From the Pulpit: Stumbling Blocks

(These excerpts are from a sermon preached on Sunday, March 18, 2012. Text = Romans 14: 13-19)

To us, it might seem like a silly conflict. But to them, it was dreadfully important. Members of the early Roman church had different ideas about what they should eat, when they should eat, and where they should eat. And both sides are looking to Paul for vindication, for the assurance that their side is right and that the other side is wrong.

Paul, however, takes neither side. Instead, he says this:

“Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another. I know that I am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. If your brother or sister is being injured by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. Do not let what you eat cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died.”

Now again, Paul’s focus on the issue of food as a source of division, as something that can be a stumbling block to faith, might seem silly to us. In every church I’ve ever been to, food is a powerful source of unity. It’s just about the only thing everyone can agree on. Let’s get together and share some good food, and let’s do it as often as we can. It’s practically our 11th Commandment. We can’t imagine food ever being a source of major conflict.

But change the word “food” in Paul’s letter to something else, and it makes perfect sense for us. What if he said, “If your brother or sister is being injured by the type of music you use in worship, you are no longer walking in love.” Or, “If your brother or sister is injured by the way you dress in church, you are no longer walking in love.” Or, “If your brother or sister is injured by the type of furniture you buy for the church parlor, you are no longer walking in love.”

All of these things are real sources of conflicts that happen in churches today, and each one has the potential to divide and distract just as much as the food issue divided and distracted the early Christians...

... Occasionally, someone will ask me what I think is the appropriate standard of dress for church. Usually, the person is hoping I’ll agree with their opinion, whether they’re in favor of suits and dresses or simply say, "As long as you've got something on." And they’re usually surprised when I give my response, because I try to reflect what Paul is saying to the Romans. I say that it really isn’t that important whether someone dresses formally or casually for church. It’s no more important than whether 1st century Christians followed the Jewish or the Gentile traditions about food.

What’s important is what Paul says in the latter part of today’s passage when he says this: “Let us then pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding. Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but is wrong for you to make others fall by what you eat. It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or not to do anything that makes your brother or sister stumble.”...

... When I was in South Carolina, I had to call a locksmith one day to repair the deadbolt on our back door. We got to talking, and when he found out I’m a minister, he confessed that he used to go to church, to a Presbyterian church that was about 10miles down the road. But he had stopped attending a couple of years ago.

When I asked him why, he explained that he had been asked to be an usher and was thrilled with the opportunity to serve. One Sunday, however, as he was passing the offering plates, he overheard a woman say that they shouldn’t be letting someone like him be an usher. She had seen the tattoos that he has on each of his forearms, and did not think they were appropriate. The left after that service and never went back, and as he explained to me, the experience was so painful he wasn’t sure if he would ever go back to any church.

Now whether or not the tattoos were appropriate is not the issue. The issue is that by making her comment, the woman placed a stumbling block between this young man and Jesus. In her act of judgment, she was more concerned about the church’s unwritten rules on physical appearance than she was about how to help nurture this man along in his faith...

... Again, it all boils down to the standard that Paul creates in Romans 14. “Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another.” It’s an approach that requires both humility and compassion, especially in this day and age when the new people who are coming to faith might have little or no understanding of what it means to be a Christian and to be part of a worshipping community.

As we continue through this season of Lent, may we confess the ways that we are placing stumbling blocks in front of each other. And with humility and faith, may we remember that it is only through Christ that these blocks will be removed. Amen.

From the Pulpit: Risky Faith

(This excerpt is from a sermon preached October 16, 2011 - based on I Thessalonians 1:1-10)

The apostles were quite bold in taking risks, but not taking too many. As he travelled from place to place, Paul developed a keen sense of when to aggressively push with the Gospel, and when to retreat and take a more defensive tactic. The Book of Acts details this balance of sound risk-taking as the Christian faith exploded from a disorganized band of 12 disciples into a powerful religion that has changed the scope of world history.

But even more important than imitating the apostle’s risky faith is the fact that they have imitated Christ himself – Paul says “us and the Lord”. Because the apostles didn’t invent their strategy of good risk-taking. They were imitating what Jesus Christ did on the cross. So what Paul is really telling the Thessalonians is that since Christ was not afraid of risks, and was not even afraid being killed, then neither should Christ’s followers be afraid.

Now it might seem strange to say that Christ on the cross was a risk. It might even seem heretical to put it this way, because it implies that God, by sending his only Son into the world, was rolling the dice – that God was not in control of things. It implies that Jesus was just taking a chance and hoping for the best when he started his ministry. And it implies that this risk failed when he was killed.

So what, then, is Paul getting at when he says that we should be imitators of the apostles and of Christ? What does it mean for us to have a “risky faith” that Paul would praise?

Let’s think back to those games of Risk that I played with my brothers, and specifically to my failed strategy. Recall that I played too defensively, always trying to find a safe corner where I could hole up and protect myself. And recall how I always lost, because my brothers would build up bigger armies by being more aggressive. As it turns out, my risk-averse strategy was actually quite risky. By failing to take any risks, I was taking the biggest risk of all. I was guaranteeing that I would not succeed. Just ask anyone who has started a business. They will understand this principle well.

