February 6, 2005
2 Peter 1”16-21
Mathew17: 1-9
“A Matter of Ones Own Interpretation”
1. Several years ago, now, I got together with several other clergy in Bemidji, to discuss the problem of the large number of homeless, transient, and low income people who come almost daily to our churches seeking assistance. A problem, I was told when I came to Bemidji was something which had been here as long as anyone could remember. “There is nothing anyone can do about it,” people often said to me.
Well, after some lengthy discussions a number of churches set about to create a program to address this situation which would allow us all to work cooperatively rather than individually. For, it was, we realized, far beyond any one church's ability to deal with in any meaningful and creative way.
The rest, of course, is history. This month marks the beginning of the third year of Churches United – an organization that now includes over 23 area congregations and provides over $ 25,000 in funds to help people who need money for food, transportation, rent, gas and electricity, and other needs.
2. When we began, one of the reasons people said it would never work was because the various churches in Bemidji couldn’t get along any more. For unlike many other communities where there is a common ministerial coalition, which unites the various denominations in mutual endeavors, in Bemidji the ministerial association had disbanded over unresolveable differences. This resulted in the more evangelical churches having gone off by themselves and the more traditional “mainline” congregations (like ours) ending up too busy with their own affairs to work together on anything productive. So much for the ecumenical movement of a generation ago!
Yet, in spite of all the negativity - it happened! And Churches United is still working and all the diverse churches are getting along despite a wide range of theological differences – at least on this one issue. Mainly, I suspect, because everyone agrees that the problem of poverty is so widespread and cooperation so completely logical that it makes absolutely no sense to not do something about it together.
So, amazingly, every month, at our Board meeting, a very unusual thing happens in Bemidji. Namely, that ministers and lay people from First Lutheran, Calvary Lutheran, Bethel Lutheran, St. Phillips, First Presbyterian, Trinity Lutheran, the Evangelical Free and Evangelical Covenant, several Baptist churches, the Assembly of God, Becida Community Church, St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal and even the Unitarian Universalists all meet together in peace and harmony and even pray together as we ask God to guide us in working toward providing relief to the poor people of Bemidji.
Pretty astounding – don’t you think?
3. This then is, in a way, an introduction to raising the question which must have crossed everyone’s mind at one time or another – “why so many churches?” “Why so many churches when there is only one God and only one Jesus Christ?
Why is it that we all say we profess to believe in the same core beliefs about God and Jesus Christ and yet at the same time we quibble over the details? Or, so it seems.
Why, for instance, are their at least six Lutheran Churches in Bemidji – three who are ELCA and the other three who are more conservative and whose interpretation of the Lutheran viewpoint espoused by Martin Luther is not in agreement with the ELCA?
Why are there at least five or six Baptist churches in town? Well, that may be easier to answer because Baptists “are just that way,” or so I am told, and always have been that way. Yet, on the other hand, there is only one “United” Methodist Church here in America and also in Bemidji. “What is the difference about being “United” Methodists?” we might ask.
After all, we are a bit of an anomaly in these parts. Even the name “Methodist” sounds a little strange to some folks up here in this mostly Catholic and Lutheran area. In fact, I was once quoted in the local paper as being from the “United Baptist Church.” Which is an easy mistake for some people in Minnesota to make since the words – Methodist and Baptist – sound kind of the same. When, in reality, it is kind of a misnomer because there is really nothing “United” about the Baptists and, in addition, in many ways we Methodist have a quite different interpretation of the Christian faith than do many Baptists.
4. Wait, did I say … Methodists have a “different interpretation” of our faith from Baptists, and perhaps Presbyterians, or Catholics, or Episcopalians as well?
What does it mean to have a “different interpretation?” And how does that square with the words in the Epistle of St. Peter this morning when he writes, “no prophecy of scripture is a matter of ones own interpretation?” How can we as Methodists have our own interpretation? Or anyone else, for that matter. Shouldn’t we all be in agreement? Shouldn’t we all be “united” like Churches United? Isn’t that what the Apostles Creed means when it says, “one holy catholic church?” In which catholic means “universal.” Isn’t it wrong that there is so much division and dissension among the many Christian churches?
