Handling conflict
04/09/14 05:13
The writer of the gospel of Matthew had an axe to grind. At least that is the way it seems to a casual reader. Each of the gospel writers has a unique perspective and each chooses to tell the story of Jesus in a different manner. Mark launches into his story with John quoting Isaiah, the baptism of Jesus and the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness. Matthew starts with a rather complex genealogy of Jesus, counting the generations from Abraham to David and from David to Jesus (on his father’s side). Luke gives us a dedication, the prophecies, the story of John the Baptist’s parents and Mary and Joseph’s discovery of the news of the coming baby before getting around to a beautiful birth narrative in the second chapter. John’s Gospel launches with pure poetry and theology, not aiming to give the facts as much as to interpret the meaning. Each gives a unique glimpse of the life of Jesus from a different perspective.
But Only Matthew has this obscure flash forward. In the 18th Chapter of Matthew Jesus, who up to that point has been teaching disciples and addressing pharisees and gentiles and everyday Jews, suddenly goes into a little speech about the life of the church. Hmm . . . in no other gospel, does the word “ekklesia” appear. The church didn’t get organized in Jesus life. Conflict in the church was decades away during Jesus’ lifetime.
I suppose a Biblical literalist would say that Jesus, son of God, who was with God at the beginning (at least according to the Gospel of John) was anticipating the future. As one who is beyond all time, he knew what was going to happen before it happened and so was giving advice to the church that he knew would develop after his lifetime.
I don’t mean to be cynical, but it really seems like the Gospel writer had an axe to grind with a fellow Christian and decided to put his theories of resolving church conflict into the mouth of Jesus - perhaps in support of his own position.
I wasn’t there. I don’t know what was going through the mind of the Gospel writer. And I have had little interest in the scholarly pursuit of sifting through the Gospels and rating sayings attributed to Jesus in terms of the likelihood that they are direct quotes memorized by listeners for later recording or saying attributed to Jesus after his death. All of the words of the Gospels have been treasured by the church for so many generations, that they have value to people of faith and are to be treasured and passed down to succeeding generations.
Still, there are few Biblical passages that have been more abused in church life than those two verses:
“If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” (Matthew 18:15-17).
One wonders how often those verses have been used as an excuse to drum someone out of the church. If someone does something you don’t like, start with a personal visit; when that doesn’t work take a couple of witnesses; when that doesn’t work tell everyone in the church . . .
It makes the one who believes he or she is the victim of a sin the accuser and turns the church into judge and jury. It doesn’t define sin. It doesn’t give any advice to the one who has been accused. What if the accusation is false?
But the real “kicker” in this particular teaching is when it gets to the punishment phase: “if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” Let’s see, what do I remember about Matthew’s background? Oh, yes, Matthew was a tax collector before he took up Gospel writing.
How do we treat Gentiles and tax collectors? We welcome them with open arms. We treat them as brothers and sisters. Like Jesus and Zacchaeus, we sit down and share a meal with them.
The invitation of the passage is to respond with love when sin occurs. Without attacking or condemning others, the church is invited to move forward with love, welcoming all and extending special hospitality to those who have been marginalized, whether by their own behavior or the opinions of others.
Those verses, when carefully read, hardly support drumming anyone out of the church.
Which leaves me wondering what Matthew’s purpose was in including those particular verses. One thing is clear, they occur in a specific context in the Gospel. Matthew isn’t over with Jesus’ teaching with this little “flash forward” to the existence of the church. There are still ten more chapters to his Gospel. The very next verses have Peter asking Jesus about how many times one ought to forgive. Peter suggests that perhaps seven is an awful lot of tolerance. Jesus raises the bar to seven times seventy.
Those verses don’t often get read in tandem when one wants to get judgmental about others. Perhaps we ought to apply the advice about forgiveness to the preceding verses:
“If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. But if you are not listened to,” (repeat the process seven times seventy times offering forgiveness. If that fails,) “take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.” (Repeat the process seven times seventy times.) “If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church;” (again repeat seven times seventy times) “and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” - that is forgive and welcome that person as a brother or a sister.
