Divorce & Remarriage I

Many discussions on the topic of divorce and remarriage tend to begin with a deafening 'shot across the bow' defining the position of the author even before his (usually male rather than female) arguments are made. It is intended as a conversation 'stopper', immediately daring anyone to challenge God's clear statement of fact and thus not even to attempt to confront whatever the author will next present. The quotation I refer to, of course, comes from the last Old Testament book of Malachi, chapter 2 verse 16, where God is said to have stated: "I hate divorce".

Seldom, though, is the next phrase from this same sentence quoted: "and him who covers his garment with violence..." - which is what King David did after his adulterous affair with Bathsheba, by having her husband murdered. This man after God's own heart, who did not lose his position, nor were he and his wife stoned. In fact, it was through the line of this couple's next child, Solomon, that the Savior came. This ought to be the 'shot over our bow' that gets our attention, re-orienting our consideration of all that we once thought we knew on this topic.

Additionally, note that the Old Testament reminds us that God hates lots of things. For example, (Prov 6:16,17) God 'hates proud eyes' - in other words, those who look down upon others, feeling spiritually superior to them - kind of like many folks do when they look at someone who has been divorced and re-married. The truth is, God hates sin in whatever form it takes.

Consider those who received the strongest words of condemnation from Jesus. They weren't addressed to the adulterous woman (Jn. 8:1-11), but to her accusers - the Pharisees - the ones Jesus warned his disciples to beware of, the ones who were hypocrites. It was again the law-oriented, pride-of-the-eye, Pharisees who came to Jesus - as recorded in Matthew 19:1-3 - looking to find ways to accuse him, who present the question about divorce.

Matthew has included this passage after an intentionally lengthy discourse that consistently presents a compassionate Savior's gospel of salvation through faith in God's grace. God can and does hate sin, yet we are all sinners without exception. (Remember this word 'except' because we'll come back to it again in another post on this topic.) In the Sermon on the Mount ideals were presented, the final one being, if you plan on earning salvation by perfecting yourself, you must be as perfect as God in heaven is (5:48), which of course none of us are nor can be - ever - without exception, leaving the one and only conclusion. We are saved through faith in God's unmerited favor.

The scriptures often point us to God's creation ideals - what he wants for mankind and will actually obtain for us all after the return of Christ. Yet, we know that even in the perfection of heaven-past, sin arose, as it did again in Eden. So why the oft-presented ideals in scripture? Rather than being given with the expectation that we are to obtain perfection in this life and condemn those who don't, these pictures of perfection are outlined with the intention that they will, as does the law itself, drive us to our savior. The ideal was is never presented to clobber one another with, excluding one another from the fellowship of the Lord. Ideals remind us that none of us are perfect, yet God is. "Left to man, none would be saved. It is impossible. Yet, with God, all things are possible." (19:26). It is only within this much larger, Christ-centered context that these few remarks of Jesus regarding divorce and remarriage can more accurately be understood.

This pericope in Matthew 19:1-12 comes contextually sandwiched between Matthew 18 on compassionate forgiveness and Matthew 19:16-30 that moves us away from salvation through keeping the law and rather to a complete surrender in following the compassionate Savior to whom all the 'law and the prophets' point! Neglecting this intentional chosen context renders our interpretation of the passage inadequate at least and dangerous at most.

Many who address this passage also neglect another context - the first century context in which Jesus spoke within. What did these words mean to those who heard them then? Far too many commentaries on this passage anachronistically and shamefully interpret these words simply to reinforce centuries long, legalistic, exclusivity practices by the church - less interested in the Spirit of Christ and far more inclined to protect the ways of the institution of church.

To not fall into this error we must read this passage in the light of the sermon on the mount, the teachings that contextually precede and follow this passage, and within the context of first century understanding of what Jesus was saying. To do otherwise is to use this passage merely to buttress our 21st century notions, pridefully imagining that our current literal reading of the English text sufficient renders the exact truth of what Jesus meant 2000 years ago. If this same approach were taken with Matthew 19:24, within the next pericope: "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God", then we could assume that no rich folk will be saved, which, by the way, isn't the truth or the point of that passage.

I'll continue this discussion in my next post.

