(Click the title link above to hear a recording of this sermon from the 6PM service)
I Corinthians 1:10-18
St. Paul’s Episcopal Church
Franklin, Tennessee
January 26, 2014
Chris O’Rear, M.Div.,
M.M.F.T.
Whether it is a friendly argument about which rock band is
the greatest of all history or a political election, we like to win. We like to be right. We want to be on the winning side and we like
to be number one. It feels good to win
and no one likes to lose. Our culture
seems to be built on winning and losing.
We fight for our candidate to win elections to push our favorite
agendas. We use any means necessary to
discredit our opponents in the political arena.
There are those in baseball and other sports that can tell us that the
end justifies the means when it comes to winning and breaking records set by
someone else. We push ourselves to the
max, we abuse ourselves and others, and we sacrifice all in the name of
winning.
In Paul’s day, in Corinth, it was not the sports, but the
politics of the community that seeped into the church. The leaders and teachers of society were
judged by the eloquence of their arguments.
Persuasive teachers crafted carefully worded arguments for their own
position. Those that were deemed the
most persuasive were called wise and worthy of being followed. The people in the church at Corinth took the
same means of reflection to Paul’s teachings.
They began to notice that Paul’s arguments and teachings were not as
clever as some others. Whether they actually
formed groups or parties around various teachers is debated, but there do seem
to have been some divisions within the church.
Some still supported Paul and his stance that the Jewish roots of
Christianity were not that important, but others began say that some other
teachers and preachers were more persuasive.
Some were persuaded by Peter and his high regard for the Jewish roots of
Christianity. Some were persuaded by the
philosophical ideas of the Hellenistic Jews espoused by Apollos. This is not to say that Peter or Apollos
were actively seeking followers of their own or trying to divide the church,
but apparently there were those who identified with one over another.
The rivalry grew; each group vying for dominance in the
church. Which group would have one of
THEIR people as head of the vestry?
Which group would get THEIR person elected Bishop? Which of their ideas would predominate the
preaching and teaching or be incorporated into the catechism? Each group fought for their own view and
sought to overpower the rival views. The
rivalry grew and the difficulties increased until the divisions spilled out
into the community. It got so bad that
it finally got back to Paul because “Chloe’s people told him”. Why did Chloe or her people even care? Were they supporters of Paul who were afraid
of losing their position or were they neutral observers who feared the
consequences of the escalating tensions?
We don’t know.
What we do know is that where rivalry grows and a score-keeping
mentality dominates, there is no true community. In a
relationship with trust and true connection, we do for others as they need and
we have every reason to expect that they will do for us. In a healthy relationship, interactions are
marked by respect, openness and honesty.
But when one person or group has to win and one has to lose, then
relationships are based on competition.
Interactions are guarded and the words of others are treated with
suspicion. If we are not sure the other
has our best interest at heart, then we mistrust everything they do and we are
careful to keep score to make sure we get what we think is fair. True community cannot exist where such
interactions occur. Someone has to win
and someone has to lose. I have met so
many couples through the years that have lost the sense of trust in their
partner. They have grown suspicious of
the other’s intent or actions. It gets
so bad at times that one person can say, “Look at the beautiful blue sky” and
the other says, “What do you mean by that?” or “You have no idea what a blue
sky is”. It is very difficult for us to
come back from such a place when the level of resentment has grown to that
level.
It almost sounds foolish when Paul simply writes, “Be of the
same mind and let there be no divisions among you.” That is like a parent saying to their arguing
kids, “you two stop that. You need to
get along with each other.” That is
great, but what does that look like? How
are we supposed to make that happen?
As I was reading this passage, I couldn’t help but think of
Bill Cosby from “Himself” when he talks about parents dealing with arguing
kids. He says, “Parents are not
interested in justice — they want QUIET!” They don’t care who started the fight or who said what; they just want
it to stop. What results in the kids is
not a true understanding or resolution to the conflict, but a false peace. For the kids it is like, “My mom just makes
me say, “I’m sorry”. I don’t have to
actually BE sorry.” In this way, we
might think that Paul is just calling for everyone to be…“Polite”. We don’t have to get along; we just have to
pretend that we get along. We speak
civilly to one another, but tear each other down behind our backs. We pretend to agree while harboring deep
judgment or disgust for the other. This
is what we in the therapist business call “False Community”. It is one of the early stages of group
dynamics. Everyone wants to get along,
so everyone pretends to get along even though they might not get along. This may be a short-term coping strategy
(like some of you used with your in-laws over the holidays), but it is not a
path to true community. For “true community” to develop, false community has to
be replaced with something more meaningful.
Paul is not
advocating for “false community” and its superficial agreement. In fact in Chapter 11 of this same book, Paul
says that the existence of differences is necessary in order to find the
truth. What Paul does, however, is point
the church members beyond their focus on their arguments to something bigger
than themselves. Paul’s response
to the church is NOT an attempt to make a more eloquent argument for his own
position and reinforce any divisions there.
His response is to get to the heart of the conflict. Paul says, “No, I was not as eloquent as
some, but if you are persuaded by the eloquence, then you have robbed the
message of the cross of its ability to speak for itself.” The
message of the cross is foolish for those who do not get it, but it is the
power of God for those who are being saved by it.
Paul goes on in the
following verses to make the contrast between the world’s wisdom and God’s
wisdom. What the world sees as
important, is rubbish in God’s economy.
Paul notes that while the people have boasted to one another about which
great teacher they follow, they really have nothing to boast in besides
Christ. While they have inflated their
own importance, they have nothing without Christ. Christ died for all of us because of the sin
in all of us. If we are all in need of
salvation, then none of us is any better than any other of us and the only
value we have is as a child of God. If
we understand each person as fellow child of God and we are seeking to value
the things that God values, then whether or not we win the argument becomes
less important. If we are having heavy
discussions, but we are guided by love and respect for the other, the
conversation will end very differently than if we seek to defeat the
other. The world will tell us to protect
our own, to defend our position, to win at all costs. It is utter foolishness to say, “Love your
enemy”. It is folly to seek the honor of
your rival.
This time last year, my oldest daughter was studying in South
Africa. She had the chance to visit
Robben Island where Nelson Mandela was held for most of the 27 years he was
imprisoned. When he was released from
prison in 1990 it would have made sense by our usual standards for him to seek
revenge on those who held him in captivity.
It would make sense for him to want to defeat them, but Nelson Mandela
seems motivated by something else. He
invited his former jailer to dinner. He
invited his former prison guard to his inauguration and he once had lunch with
a man who had tried to have him killed.
He was once quoted as saying, “A good
leader can engage in a debate frankly and thoroughly, knowing that at the end
he and the other side must be closer, and thus emerge stronger. You don't have
that idea when you are arrogant, superficial, and uninformed.”
We can learn from from his example. We can learn from the apostle Paul. As we have discussions within the body of
Christ, let us not forget the leveling message of the cross and the love of God
for each one of us. May we reflect that
love in all that we do and all that we say.
Amen.
