Reaffiliation

 

Reaffiliation

 

1 Thessalonians 3:9-13

Strengthen hearts of holiness 

 

3:9 How can we thank God enough for you in return for all the joy that we feel before our God because of you?

 

3:10 Night and day we pray most earnestly that we may see you face to face and restore whatever is lacking in your faith.

 

3:11 Now may our God and Father himself and our Lord Jesus direct our way to you.

 

3:12 And may the Lord make you increase and abound in love for one another and for all, just as we abound in love for you.

 

3:13 And may God so strengthen your hearts in holiness that you may be blameless before our God and Father at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints.

 

 

RECONCILIATION is a most powerful word. The dictionary gives it two main meanings: 

 

The restoration of friendly relations.

 

The action of making one view or belief compatible with another.

 

One of my favorite Bible passages is II Corinthians 5:17-19:

 

¹⁷ So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; look, new things have come into being! ¹⁸ All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; ¹⁹ that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us.

 

There’s that word, reconciliation, in the midst of Paul’s powerful assertion that the work of Christ is to make all things right with the world, and between God and humanity. Reconciliation is a two-headed arrow, here, “restoring friendly relations” between God and us, and “making one view or belief compatible with another,” so that people of different “tribes” may find common ground. If ever there was a need to review what the Bible says about reconciliation, it is certainly now! The church AND the world have split into “warring” tribes, separated by faith and numerous other “beliefs” from political ones, to the economy, the environment, to education—you name it. We even get into fist fights over our favorite sports teams. If God isn’t grieved over how we have so fractionated ourselves, then there is no God. After all, God gave God’s “only begotten Son” that we might not perish, and yet here we are, perishing in spurts and spades seemingly on a daily basis.

 

The Apostle Paul faced this in the early church for myriad reasons, too. First, you had the dispute between the Jews who did not accept the ministry of Jesus, and those who did, putting enmity even between family members. (Jesus said this would happen when he talked about “bringing a sword” that would divide brother against brother. He knew that in its earliest stages, the “new” faith he was instituting would first divide before having the power to eventually unite.) Then the was the whole Jew/Gentile thing, which had a long history, and while many of the Jews had become Christ followers, they still didn’t believe the “hated” Gentiles could—or should. This is part of what Jesus was after in the story of “The Good Samaritan.” Samaritans were Gentiles, and the thought of receiving compassion and healing via a Samaritan/Gentile was anathema to a Jew, even one that had been an early adopter of the Christ Event. 

 

Then, of course, there were the run-of-the-mill territorial rivalries and disputes, some of which we see playing out in a seaport town like Corinth, where a multitude of cultures came together in pursuit of culture and trade. I can only guess what the taverns in Corinth were like—think Star Wars cantina scene. Add in the socio-economic strata that populated the early Christian gatherings, and you have a wildly difficult “gathering” to manage. The early church didn’t hold “membership classes” as much as “Reconciliation 101,” I’m sure. For leaders like Paul, it must have been doubly difficult. Paul was a highly educated religious leader, and now he found himself dealing with some of what he might have earlier considered “riff-raff,” and yet they were his church members and lay leaders. He had to educate them in the faith without seeming condescending and “elite” in their eyes. And he had to do his best to reconcile them not only to GOD, but to the wide variety of “others” in the church community, many of whom they’d just rather punch out in a battle of brutes. 

 

Let’s not forget the pagans who joined the church. Pagans came in a wide variety of colors and styles, too, but common threads included: multiple Gods, one to cover each of your anxieties about nature, power, weather, wealth, etc.; and a theology of appeasement—keep your shelf of Gods happy so you could go about your business. And thanks to the fact that several of these Gods had sexual fetishes, pagans could have a habit of strange worship gatherings. It was no quirk that we have Bible passages (i.e. I Timothy 2) warning early Christian women to refrain from wearing fancy hair, clothes, and jewelry to church, as it would be bad if the society were to think that Christians were employing “temple prostitutes” like some of the pagans did as part of their “worship.” 

 

Cram THIS crowd together and try to get them to sing, “Blest Be the Tie That Binds,” will you? But the Christian church survived, and here we are. Maybe this is what Jesus was thinking when he said that the “gates of hell” would not prevail against it? He saw the great cultural mélange that the church must become if his goal of reconciliation was to become a reality. In many ways, compared with the nightmare Peter, the Jerusalem Council, and Paul faced in those early days, the cross must have seemed like a picnic. At least it was over quickly. (I know, I know, some of you will fault me here, pointing out that the real “pain” of the cross was that momentary estrangement between the sin-bearing Son and the “can’t look upon sin” Father in heaven, but that’s a debate for another day.)