An Ugly Truth

There once was a very charming, intelligent gentleman who bemoaned his persistent single status. You see, the family gene pool had not favored him. He had been delivered an outward appearance that pretty well summed up what many women would consider the most objectionable features to be found in the male species. As a consequence, though respected by his more genteel colleagues, he lived a rather lonely life.

One very dark November night, as stormy winds howled outside his bedroom windows, he had a rather unexpectedly delightful dream. A visitor from a far distant land appeared to him, having been sent to grant him one wish. This painfully unattractive man didn't hesitate for a moment at the offer. His visitor, though, hesitated insisting that he take a moment to carefully think through his 'wish'.

The man's response was, none-the-less immediate and unequivocal - "I've thought about this all my life. I need not reconsider. My wish is to be the most handsome man in the world so that the most beautiful women in the world will desire me." With that being said, his dream abruptly ended.

The next morning, as he brushed his teeth, he - unusually - was able to clearly recount every aspect of his dream. Yet something odd occurred. As he looked into the mirror, he was frightened by the appearance of another man in his bathroom. He instinctively turned to face the intruder, only to find no one present. He rubbed the 'night' out of his eyes, but again saw the stranger's face in the mirror - this time realizing that the face he beheld was his own! He pinched himself to be sure he was truly awake, finding the appearance in the mirror just as he had always hoped for himself - the most attractive man in the world!

He quickly dressed and went for a walk along the city streets that were rapidly becoming clogged by the morning rush hour traffic. He smiled to all that he met, noting that lot's of folks, both women and men, were staring at him. Some women honked their horns and waved to him from their cars. To his delight, women - even gorgeous women - came over to him and asked his name. He felt like a pied piper as throngs of folks, young and old, began to follow him. This wonder of wonders was repeated all day, every day, week after week.

After several months filled with invitations to marriage, gifts appearing at his door, calls from modeling agencies, and the like, this now handsome man stopped by the church of his childhood, closing the door behind him, restraining his entourage from entering. He wanted to speak to his priest - alone.

"Father", he said, "I need to talk with you. For my whole life I've wanted what I now have, but something is still missing. I don't understand. I don’t know what’s missing. Can you help me?"
"Son", answered the priest, "I've known you since you were a small boy. I see that the desire of your life has been granted to you as a gift from the heavens. Yet, son, the gift is different from what you think it is. You have believed that being the most handsome man in the world was the gift you received. 'It' was not the gift, rather it was the 'tool' God granted to you to reveal the real gift."

The young man looked quizzically at the priest, not understanding what he meant.

"Son, the lack you sense, despite receiving this marvelous new appearance, indicates what your heart has always really looked for. The ‘something’ that is missing is the ‘someone’ who will love you for just who you are - someone who loved you long before you became handsome. The women who follow you now never noticed you before, or if they did, didn't want to be with you."
The young man acknowledged this as true.

"There is, though, one young woman who has always loved you just as you were. She comes to church often to pray for you, hoping that you would notice her. She is there in the last pew praying for you even now."

The man turned to see whom this woman was and discovered that he had known her from childhood. I there could be another human being uglier than he had been as a man, it was this woman. He shuttered and said, "Father, she is so ugly. Even I cannot bear to look at her!"

"Yes, my son. outwardly she lacks even the minutest blessing. However, she can give to you that which none of these other women can. She truly loves you as you. She has a heart of gold that you will never find in another woman."

Then the priest came to the point. "Son, you've got to make a choice here, today. If you choose to go with this young lady, you will know true love for the rest of your life, yet you will return to the appearance you had before your dream. On the other hand, if you choose to retain the admiration of the most beautiful women in the world, you can retain your handsome appearance, yet you will never find true love."

The man turned around and began to walk to the rear of the church. He looked over to the woman who seemed enraptured in her prayer. He then looked back at the priest and said, "Father, I can't give up all that I've wished for my whole life. I just can’t! I don't want to be the ugliest man in the city again."

At that, he left the church, walking into the embrace of admiring female fans.

What do you cling to that restrains you from entering into the truly loving embrace of the Savior?

What is the ‘ugly truth’ about the idols in your life?