A thorny problem – isn’t it? For it raises the question of what is the Christian faith all about and what is it that we believe ultimately to be true … and how can good men and women differ greatly about what salvation and faith in God and Jesus are all about – and still get along. Is it all a matter of belief – or of doctrine? Are some Christians right and others wrong? Are some saved and others destined for Divine punishment because they do not accept some or all the things that others believe are absolutely true? What is the truth? Or, maybe for you, this doesn’t really matter all that much to you? Maybe you have more of “live and let live” attitude. But, as we know, for many people these differences can be very controversial.
5. For instance, let me tell you that in the early months of Churches United there were some pretty interesting and passionate arguments about what the organization would stand for … and it was not without quite a bit of negotiation that the Unitarians got in at all … and they weren’t all too sure, for a while, that they wanted to be in. That’s how diverse the viewpoints were and are in this community. And, of course, I maybe don’t need to explain this to many of you, especially if you have friends and relatives who belong to other churches that have widely different opinions than we do.
I remember very well growing up in a small Minnesota town back in the l950’s when most of us Protestants were very prejudiced against Catholics …So, I think it is really quite astounding that we can actually sit down together at the same table today. Or that I can have coffee with Father Mike Patenode at the Uptown Café and we actually can agree about a great many matters. Or that our Missions Committees can work together with St. Phillip’s on the 10,000 Villages Project in the fall. In fact, at one point I said to one of the St. Phillips volunteers that this “wouldn’t have happened in my hometown back in the 50’s.” And she said, “yeah, and back then we thought all you guys were going straight to hell!”
Well, that’s progress!
6. Now, as I said, this is a thorny issue …
This morning let me make just this one point - it really seems to be an “unsolvable problem” - or an “insoluble” problem. In many ways it is just like the whole question of separation of church and state, the abortion issue, questions of the death penalty, the gay issue, and many others in our society and in our Methodist church which tend to divide rather than unite us. For, we must admit, all of these problems about which people become very passionate do not have any easy solution which will be to everyone’s satisfaction. And, in fact, what happens is that in the long run we just have to learn to live with them. Insoluble problems – that’s what they are.
On this subject, I always remember the words in the front of my constitutional law book in college. It was a quotation from the famous American theologian Reinhold Neibuhr, “democracy,” he said, “consists of proximate solutions to insoluble problems.” In other words, quite often in a democracy, you have to compromise on some things otherwise nothing gets done. I think sometimes that this is often the case in marriage, as well!
7. For instnace, let us take the question of religious freedom. Most of our forefathers came to America from Europe, where in most countries there was only one church, which was organized by the government and supported by taxes. In some countries over there this is still true. Of course, in Europe, the number of people who go to church is dismally low compared to America. Is that because they have only one choice? I wonder.
So, here we are in a free country where can all worship or not worship wherever we want. And where there is a whole menu of choices in religious opinion and interpretation all claiming to be the best way to the truth or, at least, better than anyone else. Of course, usually when it comes down to talking about which church one goes to people are reasonably polite and avoid criticism of other people’s beliefs. Although, I learned recently, that one of our members was told that because this person belonged the Methodist Church they were “going to hell!” That’s pretty bad! I certainly hope that there aren’t too many of those folks around (although there probably are) … and I hope that, as Methodists, we aren’t going around saying that to others … regardless of what we think of them!
8. Now, for the most part, as Methodists, going back to John Wesley, we have always been or tried to be very ecumenical. Witness the fact that at least half of the people here this morning did not grow up as Methodists but who were and are welcome in this church! In fact, Wesley, himself, did not really want to leave the Church of England at all. He only wanted to reform it because he felt it had become too dry and formal and lacked the true spirit of the love and forgiveness, which he had found in Jesus Christ.
Despite his efforts, however, Wesley’s fellow priests in the Anglican Church did not agree with him … and accused him of stirring up trouble and threatening to divide the Church. This put Wesley on the defensive and he fought back. Here is what he said in a letter to one of his colleagues … the VICAR OF SHOREHAM, IN KENT. It was called, "A Plain Account of the People Called Methodist."
It was not long before an objection was made to our Methodist movement, which had not once entered into my thought: — “Is not this making a schism? Is not the joining these people together, gathering Churches out of Churches?”
