Sermon - Sept 27, 2009

17th Sunday after Pentecost
September 27, 2009
Mark 9:38-50, Numbers 11:24-29

No Territory Battles Allowed

This section of Mark’s Gospel might be sub-titled, “How many ways can you get it wrong?” There is a good portion of additional material in these chapters, but reflect back with over the past two weeks, leading into today, about the Gospel readings. Two weeks ago it was the confession of Peter. That is great. But remember what happens immediately after Peter’s strong statement of faith. He rejects Jesus’ insistence that Messiah-ship means crucifixion. Remember Jesus telling Peter, “Get behind me, Satan!”?

Last week, we had the argument among the disciples as to which of them was the greatest. Jesus takes the little child, places the child in their midst, and tells them that if they want to approach true greatness they should be like this child.

Today, the disciples get into a territorial dispute. They want to claim exclusive right to speaking for Jesus and in Jesus’ name. Again, Jesus rebukes them, “Do not stop (the person casting out demons in my name); for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is for us.”

How many ways can you get it wrong? I don’t know. There seems to be endless opportunities.

One thing I do know, we (God’s children) are nowhere near being done with our disputes over who is it that has the right to claim to speak God’s Word. Nowhere near. Not now, for sure.

But it seems to be an age-old problem. The readings from the Old Testament are selected as support for the Gospel reading. The issue facing Jesus in Mark 9 was faced by Moses in Numbers 11. Someone thought that somebody else was outstripping their pay-grade and doing something they were not supposed to do. Eldad and Medad had not gone out to the tent meeting where the spirit had come to rest upon the selected seventy. And yet, Eldad and Medad are in the camp, prophesying. Moses is notified, with the expectation that he would call a halt to it all. Moses’ response is almost identical to Jesus: “Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the Lord’s people were prophets.”

Moses is not concerned that these two weren’t members of the selected seventy. Jesus does not worry that the person casting out demons in his name has taken a somewhat different path than John and the twelve apostles. “No territorial battles allowed,” he tells his most faithful followers.

The way of Christ is not the way we would choose to go; among those who choose to follow this way, there will be no opportunities to gain an advantage and become greater than another; and any who seek to do the right thing are to be respected and honored and allowed to continue to distribute their sips of water. No battles for territory are allowed.

I kept looking for a way to end this sermon without venturing into the topic which has occupied so much of our attention these past six weeks. I am referring to the actions taken by our Church, the ELCA, as it gathered in Assembly. The short report of what happened – THE VERY, VERY SHORT report of what happened – is that after two decades of prayer, study, and deliberation our Church adopted a Social Statement on Human Sexuality. The portions of that document which are receiving an inordinate amount of attention are those addressing homosexual orientation and practice. Once the Social Statement was adopted, the Assembly went on to adopt a series of recommendations with regard to ministry practices. These resolutions open the way for those expressions of the Church which choose to do so to “recognize, support, and hold publicly accountable life-long, monogamous, same gender relationships.” Further resolutions open the way for persons in such relationships to be admitted to the roster. In other words they could serve the Church as Pastors.

Since these actions were taken, there has been all sort of posturing. Persons with greatly differing convictions are staking out their response. Quite often the marking of one’s territory involves a critique of where it is that others have taken their stance.

I do understand that those who find these actions to be unacceptable will also find it outrageous that I would even suggest a parallel between the current debate and the comments of Jesus in Mark 9. I know. And I do not wish to misuse or abuse the pulpit by pretending that everyone would agree that there is a connection. But I think there is one worthy of exploring.

At the Churchwide Assembly, the body reversed the order in which the recommendations were approved. Before acting on any ministry policy changes, the Assembly moved "that in the implementation of any resolutions… the ELCA commit itself to bear one another's burdens, love the neighbor, and respect the bound consciences of all." As we entered into the debate on the Assembly floor, and as we struggled to understand how we might live into any approved recommendations, we would being with an assumption that those who choose a differing path are not outside the pall of God’s Spirit-led people. We would respect the thoughts, insights, convictions of one another – even when (especially when) those differ from our own.

No staking out a territory and then rejecting anyone who does not operate out of the same convictions. “Whoever is not against us is for us.”

I do understand that these are weighty matters. And I have not intentionally ignored verses 42-48 of this reading. For some, we are dealing with a topic which may fall into the “placing of a stumbling block” category. For some. But not for all. For others the stumbling block has been there for years. It was a block which said, “Because of who you are/because of what you do, you are not allowed to be considered for particular roles and ways of service.” Verses 42-48 could be read either way. Could be; and likely will be.

Let me make this as simple as I possibly can. We must each decide whether we believe those who speak a word which differs from our own are speaking a word pleasing to themselves or a word which emerges from their devotion to Christ. If it is a word emerging from our own sinful selves, it must be opposed. But, if it is a word birthed out of a desire to do God’s will, it should not be so easily dismissed.

Jesus goes on to say, “Everyone will be salted with fire.” We can all agree with that. The words flying around are certainly setting fire to a lot of congregations and many, many of our congregational members. Jesus seems to think that this salting is good. That, “if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it?” Jesus tells his disciples not to lose this fiery flavor, “Have salt in yourselves,” he says. But this saltiness is not to burn down the bridges between us. He ends by saying, “Have this salt in yourselves, AND be at peace with one another.”

We each have to decide whether we believe those who speak a word which differs from our own are speaking a word pleasing to themselves or a word which emerges from their devotion to Christ. If it is a word emerging from our own sinful selves, it must be opposed. But, if it is a word birthed out of a desire to do God’s will, it should not be so easily dismissed.

Amen. So help us God.