 

Pagans had a hard time believing that any god could just offer free forgiveness. This is why the persecution and execution of Jesus was an important message for them, as was his resurrection, because pagans believed gods did that kind of thing. The cross was more “foolishness” for the Jewish converts, as they never abided human sacrifices of any kind, having viewed their altar “sacrifices” as more of a “gift” to God, especially when the temple priests got to have barbecue with the leftover meat. That “God’s Son” would submit to such a thing did not make a lot of sense to these early Jewish Christ followers. Again, these kinds of theological perspectives added prickly “spice” to early church life. I get a kick out of the centuries of speculation as to what Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” might have been. Isn’t this enough? 

 

So the early church leaders had to be reconcilers, both in preaching the Gospel of Christ’s action to “restore friendly relations” between God and humanity, and in helping early believers find shared beliefs, creating a foundation upon which a church could be built. We see this tension in today’s passage, wherein the author talks of restoring whatever was lacking in their faith (reconciliation with God) and encouraging them to “increase and abound in love for one another and for all,” (reconciliation with each other via shared beliefs). These were no easy tasks, but they certainly ARE in the job description of pastors, even modern ones.

 

I’m doubting there is a pastor out there who cannot resonate with these tensions—preaching and teaching a “common” faith, and “managing” relationships in the church around some shared belief, knowing that even this may well be in dispute. Seminary-trained pastors often find themselves tempted to debate with an “energetic” parishioner who just read the latest “how-to” book (“Theology for Dummies”?) on living like Jesus, and quickly realizing how counter-productive that might be. How sad it is, though, when said parishioner announces they are “leaving the church” because they are “not being fed.” Puts a real guilt trip on the pastor, believe me. On the other hand, trying to bring harmony to the “two or three gathered together in Jesus’ name” is no easy task, either. Still, compared to the menagerie Peter and Paul faced in the First Century, our task should seem meager. Maybe we are the ones making it harder by gathering into various theological camps, or believing that “harmony” in the church means everyone gets along like BFFs? I’m guessing that our practices and expectations need a bit of “reconciling,” themselves.

 

As any United Methodist knows, our church is in the throes of what became known as “disaffiliation.” For almost half of our churches, at least here in our Western Pennsylvania Conference, it was supposedly the theological differences between themselves and “the denomination” had just become so great that remaining together was some kind of a “curse.” (I’ll be honest, I am offended by the resulting “accusation” that my theology is “wrong” or even “heretical.” It is doubly sad that most of this animas is coming from former colleagues.) Hence, in our Conference, 43% of our churches “disaffiliated” from the United Methodist Church, and either became independent or joined another denomination, such as the newly constituted “Global Methodist Church.” While we may experience an overall sadness in this parting, given the “ministry of reconciliation” Christ has given the church, there are two “sadnesses” I observe: many of the disaffiliating churches are very small and may not survive without being on some kind of pastoral and institutional “life support,” and this may not be available to them for some time in their new setting; and, unfortunately, it appears that behind the scenes of the disaffiliation movement there were leaders who were engaging in more of a power struggle than in pursuit of theological purity. Some of them have already become bishops in the new denomination. 

 

If Paul were alive today, I’m guessing he would be working toward REAFFILIATION, and not just of United Methodists and Global Methodists, but of denomination to denomination, and even greater, of the “Nones” (as they’ve become known) AND the church of Jesus Christ. Paul would be urging us to find our “common center” of faith which, judging from his writings, would be JESUS and LOVE, of God and neighbor. The “Nones” have become thus because of the irrelevance of what was going on in the church to their pursuits, desires, and needs. Many of the “Nones” just don’t get why the church spends so much time partitioning who is “in” and who is “out,” when what they understand of the love message is “allee-allee in free,” at least according to the reconciling message of Christ, as they understand it. Sadly, their understanding is probably more accurate than that of “seminary-trained pastors.” Pastors, we would do well to ask ourselves: were we ordained to be speed bumps or barriers to faith? Or ramps and doors?

 

There will be a reaffiliation at the end of the age, thanks to Jesus, but how very sad if we wait until then to be a part of it! Today’s passage gives us one key—it starts in our hearts. Each individual must decide how she, he, or they might allow the Divine to soften their hearts to those who have “disaffiliated” from us on ANY of the levels listed in this message—even those who have done so hurtfully, from our view. How we “feel” must be dealt with before we will be willing to move on this, and this may require some group therapy. Prayer is a great place for most of us to start, as it has the ability to sooth and heal the smarting heart. And what about our OWN “disaffiliation” from things or people from which WE have separated ourselves? This, too, can be examined. Last week I suggested that two obvious signs of “kingdom living” were: the examined life; and the life of gratitude. “Reaffiliation” is a call to the examined life. As we begin the Advent season, may we “risk” this renewed journey! REAFFILIATION is what Jesus is all about, Dear Ones! Amen.