Inclusion

Inclusion and living with differences

“Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness.” James 3.18

In America – I’m sure this could never happen in England! - there was a feud between a good catholic Episcopalian priest and his very evangelical organist, who loved Moody and Sankey Gospel hymns.

The first hint of trouble came when the priest preached on the need for change and the organist chose to sing "We Shall Not Be Moved."

Trying to believe it was a coincidence, the priest put the incident behind him. The next Sunday he preached on the need for increased giving, and was not amused as the organist led them afterwards in the hymn "Jesus Paid It All."

Sunday morning attendance swelled as the tension between the two built. A large crowd showed up the next week to hear his sermon on the sin of gossiping. The organist struck up with "I Love To Tell The Story?"

There was no turning back. The following Sunday the priest told the huge congregation that, unless something changed, he was considering resignation. The atmosphere was electric as the choir set out on the old Gospel standard "Why Not Tonight."

Other local churches were empty the following week as people crowded into the church to hear the resignation sermon. The priest explained that Jesus had led him to the church and now Jesus was leading him away. The organist could not resist it: "What a Friend We Have in Jesus."

Divisions in a church and divisions between churches are all too common and, despite the jokes, are really very sad. They are a major hindrance to the mission of the church. But they have been around since before Apostles like James wrote their letters, trying to heal the differences that were opening up in the early church – the ‘fights and quarrels among you’ (4.1).

Today’s OT reading is about prophets plotting to kill another prophet – Jeremiah. And the Gospel is about competitive ambition amongst the disciples?

Of course, Christians disagree and fall out about nearly anything and everything. Although to be fair, this could be said about any group of people who hold strong religious, political or philosophical views. It is part of the process by which fallible human beings come to hold some common group identity.

A key part of this process is the way in which we handle the differences, and the degree to which we demand conformity. Like cliffs, the real dangers come at the edges.

The history of Christianity over 2000 years, running parallel to the development of the modern democracy, has demonstrated a growing degree of inclusiveness in handling differences, and a lessening concentration on exclusiveness. This is not surprising, as arguably it was the Reformation in Europe in the 16thC which provided the conditions for democratic nation-states to thrive.

Fundamentalists regard all this as the rottenness at the heart of liberal Christianity. They think that General Synod will soon be including the Devil in the Holy Trinity so as not to make Satanists feel excluded!

Whereas, thoroughgoing liberals interpret any demand for conformity as an affront to the great god of individual freedom, and democracy with a capital D.

Over 16 hundred years ago Augustine tried to give a rule for dealing with the squabbles of his own century:

[In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas,
In omnibus autem caritas.}
In essentials unity, In debateable areas liberty,
But in all things love.

The current debate here and in the States, focussed on human sexuality and the role of women, is a debate about whether this is something ‘essential’ to Christianity or whether it is a debateable area. The vitriol that all this has sometimes released is all a long way from the prayer of Jesus ‘that they may be one’.

However, our Lord himself points the way forward in all our disagreements.

In the teaching of Jesus there seems to be a breadth of inclusion for all imperfect disciples (and we all are imperfect disciples) who nonetheless do good. So in Luke 9.49-50:

"Master," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us." "Do not stop him," Jesus said, "for whoever is not against you is for you."

On the other hand, there is a renunciation of those who regard themselves as doctrinally correct, but who nonetheless do evil. Luke 11.23 “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me, scatters.”

When we do see exclusion in Our Lord’s teaching, it is based on what we might call the ‘big’ ethical issues.

Thus in the sermon on the mount, Our Lord is looking for Kingdom living among his followers, for "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.' (Matthew 7.21-23)

But notice the ethical issues are broadly-based, and come under Our Lord’s summary of all ethics: ‘Love God and love your neighbour’, what James calls in the previous chapter ‘the royal law’. It is doing as you would be done by; it is in showing compassion and mercy to the poor and the downtrodden; it is healing the sick and visiting the imprisoned.

For you and me this means that in our relationships with other Christians, other political persuasions, other religions, and so on; we should be generous and inclusive wherever possible.

The Old Testament and the teaching of Jesus and James urge us to be preoccupied with poverty, oppression, injustice, abuse; and to exclude from our society those who foster these scourges.

So how do we deal with our present divisions?

Well, the Bible is certainly our guide, but it has been interpreted in so many different ways concerning what are the essentials’ and ‘non-essentials’. That’s why there are well over 12,000 registered Christian denominations, all with their own particular interpretations of the bible. We presume too much when we presume to know the mind of God in interpreting every jot and tittle of Scripture. As the Orthodox mystic put it: “Man’s walls do not reach up into heaven.”

As the not-so-mystical Edwin Markham put it:

They drew a circle that shut me out
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and I had the wit to win
We drew a circle that took them in

There is not even any infallibility within the good old C of E, for Abp Rowan is not a Pope. And attractive as the idea of a Pope might be to some, we all know from our Roman Catholic friends that he is quietly ignored when it suits! (Newman, 1875: ‘conscience first, and then the Pope.’)

However, Scripture overall presents a test – not always simple – but indicative of the way we should go.

And remember that belief always precedes action. Orthodoxy should always lead to orthopraxis.

So: Is what you believe about God enabling you to love others, with kindness and good deeds? Is it leading you to a place of personal acceptance and freedom? Does it foster hope within you?

Or: Is what you believe leading you deeper into self-absorption and self-righteousness; an inability to give yourself in love to others; and an underlying fear of life and of others who are ‘different’?

I hope you are within the first category. For it is within this secure context, with not a little humility, that we come to deliberate and pray about the ethical dilemmas of our day and culture, using the minds God has given us and the knowledge we have thus far gleaned to study his Word.

And it is to this Table, where the bread and the wine speak to us of the Love of God, that we come because we may, and not because we must;
we come because he first loved us and gave himself for us;
and we come in love and charity with our neighbour, forgiving as God forgives us, and living affectionately with our differences. This is righteous living, that produces a righteous church, society and world.

“Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness.” James 3.18