Scripts

Few realize the power of scripts in our daily lives. Scripts are routines that fall into place whenever something elicits need for a set of behaviors. The good thing is that once our brains are 'programmed' with the correct 'scripts' we function predictably. The bad thing about scripts is that once our brains are so 'programmed' we function predictably - unthinkingly so.

For example, as we approach a place that looks like a church our brains begin to dictate behaviors that are appropriate to what our 'church' script expects. Our church script, when installed, is quite powerful. Even though some things differ from the script we are most comfortable with, our minds cleverly filter out much that is objectionable. If there are too many objectionable items we reject the whole - saying, 'this really isn't a church'.

This happened to my several years ago when I walked into the beautiful old church. The architecture, stained glass windows, and well-kept ground were inviting. In fact, everything I saw said to me that this church family took much pride in their church building. Yet, when I walked in, I immediately discover that it no longer functioned as a church, but had been gutted inside to create a really awesome 'bed and breakfast'. Now, of course, there were signs saying such outside the church, but I 'couldn't' see them. My church script was elicited by the beauty of the building and filtered out anything that suggested the contrary - till I had no choice but to acknowledge the reality.

Many church groups attempt to create a novel environment inside their facilities, yet forget to change the structure. Structure often trumps function. The structure elicits the church script which in turn inclines folks to act out the past rather than the present, defeating all attempts otherwise.

Even church plants in warehouses - are often given an inner 'churchiness' feeling - so that all attempts to actually be radically different miserably fail. I can't even begin to relate all the disappointments I've had with churches in warehouses. As I approached I would think, 'this is going to be quite novel', only to find that the inside was completely modeled after any other church, which in turn elicited my church-as-usual script.

Once I found a church that met in a coffee shop. Surely, I thought, this would be a truly out-of-the-box church. Nope! When I got inside they had pulled up a pulpit and did everything just as any other church would do. It seemed to defeat the purpose of their intentionally novel location.

If we, the 'church', truly want to speak into the hearts of the church-disenfranchised we must not do anything that easily elicits the old church scripts before folks have a chance to really see a different kind of 'church' people. As they approach the 'place' where God's people meet, nothing should scream out 'church, run!' When they enter the facility, again nothing should elicit that old church script.

Wherever old scripts are installed, wonder disappears. Without wonder there isn't any room opened for the spirit to speak into the heart. Let's not shoot ourselves in both feet by neglecting to consider every aspect of what we are doing. Let's coordinate structure with function, understanding the power of the human mind.

Reconciliation III

So, we've encounter the inevitable agent of stumbling. We've taken it to the Lord and made sure that we 'see' as he sees. The thing that 'bugs' us isn't merely stylistic, but a sin. It is a sin unto death. And the Spirit prompts us to deal with it 'now'. What's the next step?

In the gospel according to Matthew, we are given the following steps in chapter 18:15-17.

First, go to the individual in private. In other words, don't tell anyone else what you have seen. Not even the pastor. All of us are so easily biased that we must be careful what we share about one another. Information carelessly passed on is not easily set aside, even after evidence to the contrary is revealed. Love covers a multitude of sin. Protect one another. Go to the one who has sinned - whether that person has sinned against you personally or not. Don't go punitively, but with a gentle and kind spirit, determined to reconcile. If that person refuses to be reconciled, then seek out some helpers.

Second, go to the pastor or one or two spiritually mature church leaders. Present what you have seen. Allow them time to pray about it. If the Spirit leads them to conclude as you have concluded, go together to the person in sin. If this person remains unmoved by your gracious appeals, move on to the next step.

Three, the church needs to re-designate this person's affiliation. He or she can no longer be considered a brother or sister 'in Christ'. This person is to be considered as a pagan or tax-collector. Now, that doesn't at all require the church to obtain a restraining order that would forbid this person from attending church. In fact, it requires the church to put much more effort into reconciling this individual who has strayed. Yet this new effort will be different from the first two steps. No longer will we appeal to this person as a believer, but to love this person as one who has 'lost' his/her way.

I like Matthew's sense of humor here. To treat this individual as a tax collector is a reminder to us all about how Jesus treated Matthew - who was a tax collector. Jesus invited him to 'follow Him'. In fact, the way Jesus treated all tax collectors was to accept invitations to their parties!

