Sermon for the Sixteenth Sunday after Pentecost; Sept. 28, 2003

 

The Rev. Dayle Casey
The Chapel of Our Saviour
Colorado Springs, Colorado
September 28, 2003

 

 

Proper 21 - B
Numbers 11:4-6, 10-16, 24-29
James 4:7--5:6
Mark 9:38-48

 

 

“Family vacation” is an oxymoron in every language. Back when Judy and Aaron and Ethan and I would take a family trip across the country, my way was to get most of the day’s driving done before breakfast. Their way was to stay in bed as long as possible. My way was to take care of all needs at one service station and not to stop again until the gas gauge approached empty. Their way was to stop at every rest stop and historical marker and every hill and mole hill on the road. When flying, my way is to be the first in line at the airport check-in counter, and then enjoy an hour or two with the newspaper and a cup of coffee while waiting for the plane. They prefer to have the plane wait for them. And by the end of the trip, everyone has had a go at explaining whose way is the right way! 

There’s no better way to test how well you get along with another person than to take a trip together.

The Bible is the story of a long family trip. In the Book of Numbers this morning we find the people of Israel on their way from Egypt to Canaan, with Moses as their driver. And in the Gospel of Mark the disciples are on their way to Jerusalem, with Jesus leading the way. These are two legs of the same journey, the journey the Bible tells us about as the people of God make their way to the kingdom of God.

On the earlier leg of the trip things are not going well. It was a long and meandering trek from slavery in Egypt to freedom in the Promised Land. It took forty years, someone has said, because even back then men wouldn’t stop to ask directions. There weren’t any Holiday Inns, food and water were hard to find, and from the back seat came a frequent whine: “Moses, are we there yet? Where are you taking us anyway, Moses? Have you brought us out into this wilderness to starve to death? Let’s go back to Egypt where we had all the meat and onions and garlic we wanted to eat. We’re sick of this manna!”

Moses, as one person put it, stood between the whining of the people and the Lord’s anger at their unwillingness to pay a price for freedom. And it gets so bad for Moses that he decides he has had enough of the privilege of leadership. “This people is a burden too heavy for me,” he complains to God. “I cannot carry it alone.”

So God tells Moses to delegate some of the responsibility. God said that if Moses would gather seventy of Israel’s elders at the Tent of Meeting, he would take some of the Spirit he had conferred upon Moses and would give it to the seventy, who would then share Moses’s burden of leadership. As it turned out, however, only sixty-eight of the seventy do as they are told and go to the Tent of Meeting. There the Lord gives each of them a portion of his Spirit, and the sixty-eight begin to prophesy. 

Then Moses receives a report that Eldad and Medad had not gone to church as they were supposed to, but that the Spirit had come to rest on them anyway and that they were somewhere back in the camp prophesying as well. And this is just too much for Joshua, who has faithfully served with Moses since he was a boy, and he tattles to Moses, “Moses, my Lord, stop them.” But Moses says to him, “Are you jealous on my account, Joshua? I wish that all the Lord’s people were prophets, and that the Lord would bestow his Spirit upon them all!”

On the later leg of the trip we find that things aren’t much different. Jesus and the disciples are on their way to Jerusalem when they come across a young boy who is sick and possessed by demons. The disciples try to heal the boy, but they can’t do it. So Jesus heals him. And shortly after this, John runs up to Jesus and tattles, “Master, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and since he was not one of us we tried to stop him.” And Jesus reassures John, “Do not stop him,” he says, “for anyone who performs a miracle in my name will not be able the next moment to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is on our side.”

“Whoever is not against us is on our side.” This was a hard saying for John to swallow, just as it is a hard saying for some Christians to swallow today. But there it is, right there in the Bible. It was a hard saying for John’s friend Matthew as well, because when Matthew later told these stories Mark tells about Jesus, he told almost all of them, but he left out this story about the unknown healer. And later in his Gospel, Matthew takes the words of Jesus we just heard in Mark and turns them around and upside down. Matthew’s Jesus flatly contradicts Mark’s Jesus. “Whoever is not with me is against me” -- that’s what Matthew says that Jesus says.

Matthew’s is a Gospel of sharp distinctions. He speaks a lot about the sheep and the goats, about the saved and the damned, about insiders and outsiders. Matthew’s Jesus says, “Whoever is not with us is against us.” But Mark’s Jesus doesn’t speak this way. Mark’s Jesus says that “whoever is not against us is on our side.”

Well, I don’t know about you, but this leaves me with at least two questions: Why do you think Matthew did that to this story of Jesus he found in Mark? And which Jesus is right?

