Dr. John Tamilio III, Pastor

 © 2020, Dr. Tamilio

“For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.”  The closing line from today’s Gospel lesson.  We often take this to mean that no matter how many people gather for worship, Jesus is there even if there is only two or three of them.  Although this is not wrong, it is a verse that is taken out of context.  Jesus is talking about legal disputes that members of the church have against each other.  He’s not talking about how many people show up for worship.

Paul writes about this at length, too.  (Look at 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, for example.)  Why do believers take one another to court, especially since their cases may be decided by unbelievers not to mention secular laws?  Shouldn’t they settle their differences through the church?  Jesus prescribes a way for us to do so.

If you have a problem with a member of the church, have a conversation with him or her.  The goal should be to resolve the problem between you.  If that doesn’t work, then you are to consult one or two others “so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’”  Jesus here is quoting Deuteronomy 19:15, which reads, “One witness is not enough to convict anyone accused of any crime or offense they may have committed.  A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.”  Even in secular courts, you need witnesses.  The more you have, the stronger your claim.  But Jesus is referring to something altogether different here.  That is not what he means when he talks about witnesses.  In this context, witnesses are to assist in mediating a conversation between the parties who are at odds with one another; they are helping the parties work through the problem together.  New Testament scholar Douglas R. A. Hare explains this:

The “one or two others” who are involved in the second stage of the procedure are presumably not witnesses to the original offense.  Their function as witnesses to the confrontation between the accuser and the accused is twofold: they can protect the accused if the accusation is too harsh or based on a misperception of inadequate information; they can protect the accuser [as well] and observe how the accused responds to the charge.[1]

In his book Body Politics: Five Practices of the Christian Community Before the Watching World, the late Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder discusses this at length.  Let me back-up a bit.  In this book, Yoder looks at various Christian practices (such as Baptism and Communion).  He deciphers some of their deeper meanings of these practices to show how the rest of the world can learn from them.  In other words, it is as if the church is on display.  People watching from the outside can learn what it means for people to not go without food, for example, when they see us sharing the bread and cup of the Lord’s Supper.

Yoder sees today’s Gospel Lesson as a lesson for resolving conflict.  Before the two people who are at odds with one another seek arbitration of any kind, they should try to work it out among themselves.  That may seem strange to us, because we live in such a litigious society.  Everyone sues everyone else for everything, it seems.  In fact, it is encouraged.  Yoder, however, says that resolving conflict in a way that is restorative should be the aim of every Christian community.  What does he mean by restorative?  Lawsuits are a win-lose venture.  If I sue you, the goal is for me to win and you to lose.  If you face criminal charges, the goal for the State is for you to be convicted.  Your goal is to be exonerated.  That’s not what restoration means.

The Apostle Paul and John Howard Yoder see the end-goal of conflict to be that right relationships are restored between the people at odds with one another.  The goal is to seek a win-win result.  That is counter-cultural.  Everything in our world is about winning: be it sports, money, politics, salvation, you name it.  But those in the ecclesia approach (or at least should approach) conflict differently.  We are about reconciliation and love.  Listen to part of what Yoder says about this.  He writes,

To be human is to be in conflict, to offend and be offended.  To be human in light of the gospel is to face conflict in redemptive dialogue.  When we do that, it is God who does it.  When we do that, we demonstrate that to process conflict is not merely a palliative strategy for tolerable survival or psychic hygiene, but a mode of truth-finding and community-building.  That is the true gospel; it is also true…[for] the world.”[2]

Conflict is natural.  It is how we grow as individuals and as a people.  The late eighteenth/early nineteenth century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel wrote about this extensively.  As with Schleiermacher last week (whom we discussed at length), Hegel is not an easy read, but he is well worth it.  Hegel had a theory about how knowledge and reality unfold, which I think pertains to conflict as well.  Work with me for a second.  An idea exists, whatever that idea happens to be.  Usually it is an idea that most people accept as being true without ever really thinking about it.  Hegel calls this a thesis.  Eventually, this thesis will come up against a counter idea, a counter argument, an antithesis.  The two clash.  As a result, a new thesis (a new view that is a combination or a resolution of the two) emerges and persists until it comes up against another, future antithesis.

When we are in conflict with one another, we could get mad — we could take our marbles and go home — or we could engage in conversation with one another to help resolve our conflict.  The result may be that one of us is proven correct while the other is shown to be wrong.  However, what may happen is that we find a sort of compromise: one that builds on the best of both of our ideas.  This is the new thesis that Hegel wrote about.

When you put people together in any organization, there is going to be conflict.  Whether it is a family, a college dorm, or a sewing circle, conflict will arise.  It is inevitable.  The question is how do we deal with it?  Very few conflicts within the church should drive us to throw up our hands and leave.  If we are truly united in a covenant of mutual love, support, and care, then we should seek to restore our differences.  We should allow our thesis and antithesis to clash and emerge stronger.  We should seek reconciliation with our brothers

and sisters in Christ.  This is a fundamental aspect of what it means to be the church.

We, my friends, are in the business of love and mercy, peace and grace, compassion and reconciliation.  Seek that above all else at all times.  Amen.

[1] Douglas R. A. Hare, Matthew (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1993), 214.

[2] John Howard Yoder, Body Politics: Five Practices of the Christian Community Before the Watching World (Scottsdale and Waterloo: Herald Press, 2001/1992), 13.