First New Testament Reading—Matthew 22: 1-14
Second New Testament Reading—Mathew 23: 13-15, 27-28
Four years ago I found myself visiting a variety of churches from different denominations Sunday after Sunday as I worked on my dissertation. Despite being in the bay area which is often stereotyped as liberal, I found quite a contrast among these churches. At some of the largest churches in Oakland, I would hear the most conservative of preachers. Although these preachers were very candid in stating many of their views from the pulpit, the pastor at one church nevertheless believed that there were certain issues he could not address without it leading to “World War III” in his congregation. One of those issues was the war in Iraq. He refused to speak of it in his sermons. This was not to say he refrained from politics. He did not hesitate to attack abortion and likely would have no problem condemning gay marriage. In contrast to this preacher and his church, around the same time I was also visiting a black Baptist church that was open to gays and lesbians and where the pastor would lash out against the war, the handling of Katrina, and the then president all to the applause of his congregation.
In comparing the two churches, the divisions in our nation were quite evident. Christians reflected these divisions in a variety of ways. Some were quiet about their views and sought to avoid argumentative debates. During this time, I came to believe that when people say they do not like politics in their church what they are often saying is that they do not like conflict or at least listening to a pastor with whom they disagree. Still, in visiting churches that were the polar opposite and where discussing politics was the norm, I found that debate was nonetheless uncommon. Preachers were often surrounded in large part by like-minded people. It is easier to sing out when you know the choir is singing with you.
Four years have passed since I visited these churches in which I witnessed such divergent Christian responses to the state of our country. We might ask ourselves whether things have changed since then. One of the themes from this past week’s inauguration and really much of this past year has been that a sizable number of people in our country desire a sense of unity. They are tired of conflict. They want a sense of harmony and working together for a common purpose.
If it is true that the aspirations of a large part of this country have coalesced around these sentiments, it is also true that a substantial part of our reality is still one of division. One of the undeniable fault lines of today is found in the different positions churches take on whether to be open and affirming or whether to condemn LGBT persons as sinners sinking into abomination. There is no church in this country that has not implicitly or explicitly taken a stand on this matter. Being quite and avoiding the issue is still taking a stand. It is a stand that says I am fine with leaving things the way they are.
If one does decide to stand up and speak out, there are a variety of ways in which that can be done. Matthew gives us one example in our second scripture reading for today. Matthew’s Jesus gives a hot rebuke to religious leaders of his own faith. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!” For those of us seeking a sense of harmony and a common purpose, this approach might make us uncomfortable. In the gospels, of course, Jesus used other approaches as well. For example, he told parables. The genius of parables is that they invite people into a story in which they can use their imaginations to think through their own position. In the parable of the prodigal son, we are compelled to think about whether our own heart would lead us to forgiveness. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, we are compelled to think about who are neighbors are and whether we would extend our compassion and care toward them. In the parable of the wedding banquet found in our first reading today, we are compelled to think about whether we desire to be a part of the kingdom of God movement. Notably, this parable does contain a bit of hot rebuke in it as well, especially when one of the party-goers is cast into the outer darkness where there is much “weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
While some of us might not like such harsh words, I believe that both the story telling Jesus of the first reading and the hot and bothered Jesus of the second reading have something to offer us this morning. Upon closer inspection, I am convinced both scriptures suggest viable strategies for us to consider as we think about how we might promote equality as an open and affirming church. With Matthew’s hot and bothered Jesus, scholars contend that what we are really getting is a Jesus who was repackaged by Matthew specifically for his audience. In repackaging Jesus, Matthew was singing with the choir. His community was fiercely opposed to the Pharisees who were competing with the early Christians to evangelize gentiles. We get a sense of that when Jesus condemns the Pharisees for converting others to become what Jesus describes as children of hell. We also get a sense of Matthew’s biases in the parable of the wedding banquet. What might otherwise be a parable of inclusivity in which everyone is invited to the party instead becomes a parable condemning those who have rejected Matthew’s community.