Now apply this principle to the cross. In order for Jesus to succeed, in order for him win our salvation, he had to die and rise again. And in order to be driven to the cross, he had to have a certain level of aggressiveness and risk-taking in his ministry. If he had avoided all danger and all risk, he never would become our Lord and Savior. Therefore, for Jesus to be completely risk-averse would have been the biggest risk of all.

That’s what Paul is talking about when he talks about imitating Christ. He is praising the Thessalonians for not being so timid and so risk-averse that they can’t fulfill the calling that God has given them. They endure labors and persecutions, but persevere to become examples of faith for churches everywhere.

And we are no different. We are called to be imitators of the Thessalonians, imitators of the apostles, and imitators of Christ. We are called to avoid the biggest risk of all, which is not fulfilling our God-given purpose. We are called to find the balance that comes in taking take good risks.

For Jesus, taking good risks involved speaking the truth about the Kingdom of God and challenging the authorities of this time. For Paul and the early Christians, taking good risks meant going into potentially dangerous places and sharing the good news of Christ. What, then, does taking good risks mean for us?

That’s a question that each one of us will answer differently. For some, a good risk is inviting a neighbor to church. For others, a good risk is volunteering for an outreach ministry that seems a little intimidating. For still others, a good risk is speaking up with an opinion that might not be popular with everyone who hears it. And for some, just to show up at church, or at Bible study, or at a Fellowship meal is a risk – but a risk that is worth taking.

But as Paul has shown, and as my boyhood games of Risk have shown, the true risk – the one that we should always avoid taking – is the risk of never taking one. Amen.

From the Pulpit: "Divided We Fall"

An excerpt from the sermon I preached on September 11, 2011, based on Romans 14: 1-12. It was preached as much to myself as to anyone else, for I have often been guilty of the judgmentalism that Paul decries in this passage.)

In the time immediately following the 9/11 attacks, there were a variety of different interpretations of what happened and opinions about what should be the response – but there was also unity and a shared sense of purpose. For a short while, we were truly one people, coming together to mourn a terrible loss and somehow pick up the pieces and move on.

But that unity soon disintegrated. It did not take long before the nation split back into the usual factions. Instead of respectful discussion that fostered a shared vision, our different perspectives led us to name calling, finger pointing, and political opportunism. We became a nation of two camps at war with each other as much as with the terrorists. In the last couple of years, as we have added an economic crisis to our list of challenges, this divisiveness and hostility has only intensified – and the nation as a whole is suffering.

As we see in the 14th chapter of Romans, the earliest Christians had similar problems with divisiveness and infighting. For them, the point of controversy was differing practices involving food. Some of them fasted on the Lord’s Day, or only ate vegetables, while others ate whatever they pleased. To us, such a dispute dispute might seem trivial, at least in comparison to the issues that we face today. But in the early church, such a conflict could have destroyed their fragile new fellowship. Paul knows that peace and unity must be maintained, which is why he is so clear about them not condemning one another over these food practices.

He says this: “Who are you to pass judgment on servants of another? It is before their own lord that they stand or fall.” And this: “Why do you pass judgment on your brother or sister? Why do you despise your brother or sister? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.” And finally, this: “Each one of us will be accountable to God.”

Three times Paul makes the point that judgment is God’s business, not ours. But that’s not all Paul says. He goes on to turn the message of warning about God’s judgment into a beautiful statement about God’s love and mercy.

He reminds us that the Lord is able to make us all stand, despite our weaknesses, and that all of us who are brothers and sisters in Christ belong to the Lord. We all live to the Lord, and we all die to the Lord. And because the Lord rose from the dead, so shall all of us who believe in him.

It’s a stunning lesson in humility and grace. None of us are perfect and none of us are saved by our own merit. Therefore, none of us have a basis to claim superiority over any other member of Christ’s body because of the differences that we have.

Because of this, if he were here today, Paul would likely have a thing or two to say about the direction our national discourse has taken since 9/11. He would also caution us that our tendency to bicker and to judge one another makes us weaker. It threatens our unity in the same way that the early church in Rome was threatened by constant arguments over their different practices.

And the same is true of our Presbyterian denomination. Our national church body has been embroiled in a contentious debate for more than 15 years over different ideas about the ordination of homosexuals. And the two sides have been extremely judgmental of one another, using harsh labels such as bigoted, heretical, hateful, and wicked to describe one another.

I have even heard people, on both sides of the debate, question the very faith of those who hold the opposite opinion. I believe that if Paul were here and heard such judgments being made, he would say something similar to what he told the Christians in Rome. For perhaps the most striking portion of this passage is when Paul says this about the different believers with different notions of what is right:

“Those who observe the day, observe it in honor of the Lord. Those who eat, eat in honor of the Lord, since they give thanks to God; while those who abstain, abstain in honor of the Lord, and give thanks to God.”

Paul is clear that it’s not a matter of who is faithful and who is not, or who is sinful and who is not. Because we are all faithful, and we are all sinners. And we are all saved only by the grace of Jesus Christ that is given through his death and resurrection. This common bond of salvation should be more than sufficient to keep us united and respectful to one another when we have disagreements.