In 1 Cor 5 the church had not followed these steps with a brother who was living in open sin. Paul appealed to the church to act. They did, but they acted extremely. They 'excommunicated' the brother, misunderstanding Paul's counsel. If someone is called a brother and is living in open sin, do not so much as eat with that person. But, if that person has been re-designated as a 'pagan', the goal is that 'his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus'. Clearly, we are 'not to associate with immoral people' - in the church. This does not apply to those outside the church, else we would 'have to go out of the world!'

In 2 Cor 2 Paul revisits this issue. One person's sin affects the whole church (v.5). But, though the majority acted, they over-reacted. Instead, writes Paul, they must now 'forgive and comfort this person, otherwise he might become overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. Paul then 'urged them to reaffirm their love for him.

God has given his people the 'ministry of reconciliation' (2 Cor 5:18). The 'rule of Christ' is to do all things in love, forgiving one another. In order to be reconciled with one another we must all be reconciled first to Christ. We must faithfully go to our brother or sister who has turned away from Christ. We re-designate that person as a 'pagan' only to bring light to the need for reconciliation. We then multiply our efforts to re-call this person into the fellowship of the Lord.

Lord, help us to be faithful in this high calling. Help us all to have hearts that are open to accountability, so that we may always grow in your image and have the indwelling of your Spirit empowering us to encourage one another in their spiritual journeys as well.

Reconciliation II

In my sermon preparation for this weekend I found myself wrestling with Matthew 18:15-20. What do we do when we see a fellow believer in sin? As is quite common, this text is often lifted out of its context and applied as a formula to remedy anything deemed divergent from the norm. Sadly, it is more often than not that our 'norm' is itself far from what is Biblical.

The body of Christ is intentionally a diverse set. No two people manifest the Spirit of Christ in exactly the same manner. Therein begins our problem - at least when we look at the church through unanointed, fleshly eyes. Differences 'bug' us. Some differences 'bug' us so much we assume those differences must be sins - sins that ought to be excised (exorcised?). So, what do we do?

First, make sure we are ourselves seeing through Christ's eyes. You remember the saying, 'begin with removing the plank from your own eyes, before..." In other words, we need to make sure that we are seeing clearly. As followers of Christ we must insist that all our hearing and seeing be through ears and eyes anointed by his spirit. All things look different from the foot of the cross.

Second, with the Spirit guiding us into all truth, determine if what 'bugs' us is actually a sin or simply a stylistic difference. For example, when Paul speaks of the body he says it has many parts. If, though, one part is hurting, the whole body is affected. Yet, using my body for an example, if I die my hair purple it doesn't harm the rest of my body. But, if I have a kidney stone, my kidney will be ruined and if it ceases to function properly then my whole body is in jeopardy. No intervention is necessary for the purple hair, but immediate action is required for the kidney stone. The first is stylistic, the second is 'sin'.

Third, once I have determined that what I see is actually a sin rather than a mere superficial difference, I must ask the Spirit to help me discern whether or not this 'sin' is a 'sin unto death' or not. A 'sin unto death' is like the kidney stone. Without intervention the whole body is in danger. Yet, two individuals can have the same 'sin', but one has their eyes riveted on Jesus, moving closer and closer to him each day. Another has his eyes on the world and is moving away from Jesus. Direction determines intervention. For the first individual I simply encourage his upward direction as he encourages mine. A sin unto death is one that is leading away from Christ. If this is the case, I have one more question to ask.

Fourth, if what bugs me is a sin and is a 'sin unto death' leading a person away from God and from the fellowship of his people, my next question is about timing. Lord, is this sin one that you are asking me to address right now or not? There is a time for everything - even dealing with sin. Those who think of all this in terms of 'rules' often jump in and excise a sin prematurely. Let me give you an example.

My friends mother has two kidney stones. She has had them before. Unfortunately for her, the last time she had a stone the doctors intervened prematurely. You see, she had an infection raging in her body. When the went to remove the stone the infection turned into septicemia and nearly killed her. This time, however, before removing the stone, they put her on antibiotics to squelch the infection, then - days later - worked to remove the stone.

