|
|
Requirements or Response? |
Galatians 5:25 - 6:10
|
© Jan Trammell-Savin |
 |
|
|
|
We are on holy ground. Whenever people meet to share in depth with each other, to offer and to receive insights and experiences, they are on holy ground. I would like to offer to you this morning some of my insights and experiences, and I welcome your responses. Our scripture this morning follows Pastor Roberts' passage from last week, and is the other half of a practical application with which Paul closes four chapters of theory in Galatians. Last week's passage spoke to the readers, or listeners, about their behaviors toward themselves, and their struggles to live a life of the Spirit. Today's passage continues with thoughts on relating to others with accountability, but without judgement. Listen to Galatians 5:25 - 6:10: "If we live by the Spirit, let us also be guided by the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, competing against one another, envying one another. My friends, if anyone is detected in a transgression, you who have received the Spirit should restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness. Take care that you yourselves are not tempted. Bear one another's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. For if those who are nothing think they are something, they deceive themselves. All must test their own work; then that work, rather than their neighbor's work, will become a cause for pride. For all must carry their own loads. "Those who are taught the word must share in all good things with their teacher. "Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow. If you sow to your own flesh, you will reap corruption from the flesh; but if you sow to the Spirit, you will reap eternal life from the Spirit. So let us not grow weary in doing what is right, for we will reap at harvest time, if we do not give up. So then, whenever we have an opportunity, let us work for the good of all, and especially for those of the family of faith." Doug and I had two momentous days in June. On Thursday the 18th, we celebrated with great delight, our tenth wedding anniversary. I will be happy to show you my present later, if you're interested. On Friday the 19th, the X-files movie, Fight the Future, opened. Being the fans that we are, we, of course, went to the opening night showing. For those of you unfamiliar with this popular show on the FOX network, it is a science fiction exploration of topics that are generally unexplainable through our five primary senses, or that are attributable by the show's writers to the covert actions of the U.S. government. The shows never answer the questions they raise; they leave the observers to decide for themselves whether the explanations are human, scientific ones, or extra-human ones. One of the primary themes of the X-files is the presence of a concurrent reality undetected by the usual approaches of the characters to the world. In a recent episode, for instance, a seemingly ordinary man, a supervisor for an office full of telemarketers, was literally seen by one of his employees as a malevolent monster -- a type of human-sized insect. Because the other employees couldn't see this aspect of their boss' character, the employee who was afraid was considered emotionally disturbed. We, the observers, must draw our own conclusions about whether the employee is really seeing the truth -- until our heroes, Agents Scully and Mulder, see it, too. But was the monster aspect real? Or was it the power of suggestion: a folie deux, a delusional belief shared by two closely associated people -- one possible solution proposed by the program? This type of awareness, of being able to see beyond the information presented to our senses, is exactly what is needed for restoring in gentleness. Jesus did it all the time: he interacted respectfully with people who were considered unacceptable to society, because he could see the reality of their souls beneath their behavior and human defenses. It's the ability to see the pearl inside the oyster, amid the sand and foreign material, and the willingness to allow that sand and foreign material to remain present. During Lent, I read a book by David Rhoads entitled, The Challenge of Diversity.[1] Rhoads' chapter on Galatians gave me a boundary-breaking experience similar to Peter's, that Carole Jackson Cochran preached about several weeks ago. One of his points, and the one to strike me most forcefully, is that not only are we accepted by God's grace despite our sinfulness, but also despite our worthiness. Let me say it another way: not only are we loved by God despite our shortcomings, but also despite our achievements. Now I always understood about the shortcomings part. It's what draws all of us to God in one form or another: realizing that we aren't capable on our own of living a life consistently pleasing to God, but that love and acceptance can still be a reality for us. The boundary-breaking part was the idea that even when we do manage to do something well, we don't get extra credit. God obviously cares about our successes and failures, because God cares about accountability. But those behaviors do not influence, to the bad, or to the good, God's depth of love for us. Perhaps you have already understood that, and I'm the only one new to this concept. But it was incredibly freeing for me. As an overachiever, I have always believed, deep down, that somehow my accomplishments are wrapped up with my acceptability. If I don't have something to accomplish, then I won't be able to gain acceptability. And then where will I be? There's another side to this revelation. Not only does it allow me to feel freer, but it allows me to let other people be. If I'm not required to accomplish certain things in certain ways, then neither is anyone else. There's no scorekeeping, good or bad. There's no need for envy or judgment. And obviously, this is an ultimate goal. Because we all experience envy and judgment, both with ourselves and with others. Restoring someone "in a spirit of gentleness" is only possible when the person doing the restoring has no need for envy, or competition, or holding up requirements for earning that restoration. Requirements can be comforting. Child experts tell us that children need boundaries and limits in order to feel safe exploring their world. When there are no