This is one of those places, I think, where theology has to help us interpret the Scriptures, one of those places where we have to begin by asking ourselves what, deep down, we know God to be like as he has been revealed to us in Jesus, and then rely on that revealed God himself to help us come to grips with what the Bible is saying to us.

Is God a God who boxes out all those who don’t follow the rules? Is God a God who damns those who don’t believe the right things? If so, then what are we to do with the story of Eldad and Medad, who didn’t follow the rules but whom God entrusted with his Spirit anyway? And what do we do with the story of the unknown healer in Mark’s Gospel, the unknown healer who “wasn’t one of us,” as John said, but whom Jesus praised for his good deed and power and said, “Whoever is not against us is on our side”?

This makes me think of Gandhi. Early in his life in South Africa, Gandhi was greatly attracted to Jesus, but Gandhi did not become a Christian, because many of the Christians he saw there did not seem to live very close to the way Jesus lived. 

When the black plague broke out in the squalid Indian ghetto of Johannesburg, the sick and dying had to be quarantined. And a heroic nurse -- whether she was a Christian or a Hindu or a Muslim or Jewish or of no religious faith at all, I don’t know -- in any case the nurse took fearless charge of the care of the victims of the plague. 

And the nurse later tells of a night when a small figure appeared at the door. She shouted a warning: “Get out! This is plague!” But the man quietly replied, “It’s all right. I’ve come to help you.” The nurse realized he was a leader in the Indian community, so she let him in. At once, Gandhi went to the sick. She watched him bend over a dying man covered with vermin. “Leave him,” she ordered. “I’m used to it [and have already been exposed].” But Gandhi continued to attend to the man himself. Whether the sick man was Christian or Hindu or Muslim or unbeliever, I don’t know. And neither did Gandhi know. But Gandhi looked up at the nurse and replied, “He is my brother.” And he stayed throughout the night until relief came.

Was Gandhi the unknown healer Jesus was talking about when he said, “Whoever is not against us is on our side”? 

“Whoever is not against us is on our side.” Sometimes I wonder what we’ve done to the name of Christ.

Those of you who read Peanuts know that Charlie Brown has a problem with kites. Every time Charlie Brown gets a kite in the air, it gets caught in a tree. In one strip, Charlie Brown goes out to buy yet another new kite, but this time the owner of the kite store refuses to sell him one. Charlie Brown is crestfallen, and when he sees Lucy outside the store, he says, “They won’t sell me a kite. They say I’ll just get it caught in a tree. They say I’m giving kite flying a bad name.”

“That’s ridiculous!” Lucy says, outraged. “Give me your money. I’ll go buy a kite for you.”

Lucy marches into the store. “Sir,” she says, “I want to buy a red kit. What? Of course, it’s for myself. What do you think I’m going to do, give it to my friend, Charlie Brown?” And Lucy immediately realizes her slip, but it’s too late.

And then, back out on the sidewalk, Lucy comforts Charlie Brown. “Here, Charlie Brown, I bought you a marble.”

Charlie Brown has to face up to what he has done to the name of kite flying. And I wonder if we Christians are ready to face up to what we sometimes do to the name of Christ when we use it to beat up on those who don’t play by the rules as we understand them, or when we use the name of Christ to exclude those who don’t believe as we do, those who, as John said to Jesus, “are not one of us”?

We have some explaining to do, don’t we, when we use Christ’s name in this way, while God gives his Spirit to Eldad and Medad, and while Jesus praises the unknown man who was “not one of us” and says that “whoever is not against us is on our side.”

If the Bible is the story of the trip we are all taking toward the kingdom of God, it seems to me that it is a story of a people who do not all agree, and never have all agreed, a story of a people who do not always follow the same rules. Joshua was mightily annoyed that God would do such an outrageous thing as give his Spirit to those who didn’t get themselves to church when they had been told to, and John couldn’t imagine sharing the healing ministry of Jesus with those who “are not one of us.” 

And here on our own later part of the journey, we know that Lutherans and Episcopalians and Jews and Baptists and Hindus and Muslims and Roman Catholics are different, and that we don’t all believe the same things. As we saw at our General Convention this summer, and as we will see at our diocesan convention next weekend, not even all Episcopalians believe the same things or follow the same rules. And how could it possibly be otherwise? It is not possible, it seems to me, for all people to believe the same things, anymore than it is possible that everyone will want to get on the road at the same time every morning.

