Posted by PS on April 12, 2003 at 16:43:49:
I know most of you trust my judgment in matters where I have to make decisions for the good of the body. I think you know that I love the church and the people in it, and often have a difficult time weighing the needs of the one against the needs of the many. I am not a legalist nor a dictator, and am much more intimidating in personality than I am in judgment. I have kicked only one person out of church in ten years. He was welcomed back when he returned in a few months, having repented for offering marijuana to church members. ;-) There are others who chose to leave because they would not acquiesce to the wisdom of a teaching or decision, were admonished for some inappropriate behavior, or just chose to be offended at personality issues and refused to forgive. This is life, especially so in the church. These things happen in any institution, especially where moral imperatives and intense personalities coalesce.
Promoting unity is a vital imperative. Though some criticisms may have the ring of lofty ideals, the presentation and motivation of the dissenter are key. (We will visit this aspect below.) The fact is that anyone can identify errors, imperfections, and offenses. This requires no special talent, discernment, or wisdom; such infractions are multitudinous, and it is easier for the offended or proud to focus on them than the equally ever-present redemptive elements. Easier, I say, not only because human nature tends to denigrate others to advance one's own validation, but because every new offense represents an opportunity to retaliate for every supposed injustice one has incurred in the totality of their existence. Only real forgiveness breaks the cycle of festering bitterness and unending recompense. (The only other possibility--the complete cessation of offenses--will never be realized in this life.) In the sacrifice of Jesus, we find the power to transcend our accusatory and retaliatory natures (satan=accuser/adversary) and embrace that of the justifier (Yeshua="I AM" salvation). To choose not to remit sin nor release people from our judgment is against the whole import of Jesus' teachings, and we can hardly call ourselves "Christians' if we do not follow the example of our Christ.
Embracing this ethic and acting on it in practical ways represent an often difficult and neverending challenge for the believer in Jesus. I am not immune; I do not pretend that I do not also struggle with such things, as you know. But as a body we must struggle together to represent Christ in this world. If we cannot forgive all manner of offense yet, we must at least actively acknowledge God's right and will to forgive, and the adequacy of Jesus' sacrifice for full redemption from all manner of offense. We must confirm our willingness to be reconstructed and empowered to represent the forgiveness of Christ, and establish our commitment to not be used as the instruments of the accuser. We must at the very least forgive each other (in our Parallel Universe body) as an evident starting point and a foundation for the ongoing divine construction of this grace in our lives.
This last prerogative is our absolute minimum starting point. I have to insist that we will not sow division in our body; we will not bring bitterness into our communion and we will not motivate one against the other, whether publicly or privately. It is in this regard that I have taken a stand in a difficult recent issue. It has little to do with details of the situation nor the validity of identified infractions. It has everything to do with motivation (which I referred to in the first paragraph): whether to promote unity or division as the tool of "reform." I pick this word deliberately, because well-meaning reformers throughout history have seen the forceful presentation of their lofty ideals unintentionally inspire war and suffering lasting centuries. Some of these conflicts rage today, with no sign of imminent resolution. I ask again: should we promote unity or division as the tool of reform? Should we publicly expose offenses to inflame, and thus promote revolution; or should we choose to remit and cover sins as Jesus' love does, seeking and nourishing the Christ image in each of us?
Some take the stance that God wants us to identify publicly all offenses and focus on them, endlessly debate them, and not cease until all manner of offense is eradicated. For such people, appeal to simple forgiveness is not enough, and certainly if it is not the first offense; it must be demonstrated publicly that their "oppressor" has become faultless, before complete, official, unqualified forgiveness is imputed. This is the attitude that has tried to infect us recently, ostensibly through the desire to nourish the body. Such divisiveness, focus on offenses, and retention of sin does not nourish anything. It sickens, demoralizes, embitters, and finally destroys. I feel strongly led by God to curtail this attitude in our body (just as I seek to eradicate it in my own life). It will leaven every area of our body if it is entertained. There is no personal attack intended in my imperative, unless it be against the father of all lies and division, whom all "Christian" accusers unknowingly follow in principle. I love to kick his miserable ass. Forgiveness in the name of Christ--the refusal to retain offenses--is the way it is done. Welcome to the realm of spiritual warfare, and spiritual power.
Repentance is accepted. It is not a complicated thing to turn from judgmental attitudes and choose to be an agent of forgiveness and reconciliation. But it is not easy for the one who has long embraced the pain of offenses against them to validate their existence. To release their personal pain and "justice" is like losing their whole identity. I do understand this psyche well, and I know there is great healing available. But again, repentance (a deliberate and resolute turning, to go in a different direction) is required. This would be at the very least evidenced by a complete and resolved cessation in the divisive airing of grievances, and a demonstration of the reality of felt forgiveness in the person's life. While I desire nothing but healing and happiness for such a person, I cannot for the supposed good of the individual subject the whole body to poison. In reality, to condone such poison is surely not in the good of this individual, either.
Addendum--a personal response to recent events:
I have been the recipient of scathingly accusatory emails for sin toward this person which I am supposedly guilty of. My apology has been rejected, my attempts at friendship and blessing scorned, my calling as a pastor denounced. My accuser has lauded his own bravery in standing up to me in the name of God. He has continually reminded me that God will judge me for what I have done to him. Sigh...
If God's blessing and wisdom and power are lifted off of my life according to this person's prophesies and prayers against me, I guess my accuser will be vindicated. If God has ceased to regard the blood of Christ as sufficient, has rejected all my repentances and my love, and has begun judging me by the offended righteousness of my accusers, then I am indeed in trouble. But if the goodness of God is revealed by grace and the forgiveness of Christ is the heart of God, I will stand. We will stand together.
We all should continue to pray for reconciliation and love to prevail, and continue to pray for this friend. But I cannot allow this person to address this body in our group settings or on this message board at this time. For the time being, his posts will disappear. If you have any questions regarding this, please contact me.
Love,
PS