boundaries, no limits, no requirements, they can feel overwhelmed by all the possibilities, and without the resources yet to know how to sort them out. Students routinely ask their teachers for detailed explanations of what is required on assignments. Some of them want to be able to do the least; others want to be able to get that extra credit. But all of them wind up frustrated when faced with a teacher who simply says, "Do what you think is best." And like those teachers, who by skirting the issue are trying to encourage their students to think for themselves, the point behind childhood limits and boundaries is to allow children to explore safely but ultimately to arrive at their own conclusions in maturity -- hopefully conclusions that are life-affirming and not life-denying, conclusions that will lead to actions based on responses, and not just on requirements. The problem is that not everyone moves beyond the need for externally-imposed requirements into an ability to respond to unique situations in unique ways. And that, after all, is the goal. When we built our building, we were required to use certain materials in certain ways in order that the building would stand and endure and serve its intended purposes. But our ultimate goal is those purposes, not just the building itself. If we never get beyond admiring the way the materials went together, if in fact our main reason for building is simply to have built, we've missed the point. And so with requirements. Following the rules for the sake of following the rules, for the sake of achievements, for the sake of extra credit, is really missing the point. What is it that following the rules enables us to do? Respond. Responses are the fruit of knowing the freedom of being totally accepted and loved by God despite anything we do. If we are no longer required to do exceptional deeds to earn God's love, then, do we not do any? Of course we do, but the motivation is very different. The motivation is now one of response. Because we have been loved, we respond with love. That's why it's impossible to require acceptable behavior from people who have not first known love. That's why it's impossible to effect change with people who still do not know love. When I watch the news and read the papers, I'm overwhelmed by the anger and alienation I sense. It can result in murder, or stealing, or roadrage, or simply rudeness at the checkout counter. But I've noticed that I can always find significant anger and alienation somewhere in the background of any of these unacceptable behaviors. Do we really have that short a supply of love? Paul goes on to mention something that can only be understood from the stance of response: "Take care that you yourselves are not tempted." Or, in the words of the English Protestant martyr, John Bradford, "But for the grace of God there goes John Bradford," as he watched innocent people burned at the stake.[2] (Bradford was eventually burned at the stake himself, by the way, for holding to his Protestantism.) We are all at risk for being the one who needs to be restored. It is easy to make good choices from a position of strength. Any of us, in positions of oppression, depression, or misfortune, are vulnerable to making poor choices that hurt ourselves and others. We are all one unfortunate incident away from possible disastrous behavior. Paul puts it this way: "For if those who are nothing think they are something, they deceive themselves." So do we abandon requirements altogether, operating solely out of response? No. Paul doesn't leave us there. "All must test their own work . . . all must carry their own loads." God does require accountability, just not in order to earn love. Instead, accountability is a recognition that responding in love is responding constructively to life. Wholeness is always the ultimate hope. If there were no accountability, no standards, there would be no need to "restore" someone. How, then, do we go about determining the difference between situations that are to be handled with requirements, and those that are to be handled with responses? The questions are, who is involved, and which approach is primary? You'll notice that Paul commands us, the listeners, to restore others with gentleness, taking care that we are not similarly tempted. Responses are to come first with others. Accountability is to come first with us. Paul concludes this passage with an injunction to our own -- not our neighbor's -- accountability. "You reap whatever you sow. . . If you sow to the Spirit, you will reap eternal life from the Spirit. . . So then, whenever we have an opportunity, let us work for the good of all, and especially for the those of the family of faith." Paul knows that being in the family of faith does not always mean knowing oneself to be truly loved by God. We cannot assume that all of our neighbors in worship are operating from a strong experience of acceptance. We cannot therefore always begin with requirements and accountability in those relationships. We need to exercise our understanding of response, beginning right here. How do we do that? I will leave you with three possibilities: Remember the X-files? We can take special care to keep our senses alert to those aspects of the soul beneath the behaviors on the surface, that may require a great response of love from us. Remember David Rhoads? We can remind ourselves that the good things we are managing to accomplish don't put us on any higher a plane in God's love, than the others who are struggling with mistakes. Remember the order of response and accountability? We can be quick to respond first in love to others, remembering that love needs to precede requirements, even as we take care that we ourselves are on the right path. My prayer for all of us is the awareness to see the truth that is out there, and the openness to respond out of love, without need for envy or competition. Let all God's people say: Amen. Jan Trammell-Savin Woodbrook Baptist Church Baltimore, Maryland This sermon is for circulation within the Woodbrook congregation and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without permission. Notes: [1] (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996) [2] John Bartlett, Familiar Quotations, 14th edition, Emily Morrison Beck, editor [Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1968]. |