resurfacing of grief is an indicator of the significance of what or who we loss. It is an invitation to remember and be thankful.

 The writer of Ecclesiastes says there is a time to weep and a time to mourn (Ecclesiastes 3:4). There is also a time to move on, to begin to rebuild, to face and embrace the future, trusting God’s steadfast, faithful love.

 Recently, I participated in a service of lament for clergy who have been hurt in the disaffiliation process. (Many clergy have been the target of hateful things said and done by members of their churches — an indication this conflict and splintering is not of God.) Following Psalm 13, we voiced our hurt and pain, our grief and anger. We told our stories. We prayed, opening our hurt to God’s healing Spirit. We reclaimed our hope, trusting God’s steadfast, faithful love. The service of lament was a service of healing.  

 This past week, Bishop Rueben Saenz was assigned to serve as the bishop of the Central Texas Conference, along with the North Texas Conference. Bishop Saenz has served as our interim bishop for the past year while serving as the bishop of the Great Plains Conference. In a conversation with him at this year’s annual conference, Bishop Saenz said to me, “A party is coming!” He was encouraging me to not be discouraged, to not get bogged down in the loss caused by the splintering. He was telling me to live in hope, trusting the steadfast, faithful love of God.

 It is time to claim that hope. It is time to move on.

Perfecting Grace

John Wesley spoke of four expressions of grace. Prevenient grace is God at work in our lives before we are aware of or responsive to that work. It is the Spirit’s work of drawing us to God, leading us to respond to God’s love. It is the Spirit’s work of preparing us for what God has for us next. Justifying grace is the grace that bridges the alienation between us and God. God is the one who heals the relationship, relating to us out of grace and forgiveness. We respond to that grace by opening our lives to God – what in popular theology is called “being saved.” Sanctifying grace speaks of the Spirit’s transforming work in our lives, maturing us into the likeness of Christ. In this on-going process of transformation, we move from our old self (Ephesians 4:22, Colossians 3:9) into the new self which is being recreated in the likeness of Christ (Ephesians 4:24, Colossians 3:10) by means of the renewing of the mind (Romans 12:2, Ephesians 4:23, Colossians 3:10). (This is the biblical pattern of spiritual growth: from, into, by means of.) This process of spiritual transformation leads us to Christ-like spiritual maturity. Perfecting grace was a uniquely Wesleyan emphasis. Wesley taught that we could be made perfect in this life. By that, he did not mean we would be sinless. (That’s the misunderstanding that gave birth, out of the Methodist movement, to the holiness movement and the Nazarenes.) Wesley meant the Spirit could empower us to love God and neighbor with our whole heart — at least for brief moments. He called the Methodist people to “go on to perfection.”

 Now let me reemphasize what Wesley said. Perfection is not sinlessness. Perfection in that sense is only a word in the dictionary. (That statement is an invitation to all perfectionists to give up their quest for perfection. It is an illusion that sabotages our lives.) Perfection as Wesley taught it is the ability to love God and neighbor. Wesley’s teaching reflects the meaning of Jesus’s statement in the Sermon on the Mount. “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect,” Matthew 5:48. To be perfect as God is perfect is to love as God loves. It is to love unconditionally. It is to love out of who we are, not in reaction to who the other is or what they do or to what they deserve or don’t deserve. It is to love the just and the unjust just as the Father sends the rain on both (Matthew 5:45). Rather than perfect, a better translation of the Greek word is “mature.” The original word means “to reach its intended end.” The intended end of a seed is to produce a mature plant that produces more seeds. The intended end of a follower of Jesus is to love as Jesus loved and to love whom Jesus loved. It is to be spiritually mature, reflecting the likeness of Christ.

 Wesley believed that we could, through the work of the Spirit and by the power of the Spirit, live out of that kind of maturity on some occasions. The Spirit could empower us to love God and neighbor as Jesus loved God and neighbor. Believing such to be possible, Wesley urged us to go on to perfection, that is, to Christ-like spiritual maturity. “Let us then go on toward perfection,” Hebrews 6:1.  In this verse, the word “perfection” is better translated as maturity. (See the footnote reference in the NRSV study Bible.)