The apostle Peter, despite is inclination to speak and act before thinking, had a heart that was responsive to correction from Jesus and the Lord often had to correct him. Judas, on the other hand, did not have such an openness of heart. Jesus saw 'sins unto death' in Judas, but could not confront them simply because Judas did not open his heart to Jesus - or to anyone else - to be corrected. He set himself up as better than everyone else, even smarter than Jesus. To have confronted Judas prematurely would have elicited an infection among all the disciples. Jesus could only 'bear' with Judas' sin, functionally giving him enough rope to hang himself with. Only later did the 11 understand the true heart of Judas.

So, if the Spirit has led us to discern that what 'bugs' us in a member of the body of Christ is not merely stylistic, but is sin; and that it is a 'sin unto death'; and that we are being prompted to intervene immediately rather than to wait, how do we proceed? That will be the subject of my next post.

Reconciliation I

Church is often envisions, unwittingly, as a zero-sum game. I win, you lose. Yet, that attitude is the antithesis of the kingdom of heaven. We might even say that such a notion is anti-Christ.

The kingdom is made tangible in the church. The church is called to be a community of the forgiven. More, if living in harmony with the rule of Christ, the church can only be the community of the forgiven as long as it functions as the community of the forgiving. The church is called into a ministry of reconciliation. In fact, unless we intentionally weigh every decision of church against this value we will stray - have already wandered from - our purpose. To be the visible agent of reconciliation in the world is to have a win-win attitude in all that we do.

Here's the kicker though. The church is all about diversity. Each one of us is called to be an uninhibited and unique interpretation of Christ. The result? Some of those diverse interpretations will, no doubt, bug us. So, how can we proceed as one body under one head when we don't like what we see happening in the lives of others we are traveling with?

This is where the rules come into play. Yup! There are rules for being the church. These are not the kind of rules we normally get confronted by when we think of church. What I'm talking about are the rules for interpersonal interactions that maintain a heart for reconciliation.

First, to even enter the church we must be reconciled with God. That means, we accept God as our one and only guide.

Second, once we enter the church, God empowers us through his Spirit to be reconciled with one another. That is, we love one another despite our diverse ways of expressing Christ. Said differently, though we receive Christ through faith as we look above, we are also called to receive Christ as we look horizontally at other believers. To reject Christ's manifestation in one another is to reject Christ's presence in us. The rule of Christ is to accept others as He has accepted us.

By receiving one another as believers in God we end the zero-sum game of the world and manifest, tangibly, the kingdom of heaven. The onlooking world sees our love for one another and acknowledges the reality of the gospel rather than merely the talk.

But, how can we keep this spirit of reconciliation alive and well within the church? What do we need to know? What are the rules for conflict resolution in the spiritual realm of church? Next post.

Simple

The repeated lesson from the accounts of Jesus in the gospels is that following the Father's lead was not easy, but it was simple. The way of the Spirit is not complicated. It never was. It never is. Nor will it ever be. There is a spectacular elegance in simplicity. In fact, it is in the simplicity of the gospel we have the grandest evidence that God is leading.

We might not want to consider it, but take just one example from the scriptures.

9 As Jesus went on from there, He saw a man called Matthew, sitting in the tax collector's booth; and He said to him, "Follow Me!" And he got up and followed Him.
10Then it happened that as Jesus was reclining at the table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were dining with Jesus and His disciples.
11When the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples, "Why is your Teacher eating with the tax collectors and sinners?"
12But when Jesus heard this, He said, "It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick.
13"But go and learn what this means: 'I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Jesus kept it simple. He didn't travel the world. He traveled among his own people, walking the streets they walked on, dressed like them, and eating and drinking with them. His social graciousness was attractive. People longed to have him as a friend. He accepted their invitations - even to parties. Jesus lived out kingdom principles in the normal affairs of everyday life. He lived out the truth and in so doing others were drawn to him. So simple.

What if we were willing to live as salt and light in our world today by keeping it this simple? What if we invited Christ to live in and through us and just mingled among family, friends, and neighbors? What if we simply accepted invitations as they arose as opportunities for others to come in contact with the gospel lived out in our lives?

What if being the church was really this simple?