It was easily answered, If you mean only gathering people out of buildings called churches, it is. But if you mean, dividing Christians from Christians, and so destroying Christian fellowship, it is not. For, these were not Christians before they were thus joined to our movment. Neither are they divided any more than they were before. If it be said, “But there are some true Christians in the parish, and you destroy the Christian fellowship between these and them; “I answer, That which never existed, cannot be destroyed. Which of those true Christians had any such fellowship with these? Who watched over them in love? Who marked their growth in grace? Who advised and exhorted them from time to time? Who prayed with them and for them, as they had need? This, and this alone, is Christian fellowship:
But, alas! where is it to be found? Look east or west, north or south; name what parish you please: Is this Christian fellowship there? Rather, are not the bulk of the parishioners a mere rope of sand? What Christian connection is there between them? What intercourse in spiritual things?
What watching over each other’s souls? What bearing of one another’s burdens? What a mere jest is it then, to talk so gravely of destroying what never was! The real truth is just the reverse of this: We introduce Christian fellowship where it was utterly destroyed. And the fruits of it have been peace, joy, love, and zeal for every good word and work.
Well, that about says it all!
Wesley, it seems, had tried to remain conciliatory to the very end but it didn’t work. So eventually, the Methodist movement took off on its own and when it crossed the Atlantic it spread far and wide throughout America – even to Bemidji, Minnesota (a little over a hundred years ago).
9. Like Wesley, I, too, try to be very open minded and tolerant of those I don’t necessarily agree with … as I believe we all should. If I didn’t, I would be the chairperson for Churches United. And, it really makes me feel very good to see all the diverse churches here in Bemijdi working together in harmony. For we are really, in fact, doing what Jesus commanded when he said, “When did you see me hungry and feed me, when did you see me thirsty and give me drink … I say, when you did it for the least of these, you did it for me.” And, after all, there is no mention of denominations in that statement – as I reminded several people back when we were having our initial discussions.
Well, I wonder what would St. Peter have thought to know that today there are so many different religious interpretations of Jesus life …? Would he have been appalled or would he have understood that underneath it all we are all alike … it’s just that we have our own opinions? And exactly when does an opinion become a belief, which is so powerful that one is lead to discredit, or denigrate the faith of another person?
“Judge not, lest ye be judged,” Jesus said. And yet, so often, there is a great deal of judgementalism and self-righteousness in religion. So much divisiveness and finger pointing. There always has been, I suppose – nothing changes.
10. Well, enough said. We can’t change the whole world. One pastor alone and one church cannot very easily start a revolution – nor would we perhaps want to, I suspect. And even the great Wesley, it seems, failed to move the Church of England toward the changes he truly desired and so finally he just threw up his hands and let the Methodist movement, which he had started, have its own way. And, only now, I am told, are Methodists and the Church of England once again talking about a merger … after 250 years of separation. I think Wesley will be pleased to know this – don’t you?
No, in the end, all we can do is be the best, most caring, most fair and open-minded church we can be and ask ourselves if we can live up to Wesley’s definition of fellowship:
Do we have, as
Christians true
fellowship with one another? Do we watch over one another in
love? Are we we marked by our growth in
grace? Are we advised and exhorted from time to time by the minister and one another? Do we pray with and for one another as we have need?
Are we watching over each other’s
souls? Do we bear one another’s burdens?. And are the fruits of our labors:
peace,
joy,
love, and
zeal for every good word and
work.
For, this, and this alone, is
Christian fellowship:
What do you think? If you ask me, in many ways, I think we are doing a good job of it. And let’s keep it up!
I also think the Methodist Motto; “Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors …” typifies the Methodist Spirit all the way back to Wesley.
Let’s keep that idea before us always as well. And let’s not discount the openness and hospitality that already exists among our members right now. In fact, the other day, someone said to me, “this is one of the most caring and least judgmental churches I have ever been a member of….” That says it all, don’t you think?
11. Well, another word for caring is “hospitality.” Hospitality means to be “welcoming” … to welcome someone is to be open to knowing and accepting and understanding them … hospitality means forgiveness … it means love and grace … the grace of God … witnessed to by human beings … who are called by Jesus to minister to one another, to strangers, and to the world.
Hospitality … Hospitality … this will be theme of our celebration of communion today … the Hospitality of God … who welcomes us into a healing relationship with Him … out of Love …
The Hospitality of God … is what brings us here this morning and what binds us together in love … and which we are to bring with us when we go bacl out into the world this week.