 Wesley’s teaching about perfecting grace comes to mind as I reflect on the splintering of The UMC. His teaching leads me to ask questions. How is this splintering an expression of going on to perfection? How will it help us go on to perfection?

 By now, you know my perspective on this issue. In my mind, the splintering is neither an expression of going on to perfection nor will it help us do so. In my mind, it is a hindrance to and will be a barrier to the process. It will, at the least, be a distraction from the uniquely Wesleyan emphasis.

 If we are going on to perfection, that is, living out of a spiritually mature spirit, we will love as Jesus loved, that is, unconditionally. The splintering of The UMC does not reflect such love. The spirit of judgment and condemnation towards LGBTQ+ people certainly does not reflect such love. The willingness to do harm to churches and to foster division does not reflect such love. The spirit of “I’m right, you’re wrong,” “my way or the highway” does not reflect such love. The criticalness of those causing the division (of which I am guilty) does not reflect such love. Certainly, we Methodists — both United Methodists and Global Methodists and Independent Methodists — are not going on to perfection-maturity in this conflict and division.

 In addition, I fear this splintering will be a hindrance to our doing so. The emphasis on moral purity — the unnamed pursuit behind the splintering — will keep us focused on issues and behavior, not on loving one another. The demand for obedient conformity to the law of The Book of Discipline will blind us to the issue of love. The emphasis on orthodoxy will be interpreted by moral and theological standards rather than by loving as Jesus loved. Unaddressed and unresolved hurt and anger toward the other side will keep us from loving one another, much less going on to perfection-maturity.

 In this splintering, we Methodists are forgetting — or denying — our unique heritage. Perhaps it is because we have not understood, studied, and embraced our theology. (In my opinion, our Methodist theology is the best on the market!) In The UMC, grace is central. We live by grace. We grow in grace so that we can love as Jesus loved. The goal of salvation is the transformation of our hearts and minds into the likeness of Christ so that we can love God and neighbor as Jesus loved God and neighbor.

 Our splintering reflects the religious culture in which we live rather than our Methodist theology and heritage. The religious culture in which we live is a culture that emphasizes proper belief, proper behavior, and proper religious life. In our splintering, our focus is on proper belief about homosexuality and proper behavior (moral purity). The splintering is because some dared to defy the official ruling of General Conference (religious life). In this splintering, our focus is on the other, not ourselves. Our focus is on externals, not the internal condition of the heart. We seek to change others to our way of thinking rather than seeking to change ourselves. Our splintering reveals the ego-centric persona out of which we live. This ego-centric persona is who the world told us we had to be if we wanted to be accepted and valued. It is constructed out of right and wrong, black-and-white thinking and living. It prioritizes proper belief, proper behavior, and proper religious life.

 If we lived our theology, our focus would be on the internal transformation of our hearts and minds through the work of the Spirit, i.e., sanctifying grace. As the followers of Jesus, we would recognize, deny (Mark 8:34), and crucify (Galatians 2:19) our ego-centric self (the old self). Our priority would be going on to perfection, that is, growing spiritually into the likeness of Christ (perfecting grace, the new self). We would judge ourselves — not others — by a single standard: love, specifically, how our love mirrors the love of Jesus. Arguments over moral issues would be governed by grace and would give way to the greater priority: going on to perfection-maturity in which we love God and neighbor as Jesus loved God and neighbor. Our unity would center in Christ, not agreement about some moral issue.

 Personally, I think Wesley got it right by focusing on the grace of God — prevenient grace, justifying grace, sanctifying grace, perfecting grace. Maybe we need to get back to our source.

 “Be perfect (spiritually mature), therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect,” Matthew 5:48. “Let us then go on to perfection (spiritual maturity),” Hebrews 6:1.