I’m reminded here of the story about Bishop Fulton Sheen, who was a popular television personality forty or fifty years ago. Bishop Sheen was invited to address a number of important persons at City Hall in New York City one day, but on his way there he got lost. He got off the subway at the nearest stop, but City Hall was a two or three block walk from there, and on his way he made a wrong turn and found himself in the middle of a side street where a number of young men were playing stick ball. Bishop Sheen asked the young men for directions to City Hall, and they gave them to him. Then, before he left, he asked them if they would like to go with him to listen to his speech so they could learn how to get to heaven, and one of the fellows said, “Mister, you can’t even find City Hall. How are you going to find heaven?”

For us human beings to try to squeeze everyone into the same theological box is simply to seek the impossible. And what today’s stories say to me is that God himself does not expect it. If today’s stories say anything, they say that God is not fenced in by our boundaries, and that God sends his Spirit where he wants to. These stories suggest that God’s boundaries are considerably more expansive and more elastic than ours, that God sometimes gives his Spirit and power to those who are “not one of us” as well as to us, and that if those who are “not one of us” are not against us, then they’re on our side.

William Willimon tells two interesting stories that reflect two different theologies, two different views of the revealed God, and of his Church and his kingdom. They are two different theologies that compete for our consideration as we read our Bibles and make our journey together toward God’s kingdom.

The first is about a woman named Linda Petracelli. Although she is now a United Church of Christ minister, she grew up going to a strict Roman Catholic school. And she recalls that one day Sister Mary Roberts Cecilia delivered the sermon to the children in chapel. One of the things Sister Mary Roberts Cecilia told them was that everyone who is not Catholic, everyone including, and especially, Lutherans and Episcopalians, is going to hell. 

That afternoon when Linda got home, her mother asked her the question she asked her every afternoon. “What are you thankful for today, dear?” she wanted to know. And Linda sighed, “I’m thankful that Sister Mary Roberts Cecilia is not God.”

I don’t tell this story, I hope you realize, because I think it is uniquely, or even characteristically, reflective of Roman Catholics. I tell it because Sister Mary Roberts Cecilia’s is a theology that lurks deep within us all.

The other story is about a Wednesday evening in the basement of Duke University Chapel. Willimon says that the Duke Chapel basement has only eight rooms, but on this particular Wednesday evening all thirteen religious groups that call the Chapel basement home were having meetings or services.

Baptists were stepping over Lutherans, the Jews were holding a heated discussion in the Presbyterian Campus Ministry office, the Roman Catholics had borrowed the Methodists’ space for their Eucharist, and Campus Crusade had overflowed into the Catholic Campus Ministry Center.

Willimon says that as he passed the Lutheran campus minister, who was trying to make his way to his own group through a throng of praying charismatics, he heard him mutter, ‘Won’t we all be in for a surprise if heaven looks like this!’”

Many of you know the Center for Christian-Jewish Dialogue, which was founded several years ago by Rabbi Hirsch. Made up of all kinds of Jews and all kinds of Christians, the Center assumes that its members will never agree on everything and will never believe all the same things. So it took the Center a long time to pull together a vision statement for this group which, in principle, cannot agree on many things. Because the members cannot agree even on something as fundamental as who Jesus is, “right belief” cannot therefore be part of the Center’s vision or objective.

So here is the vision the Center agreed upon: “The Center for Christian-Jewish Dialogue brings Christians and Jews together to explore and understand their beliefs and values in ways that build relationships which are pleasing to God.”

What a splendid vision! What a splendid objective for the journey we’re all taking together!

The reality is that it is simply not possible, on this family trip of ours, for everyone to believe the same things, anymore than it is possible that everyone will want to get on the road at the same time each morning or will want to stop at the same places along the way.

What is possible is a mutual exploration and a mutual sharing of our beliefs and values “in ways that build relationships which are pleasing to God.”

Wouldn’t that be a wonderful vision statement for the Church of Christ itself? And for the Episcopal Church in particular. I wonder, in fact, if it’s not the Bible’s vision for the human journey. Wouldn’t it be a wonderful vision statement for the nations of the world?

Perhaps that’s what God is using the Bible to do to us today in these stories about Eldad and Medad and the unknown healer. Perhaps God is calling us to recognize that God’s boundaries are considerably more elastic and expansive than ours. Perhaps God is calling us to recognize that God’s boundaries can include those who “are not one of us.” Maybe God is calling us who are on this journey of life to recognize that his vision for human beings is for all of us, regardless of agreement or disagreement, to explore and understand our beliefs and values in ways that build relationships among ourselves which are pleasing to him.

Is it possible that such relationships are the kingdom we’ve been searching for all these years?
In the Name of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Amen.