One of the more intriguing dimensions of modern culture is the tendency to try to address and solve almost any problem by compiling a list of the necessary steps that a person should take to achieve some desired solution.
Whether it is on the covers of magazines, or in social media posts, or on personal or corporate blogs and websites, we seem to be inundated by the ready availability of lists that can be used to address and solve almost any dilemma that confronts us.
Ten steps to a slimmer waist line; five steps to success in the real estate market; seven essential steps to inner peace; nine steps to change your life; four steps to street-proof your kids.
And this tendency to solve problems by checklists is not unknown in the religious realm either. I have an old acquaintance who regularly writes a blog about issues related to the church. A fair amount of his work is somewhat critical, but most of the “solutions” that he proposes to the various problems that he sees in the modern church come in the form of lists – the top 8 reasons why your church is small; five good reasons why a church should close; nine universal lessons he’s learned from writing, blogging and podcasting about religious issues; seven reasons why many church leaders aren’t particularly effective.
Such clear, systematized and practical lists of ways to approach spiritual issues are not particularly new. In fact, there was once an old joke that most Presbyterian sermons were able to distill the essence of any given biblical passage down to an easily summarized list of three points and a poem.
And there was good reasons for Presbyterian preachers to adopt this “three points and a poem” approach –
1) it helped to structure their sermons;
2) it made their ideas more memorable; and
3) people knew when the sermon was drawing to a close.
However, even in spite of those three good reasons,
Which could be used throughout the seasons,
While telling truth in lists of three
Can lead to clever summaries;
Most of us know that in real life
Three points and a poem don’t always suffice.
I found myself pondering this formulaic, systematized, albeit often practical, approach to matters of spirituality and faith when I turned to today’s suggested reading from the Gospel of Matthew.
After all, at first glance, the passage seems quite straightforward in the advice that it offers about how to deal with situations of conflict. In fact, the passage can be summed up in a list of “four steps to resolve conflict”.
Step 1 – go directly to the person that wronged you and address the issue;
step 2 – if that does not work, take one or two other people with you, and try to address the issue with witnesses present;
step 3 – if that does not work, tell the whole church;
and step 4 – if that does not work, kick the person who has wronged you out of the church and treat them as an outcast in the same way that you would shun a Gentile or a tax collector.
It seems practical, straightforward, even wise…well, at least until you get to the part about shaming the person by telling the whole church what the person has done wrong, and then kicking them out.
So maybe there is a bit of a problem with this particular “four steps to resolving conflict” list.
But there may be a different way to read this text – not with a focus on the four steps, but rather on the assumption that the passage makes, and the vision that it offers to us.
And it may be that it is in realizing that assumption, and pondering that vision, that the real Gospel message may be glimpsed, even in this seemingly practical list of ways to deal with differences.
After all, the Gospel of Jesus Christ can never, and should never be viewed as an overly simplistic, formulaic, systematized checklist to lead us to spiritual enlightenment and accomplish our salvation – in some ways, it might be easier if it were – but undoubtedly less wondrous, and less inspiring. There have, of course, been attempts to break it down into a few easy steps – pray this prayer, believe this assertion, say these words, and all is done. But I have always found such simplistic attempts to sum up the Gospel to be shallow, and lacking. Which is a challenge – because it means that we have to strive further, delve deeper, journey ever further into the mystery so that we can continue to keep, before our eyes, this transforming vision of what can be, and what will be for our lives, and for our world, because of what God has through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
So what is the assumption that this passage makes, and the vision that it offers?
Consider.
These words, placed on Jesus’ lips in the Gospel of Matthew, were compiled into the form that we have them in the early years of the Christian movement. As the early communities were established and began their work, various writers began to write the stories of Jesus and to share them with the various communities that were taking shape. Matthew’s Gospel was likely completed a number of decades after Jesus’ death and resurrection, and the issues and perspectives that this Gospel contains reflect many of the issues and events that were affecting the early church communities.
And, as we know from this text – as well as many of the passages in Paul’s letters and in other parts of the New Testament – not everything always went smoothly. Even the early church was not free of differences of thought, diversities of beliefs, conflicts of opinion and understanding.
There were differences of opinion about theological matters, about the best ways to worship, about ethical and moral issues, about how to most effectively structure those early Christian communities. Different groups wanted to follow the teachings of different individuals, to organize themselves in different ways, and to place different levels of emphasis and importance on different gifts and abilities.
And in the midst of those differences of opinion, there were conflicts.
In fact, the biblical authors never seemed to suggest that there was a time when conflicts were entirely absent from the church, nor did they suggest that an absence of conflict was a sign of the faithfulness of the church – to the contrary, the biblical authors assumed that there was, and that there would be conflicts and differences of opinion, and thought, and practice.
This assumption has continued to exist throughout the history of the Christian tradition. After all, there has never been a moment when the church has been absolutely “at one” in relation to every thought, every belief, every idea. Rather, we are a part of a dynamic and living tradition, a movement that constantly examines and re-examines, debates and discusses, interpreting and re-interpreting, forming and reforming in the quest for truth.
And in those swirling movements of thought and belief and practice, there have always been differences. Today’s suggested Gospel reading makes the assumption that differences will exist, but inviting the members of the community to do what they can to address them – when, and not if, they arise.
But in light of the fact that the church – ever and always – is made up of beautiful, wonderful, thoughtful, diverse, imperfect, broken, sinful human beings – is a simple checklist of steps to resolve conflict truly adequate to provide the motivation and inspiration to triumph over times of difference and disagreement? Will four steps to resolving conflict ever completely suffice?
Or is a bigger vision necessary?
And if so, what was the vision that this passage suggested should motivate people to actively and courageously try to work together, in spite of their differences?
Listen again to the part of the passage “after” the four steps. Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again, truly I tell you, if two of you agree on earth about anything you ask, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.”
Did you get that – the vision that this passage sets before us is a vision of a community in which the power of heaven itself was to be found; a vision of a community where grace and compassion would bind people together, regardless of their differences; and a vision of a way of being together in a way in which the power and the presence of the living Christ would be experienced in their midst. “…where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.”
Which is quite a promise, quite a vision. Even two or three who were gathered together in Christ’s name, who were bound together in his love, would come to know that grace, that power, that presence, that unity, that communion – both with each other, and with Christ himself.
When we come to realize the assumption that shaped this passage – that the Church has always, and will always, be made up of imperfect people who will, at times, not see everything eye-to-eye – we find consolation, and even inspiration.
After all, like the early church, we live in a time when the Church seems often divided on issues – issues of theology, issues of ethics, issues of morality, issues of preferences in worship, issues of differing priorities and ideologies. There is nothing new about these differences of thought and opinion – they were certainly present in the earliest church communities to which and in which the biblical texts were written, and they have shaped the life of the church throughout the ages.
We are aware of those differences, and our wider culture takes great delight in pointing out the divisions and conflicts in the church – but why be bothered? There always have been differences; and there always will be; but Christ’s promise remains the same – what you are bound together in love, beyond your differences, the power and grace of heaven itself will be with you; and when two or three are gathered in my name, I will be there among you.
So strive together to move past your differences, to a place where the love and grace of heaven bind you together and create the conditions for my presence to be known, and my love to be experienced.
All it takes is a willingness to assume and accept your own brokenness, to assume and accept the brokenness of each other, and then to move beyond those assumptions to a greater vision of what you can be, and what I am calling you to be.
All it takes is two or three people.
And you could be one of them.