An Overlooked Factor

In previous blogs, I have identified issues that underlie the LGBTQ+ issue that is dividing The UMC. The LGBTQ+ issue and the resulting disaffiliation movement are but the presenting issues in the conflict. The deeper, underlying issues include …

(1) how we view, interpret, and use the Bible,

(2) our understanding of the nature of the Christian life (a good Christian is defined by beliefs, morals, and church involvement OR by love),

(3) our understanding of the role of the church (a moral policeman and religious authority OR a community of Christ-followers who are learning and living God’s ways of grace, i.e., the kingdom),

(4) merit-based thinking and functioning rather than grace-based thinking and functioning,

(5) our understanding of the character of God (creating God in our image rather than being recreated in the image of Christ).

These issues are all theological issues (what and how we think) that shape what we do and how we live. In this blog, I want to address what I believe is a major contributing factor to the conflict – one that is overlooked.

The United Methodist Church is a religious institution that functions through an organizational structure. The institution — a collection of annual conferences organized into jurisdictions — operates out of a legislative model in which decisions are made by vote with limited, controlled discussion (three statements for, three statements against). All decisions are treated as up-or-down issues that demand for-or-against positions. Various committees bring forward issues for consideration after the same kind of up-or-down vote has been done in the committee. The decision-making process is controlled by Robert’s Rules of Order. Once a decision is made, it becomes institutional law — a top-down directive which all are expected to follow, a position to which all are expected to conform.

This legislative model is a normal part of religious institutions and organizations. It is an attempt to function efficiently within a large institutional-organizational setting. The problem is that efficiency does not always translate into effectiveness.

I believe this legislative model is a contributor to the current controversy and splintering. I identify at least three weaknesses in this way of functioning.

This legislative way of functioning leaves little room for diversity or differences of opinion. As a result, it creates winners and losers. It produces uniformity, not unity or oneness. (Interestingly, John Wesley advocated “in essentials, unity; in nonessentials, liberality; in all things, charity.” His philosophy avoided winners and losers.)

For the past fifty years, those who have advocated for a grace-filled way of viewing and relating to LGBTQ+ persons have worked to change the language in The Book of Discipline. Repeatedly, they have been the losers in the legislative process. Those who believe that homosexuality is incompatible with scriptural teaching (the language of the Book of Discipline) have been the winners. In recent years, more and more conferences and clergy have openly defied the legislation passed by General Conference that forbids the marriage and ordination of homosexual individuals in The UMC.

In 2019, the General Conference passed a temporary provision that provided a graceful exit for those “progressive” churches and conferences — those who came out on the losing side of the vote — to disaffiliate with The UMC. In 2021-22, the “conservative” churches and conferences — those who came out on the winning side of the vote — chose to exercise the option provided by this temporary legislation. They are the ones choosing to disaffiliate.

By their very nature, religious institutions and organizations lose the personal touch. Their focus is on the institution’s functioning, purpose, and survival, not individuals. The legislative way of functioning focuses on issues, not individuals. The impact of a decision on individuals is often not a part of the consideration. The win-lose adversarial nature of the legislative process prevents us from seeing those on the opposing side as individuals created by and loved by God. In contrast, the very nature of a church is personal. It is relational. It is a community rather than an institution or organization. The life of the church is structured to nurture the spiritual life of its members, leading them to love God and neighbor. The loss of the personal dimension is a factor in the splintering of The UMC.

Following the legislative model, religious institutions and organizations allow little room for discernment of the Spirit’s guidance. Time and energy are consumed with arguments for and against a position.

A crisis arose in the early church as opposing sides developed over the issue of Gentiles. A counsel was held in Jerusalem to address the controversy (Acts 15). Both sides argued their positions. One side, appealing to tradition and the teachings of the Hebrew Scriptures, argued that Gentiles had to be circumcised to be saved (Acts 15:1). Taking the opposite position, Peter shared his experience with Cornelius in which the Spirit was poured out on the Gentiles, duplicating the experience of Pentecost (Acts 10:1-11:18). Paul and Barnabas shared their experience with Gentile converts in Antioch (Acts 11:19-30). In both situations, Gentiles responded to the grace of God that was proclaimed to them without having to be circumcised. James, the head of the church in Jerusalem, pointed out how the Hebrew Scriptures pointed to the inclusion of the Gentiles (Acts 15:13-18). Following experience, the teaching of scripture, and reason, James concluded that circumcision was not required of the Gentiles (Acts 15:19-21). The other apostles, elders, and the whole church agreed.