While Matthew indeed had his own agenda, it is nevertheless more than likely that Jesus did criticize the religious leaders of his time. While it might not always work to one’s advantage to be hot and bothered, I believe the essence of Jesus’ approach in Matthew has some promise. Stripped of its fiery condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees as slithering snakes, Jesus makes a persuasive argument about what it means to be truly faithful and righteous as he points out the hypocritical inconsistencies between what they say and what they do.
I found very much the same underlying approach this past week while I was reading a book on overcoming heterosexism and homophobia. In this book, there is a chapter on persuasive communication strategies. In a nutshell, part of the chapter basically says that if you want to help others overcome their heterosexism, you get them to question the inconsistencies in their views. An example of this is when someone thinks, “If I am supposed to love everyone, then why does my religion want me to hate gays and lesbians?” Once people begin to recognize these inconsistencies—in other words, once people begin to recognize the hypocrisy implicit in their religious beliefs—they begin to seek greater harmony in their views. Hopefully, it is at that point that our hypothetical believer begins to think, “If I am supposed to love everyone, then my religion calls me to love and accept gays and lesbians just as I want to be loved and accepted myself.”
This strategy of unmasking hypocrisy and the inconsistencies that it entails has actually been used by our denomination in its television and radio ads. Many of you have probably seen the ad where two burly bar bouncers stand outside of a church and keep people such as a gay couple from entering. Our denomination also has radio ads that highlight Christian hypocrisy. I’ve asked Niels to cue them up for us today. Here is the first one…
[Listen to the telephone tree ad at: http://uccfiles.com/mp3//telephone_tree_national.mp3 ]
That one has actually been played on the local radio station KPOJ AM 620. Here is another one…
[Listen to the legal copy ad at: http://uccfiles.com/mp3/legal_copy.mp3 ]
Those are some examples of how our denomination is challenging the hypocrisy of heterosexist Christians.
That strategy might not work for everyone, so let us consider a second strategy. Let your minds wander away from what we have been discussing to listen to a story about a king and queen who held a wedding banquet for their son. The royal couple sent out invitations to all of the royal court for them to come to the banquet and celebrate the occasion with food, dance, and music. A week from the date of the banquet the royal couple realized that most of those whom they had invited had not yet rsvp’ed. Hoping that all their friends would join with them for this great day in their lives they sent another invitation with fancy calligraphy and beautiful golden borders. The invitation announced that the banquet would have the finest food. There would be prime rib for the meat eaters while the vegetarians would feast upon stuffed mushrooms and a spicy ratatouille served over rice. Of those who received the invitations, some begged off saying they were spending the weekend at the beach. Some excused themselves saying they had business matters to which they really must attend. Still, others simply crumpled the invitation in their fist and threw it away in disgust. When the royal couple learned of this, they were quite upset. “How can they call themselves friends!” they roared.
After calming down, they resolved to find new friends. No longer would they exclude from their table those who were not of the royal court. They would go out into the street and invite all whom they encountered to come to the wedding banquet. One by one the people on the street gratefully accepted their invitation. The wedding hall was filled with guests. As the celebration grew in its joy and the guests congratulated the son and his partner, the royal couple noticed someone standing off to the side who had not joined in their merriment.
Wanting to throw him from the party, they approached him asking, “Why aren’t you joining in the festivities? Do you not want to celebrate the wedding of our son and his partner?” To which the man responded, “I have been left speechless this whole night lamenting my own transgressions. I came here to condemn you and to say that what you celebrate tonight is to God an abomination, but when I saw the joy in your faces and the love in your son’s face and that of his partner, I realized it is I who should be condemned.” With that, the man left the banquet and headed off into the night where he repented and declared, “From the royal court, many were invited, but few were willing to open their hearts.”
In this church, may we live with open hearts and experience with gratitude the joy of the wedding banquet that is open to all. Amen.