Scripture:
Galatians 3:27-29
26
for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith.
27 As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed
yourselves with Christ. 28 There is no longer Jew or Greek,
there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and
female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you
belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs
according to the promise.
We
reminded each other in the beginning of this sermon series on Paul
that this highly influential leader in our faith is also extremely
controversial - profoundly controversial.
Let
me give you a couple of examples of that. I was told recently that
in one of our Disciple Bible study classes a few years ago when
the group was to study the letters of Paul for a few weeks, that
one student told the class that she would not be coming to class
during those sessions but would return after they finished the
study of Paul. She made that choice because she was so troubled by
the destructive attitudes toward women that she saw in what she
thought were Paul's letters.
The
key phrase in what I said was, "what she thought were Paul's
letters" because there are several letters in the Bible that
are attributed to Paul - six to be exact - that most likely were
not written by him. Almost no mainstream scholar believes that
those six are authentically Paul but were written later by persons
who were followers of Paul and who did something that was common
in that time but is seen as dishonest in our time and used his
name to give their letters authenticity. The disputed letters are
II Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, I and II Timothy, and
Titus.
New
Testament students including myself discount those letters because
the writing style and vocabulary is quite different from Paul in
the seven letters that are really his and because some of the
issues and questions that are addressed are coming from a much
later period in the life of the early Jesus movement.
Now,
fundamentalist Christians will tell you that all of those are
really Paul's, and that is one of the differences between
mainstream thinking and biblical literalism. And, if people
believe that Paul wrote some of those terrible things about women
and slavery that are quoted in your bulletin insert which I will
look at with you in a moment, they will have a very different idea
about this first century apostle than if we only look at the
letters which everyone agrees on.
Let
me offer you one more example of how controversial Paul is and how
your approach to which letters he really wrote can make a
difference. About a year ago a young couple was getting married at
St. Andrew Church and they wanted to ask a relative of theirs to
officiate. We occasionally do that but only if we are comfortable
with the theological background of the clergy person because we do
not want someone leading a service who would, for instance, quote
some of the demeaning things about women in the Bible and the
guests there might think this is the United Methodist belief.
This
relative was a Missouri Synod Lutheran minister which means that
his approach to the Bible is that it is literally true and that it
is inerrant and infallible. I talked with him on the phone about
what scripture he would want to read at the service and the one he
mentioned was the one from Ephesians which says that women are to
be subject to their husbands and that this is not an equal
partnership of marriage but where only one person can be in
charge.
I
told him that was not the United Methodist understanding of
marriage and that besides, I do not believe this really are the
words of the apostle Paul. We agreed to differ about that and he
did not read that passage not only because of our conversation but
also because the couple being married did not want that sort of
first century patriarchal perspective in their service also!
Now,
we have just named one of the keys in understanding what Paul and
Jesus were about. I believe both of them were quite revolutionary
in how welcoming they were of women. We have to remember that the
culture around them was extremely male dominated and that women
usually had no rights, especially if they were widows or had no
sons to give them credibility. Jewish boys in the first century
were taught this prayer growing up: "I thank you God that you
did not create me as a Gentile, a Samaritan, or a woman."
In
the midst of that oppressive patriarchal culture, the way that
Jesus and Paul include and welcome women is a radical thing. Jesus
had women among his larger group of followers, says the gospel of
Luke. He welcomed Mary as a student when her sister Martha was
begging for help in the kitchen. The first persons to witness the
resurrection were women in all the gospels. And the recent
scholarship about Mary Magdalene is showing us how influential a
leader she was in the first few years after Easter.
The
way Jesus treated women was new in this male dominated culture.
AND Paul was just as radical. Paul recruited women as leaders -
ministers - in the early church. Take a look at the Romans passage
in your insert. Paul greets Phoebe and calls her a diakonos - a
minister. He also names Prisca and Aquila who were highly
significant colleagues of his in Corinth for the two years he was
in Corinth establishing a congregation there. And that couple,
Prisca and Aquila also were with him in Ephesus during Paul's two
years in that huge city in Turkey. Later on in that chapter he
greets Junia, another female leader in the community of faith.
So
the many churches today who are not willing to welcome women into
leadership just seem to ignore the examples Paul offers in his
true letters. Instead what they seem to emphasize is the terrible
discriminatory passages in the inauthentic letters such as
Timothy.
Let
me show you what I think is an even more astonishing statement
from Paul about equality between men and women in I Corinthians.
He is addressing in that letter a question that has come from the
Corinthian congregation about marriage and about whether it is
better to be single or married and he comes out with a statement
about mutual sexuality in marriage that is just astounding for a
first century Jew in a male dominated culture. Here is what he
says. "The husband should give to his wife her conjugal
rights and likewise the wife to her husband." He is saying to
married couples in an egalitarian way - be available to fulfill
each other's sexual needs - he is not just saying that to the
wives but to the husbands-that is what is so unusual. And further
he makes another astonishing statement considering his culture and
his time: "For the wife does not have authority over her own
body but the husband does." Sounds like a chauvinist so far.
But then: "Likewise the husband does not have authority over
his body but the wife does."
Paul
is offering a picture of marriage, which is very egalitarian - one
of giving ourselves to each other as equals - and being concerned
mutually about each other's needs. It is not one sided or male
dominated but equal. This is very different from the author of
Ephesians who says that only the man is in charge.
We
can find the same sort of contrast in how the false letters talk
about slavery. In three of the disputed letters the author-not
Paul-encourages slaves to obey their masters. And in America in
the 1840's what happened to those verses? They were used by slave
owners to justify slavery saying that if the Bible approves of
slavery it must be all right.