This whole process was an exercise in discernment. In the discernment process, the guidance of the Spirit was sought as all factors are considered. The objective of the discernment process is to discern how the Spirit is guiding, not the right or wrong of a position. The objective is to discern the will of God. It is to discern how to live the grace-based ways of God in a particular situation.

The legislative way of functioning does not allow for diversity. It omits the personal dimension. It does not have room for Spirit-guided discernment.

How we make our decisions is a factor in the splintering of The UMC.

 

Love Your Enemies

 It’s another one of those things Jesus taught: “Love your enemies,” Matthew 5:44. Like his teaching “Do not judge” (Matthew 7:1), we tend to dismiss this teaching as unrealistic. We essentially ignore it, excusing ourselves from doing what Jesus taught. We rationalize our choices by saying it is impossible to love our enemies. It is beyond our ability

In the current splintering of The UMC, it seems to me this teaching has been put on the back burner of our awareness. We have struggled to love one another (John 13:35). Instead, we have often treated one another and spoken of one another as though we were enemies rather than as brothers and sisters in Christ.

Is Jesus’s teaching really impossible or do we just not want to do the hard work it requires?

In order to love our enemies, we have to (1) shift our focus and (2) change the way we view them. How we think of them has to change.

Our so-called enemies develop around some issue or interaction. Their position on an issue is the opposite of ours, making them on the wrong side (in our opinion) of the issue. We naturally think of them as wrong. Or they do something that we perceive as an attack on us. They say something negative about us that devalues us and discounts our position.  Consequently, we view them as a threat, someone who will hurt us. We are unable to love our enemy as long as our focus is on the issue or the offense.

Loving our enemy calls us to shift our focus. It calls us to look beyond the issue and beneath the behavior. Loving our enemy calls us to seek to understand them. We seek to understand why they take the position on the issue that they do. We seek to understand the fear behind their position. (The more rigid or defensive a person is in their position, the greater their fear — which raises the question: what fear underlies our position on the issue?) Of course, seeking to understand our enemy requires us to actually talk to them (rather than about them) and to listen deeply (rather than thinking about how we can attack their position or defend our own positon). We seek to understand what their treatment of us says about what is going on inside them. Attacks on others reflect unrecognized, unaddressed, and unresolved pain. Hurting people dump their pain on others. If we can see beyond the other’s behavior to what their behavior reflects, then we can begin to view them and think about them differently. We can respond to them rather than react to them.

Recognizing our enemy’s fear or pain helps us to see them with compassion. We begin to see them as a person again rather than as an enemy we demonize. We honor their fear and pain.

Seeing the humanness of our so-called enemy allows us to do the other thing Jesus said. “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,” Matthew 5:44. When we see beyond the issue or beneath the offense, then we can pray for our enemy. We can pray about their fear and their pain. Praying for them reminds us of their humanness. It helps us turn the other cheek (Luke 6:29) and bless them when they speak negatively about us (Luke 6:28).

None of this is simple or easy. It is hard work. It requires emotional-relational-spiritual maturity. It calls us to recognize and deal with the log in our own eye (Matthew 7:1-5). It calls us to rely upon the power of the Spirit to do what we cannot do in our own strength.

As long as we view the other and think of the other as an enemy, we will treat them as an enemy. We will not see them as a person created by God and loved by God. We will have little or no compassion for them or their pain. We will remain alienated and divided. The relationship will remain broken.

Such is the way of the world, not the way of the followers of Jesus.

Love your enemies. It wasn’t just a suggestion. It was and is the way to healing and reconciliation, to progress and growth. It is the way of life.