Whatever the early church was fighting about when Matthew wrote the gospel has long sense been forgotten. I suspect that most of our petty battles are in the same category - we won’t remember them after a little time passes. What is worth remembering is that when all else fails, Matthew recommends that the church treat others the way he has been treated - as a tax collector.
But Only Matthew has this obscure flash forward. In the 18th Chapter of Matthew Jesus, who up to that point has been teaching disciples and addressing pharisees and gentiles and everyday Jews, suddenly goes into a little speech about the life of the church. Hmm . . . in no other gospel, does the word “ekklesia” appear. The church didn’t get organized in Jesus life. Conflict in the church was decades away during Jesus’ lifetime.
I suppose a Biblical literalist would say that Jesus, son of God, who was with God at the beginning (at least according to the Gospel of John) was anticipating the future. As one who is beyond all time, he knew what was going to happen before it happened and so was giving advice to the church that he knew would develop after his lifetime.
I don’t mean to be cynical, but it really seems like the Gospel writer had an axe to grind with a fellow Christian and decided to put his theories of resolving church conflict into the mouth of Jesus - perhaps in support of his own position.
I wasn’t there. I don’t know what was going through the mind of the Gospel writer. And I have had little interest in the scholarly pursuit of sifting through the Gospels and rating sayings attributed to Jesus in terms of the likelihood that they are direct quotes memorized by listeners for later recording or saying attributed to Jesus after his death. All of the words of the Gospels have been treasured by the church for so many generations, that they have value to people of faith and are to be treasured and passed down to succeeding generations.
Still, there are few Biblical passages that have been more abused in church life than those two verses:
“If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” (Matthew 18:15-17).
One wonders how often those verses have been used as an excuse to drum someone out of the church. If someone does something you don’t like, start with a personal visit; when that doesn’t work take a couple of witnesses; when that doesn’t work tell everyone in the church . . .
It makes the one who believes he or she is the victim of a sin the accuser and turns the church into judge and jury. It doesn’t define sin. It doesn’t give any advice to the one who has been accused. What if the accusation is false?
But the real “kicker” in this particular teaching is when it gets to the punishment phase: “if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” Let’s see, what do I remember about Matthew’s background? Oh, yes, Matthew was a tax collector before he took up Gospel writing.
How do we treat Gentiles and tax collectors? We welcome them with open arms. We treat them as brothers and sisters. Like Jesus and Zacchaeus, we sit down and share a meal with them.
The invitation of the passage is to respond with love when sin occurs. Without attacking or condemning others, the church is invited to move forward with love, welcoming all and extending special hospitality to those who have been marginalized, whether by their own behavior or the opinions of others.
Those verses, when carefully read, hardly support drumming anyone out of the church.
Which leaves me wondering what Matthew’s purpose was in including those particular verses. One thing is clear, they occur in a specific context in the Gospel. Matthew isn’t over with Jesus’ teaching with this little “flash forward” to the existence of the church. There are still ten more chapters to his Gospel. The very next verses have Peter asking Jesus about how many times one ought to forgive. Peter suggests that perhaps seven is an awful lot of tolerance. Jesus raises the bar to seven times seventy.
Those verses don’t often get read in tandem when one wants to get judgmental about others. Perhaps we ought to apply the advice about forgiveness to the preceding verses:
“If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. But if you are not listened to,” (repeat the process seven times seventy times offering forgiveness. If that fails,) “take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.” (Repeat the process seven times seventy times.) “If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church;” (again repeat seven times seventy times) “and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” - that is forgive and welcome that person as a brother or a sister.
Whatever the early church was fighting about when Matthew wrote the gospel has long sense been forgotten. I suspect that most of our petty battles are in the same category - we won’t remember them after a little time passes. What is worth remembering is that when all else fails, Matthew recommends that the church treat others the way he has been treated - as a tax collector.