On
the other hand, while Paul does not encourage a first century
slave revolt, he does tell us that in Christ - this is an
important term for Paul and we use it every Sunday: Our life in
Jesus Christ goes on even after we leave this place of worship.
In
Christ, Paul says, the old barriers and reasons to discriminate
have been broken down from now on there can be neither Jew nor
Greek, slave or free, male or female because Christ has taken down
the reasons for us to feel superior to someone else.
AND-there
is a very subtle thing that Paul does to undermine slavery in his
shortest letter. Which letter is his shortest letter? Philemon is
just 25 verses long. Paul is writing to Philemon who lived in
Colossae about a slave who had run away. Philemon was the owner of
the slave and the slave's name was Onesimus. Onesimus had escaped
and had gone to join Paul. He felt close to Paul because Paul had
helped Onesimus, the slave become a Christian. Now Paul was doing
something very risky. He was sending Onesimus, the slave back to
his owner. Why was this risky? Because under Roman law, the owner
had the legal right to have a runaway slave executed for escaping.
But Paul has been the reason that Philemon the slave owner had
become a Christian also and Paul makes a very daring request. He
not only asks the owner not to punish his runaway slave. He asks
him to set the slave free - to welcome him as a brother.
That
was a revolutionary thing for Paul to do and it reflects what I
believe is how radical he was in applying the freedom of Christ to
all people.
Let's
look at how we are doing in following Paul's lead. In Christ the
reasons to discriminate against people are gone. The barriers we
try to put up so we can demean people are invalid. Our efforts to
divide and to demonize are called into question by the
inclusiveness of Paul.
Where
do we need to look at dismantling some of those barriers? I have
been given an invitation by a member of the Colorado legislature
to consider leading a short term Bible study for any members of
the legislature who might want to be in a bi partisan Bible study
with someone who is not a fundamentalist! When I have asked some
of you what you hope might be some outcomes in such an effort,
some St. Andrew members have said that they hope legislators can
get beyond divisive partisan wrangling and do some things for the
common good of our state and our citizens.
Some have mentioned the bitter feelings that legislators
seem to have left last session with after what I believe was an
ill considered redistricting battle.
And
most Americans in survey after survey say that their wish for
legislatures and legislators is for more bi partisan approaches
and less divisiveness. That is a pressing challenge right now in
our country as I am learning again in a new book by Stanley
Greenberg called "The Two Americas" which is being
praised by leaders in both major parties.
The
opportunity for persons who want to take Paul's example seriously
as well as the example of Jesus is to build bridges between people
instead of barriers that inflame and divide.
But
tragically it is often religion that has been a prime mover in
dividing and demonizing people. The people Jesus had the most
trouble with as he sought to widen the circle of who belongs in
the family of God were the religious leaders who stuck by their
beliefs that some people just didn't belong like those Samaritans
or those Gentiles or those tax collectors or those loose women or
any others who they saw to be sinners - unlike themselves. And so
the problems that Jesus spent the most time addressing were
self-righteousness and greed and hypocrisy among persons who
thought they were more holy than others.
It's
important for me to remember when I get a little self absorbed is
that Jesus had the most trouble and the most conflict with the
religious people of his time. The same thing was true of Dr. King
as well. In fact, he writes in his letter from the Birmingham city
jail that he has been most disappointed with his fellow so-called
Christians because they had been defending a system of bigotry and
racism and prejudice and had not been able to see how unholy and
how sub Christian their actions were. Dr. King included some
Methodist bishops in his criticism in that letter and well he
should have because some of those bishops and other leaders were
part of the problem in maintaining the divisions instead of
building bridges.
Dr.
King and other successful reformers have had some very serious
problems with "religious people" and religious leaders.
That
is because religion can be used for good or evil. Religion, as
Paul was experiencing, can be used to build bridges between people
or to build barriers between people. Religion can be a force to
tear down walls or to build up walls and to say that because those
other people are so different, so unlike us, we should shut them
out and have nothing to do with them. Religion can be used as a
force for good or as a force for evil.
If
you need any reminders of that, let me recommend Dr. Peter Gomes
book on the Bible called "The Good Book" that we just
got some extra copies of. Gomes is the chaplain at Harvard and
recounts how the Bible and religion have been used (misused I
believe) to try and justify slavery in America 150 years ago, to
try and keep women from voting 100 years ago (using some of those
verses from the false Pauline letters), and how it is being used
today to try and deprive gay and lesbian citizens of basic civil
rights.
Religion
can be a force for good or for evil, and Professor Charles Kimball
of the University of North Carolina details that in his book,
which our Monday book group studied a while back. I believe that
book is also on our shelves.
The
apostle Paul was passionate about a faith that breaks down
barriers between people instead of placing walls and dividers
between us. It was his experience that a relationship with Jesus
Christ has the effect of bringing people together instead of
pulling them apart, of giving us reasons to include and welcome
rather than to exclude and shut out.
He
took that stance even though his previous approach as a passionate
Pharisee had been to isolate and destroy his opponents - the early
Jesus followers. He made his change because he was a new person.
He had a new heart. He had been transformed by meeting the risen
Christ. He lived out the words he wrote in II Corinthians: If
anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation. The old life has
passed away and everything has become new. All this has happened
from God who has reconciled us to himself and who has given us the
work of - not dividing people, demonizing people, not of shutting
off and walling off people who are different from us - but who has
given us the work of reconciliation.
I
thank God for the way Paul described that mission of
reconciliation and pray that each of us may be willing to take it
on once more so that in Christ there will be neither Jew not
Greek, slave not free, male nor female but that we all may be one
in Christ.
