rae

Ty ee es

ern eee ae ie a

r LPs) -* i
w*

Wholeness

Micah 6:6~-8; Isaiah 40:1-5, 11

Luke 4:14-21; 1541-7

September 26, 1971.

John M. Buchanan =

‘

The trouble with Jesus was that he would not be anybody's man but his
own. Not that people didn't try. His contemporaries were forever trying to
push him into one position or another: trying to force his hand so that he
would come down squarely for this party and against that one. Once they gave
him a coin with the head of Ceasar on it and asked a question designed to
reveal where he was in terms of the division between loyalists and revolu-
tionaries. His response; "Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's: and ronder
unto God what is God's." That is to say, final truth docs not reside in one
position or the other But in a combination of both. On another occasion he
was put on the spot as an adultress was about to be stoned: a rather clear~
cut case of right vs wrong: law vs lawlessnoss. nd his response: "Wet
the man who “is without sin cast the first stone." That is to say: the woman
has done something wrong, but the, proper response to her wrongness is are
necessarily what the law prescribed. On mother occasion he was asked what
aman needed to do to be saved. His response: "Love the Lord your God with
all your heart, soul and mind - and = your neighbor as yourself." There
were plenty of people doing one or the other, but Jesus insisted that a
combination of the two ethical imperatives was really required.

That particular incident prompts Elton Trucblood to observe: "Modest
as the word appears to be, one of the greatest of all Christian terms is the
word tand'. [The New Man for Our Time, pe 29] ‘Time and time again Jesus
showed an amazing flexibility and vorsitility by taking two fundamentally
opposing points of view and demonstrating that truth lies somewhere in
between or in a combination of the two. Jesus, that is, demonstrated some-
thing called "wholeness", an idea which I have come to believe is one of the
key concepts in the New Testament. Wholeness - that stubborn refusal to be

pushed into a position that excludes the partial truth of another position:

‘ i

Snthea
that openness and fairmess and evenhandedness that hones in on real issues
quite apart from a predetermined position.

Jesus, we believe, is a model. In terms of theology it is stated thig
way: Jesus was man as God created him to be. And I firmly believe that the
most helpful aspect of our model may be defined as "wholeness". And yet I
think we have as much trouble with that concept as his contemporaries did.
Iwas talking with a woman last wock who was observing that her favorite hymn
was "I Walked Today Where Jesus Walked". find from the gist of the conversa—
tion I concluded that she would be appalled at some of the places Jesus walked:
that she pretty well knew where he would walk today, and that it wasn't out
into the street to defend a prostitute, or into the home of a detested traitor,
or among the wretched, hopeless poor. That's where I think he would walk -—
and the fact that both of us assume that we know, lifts up the universal
inability of Christian people to deal with his "wholeness", For an honest
reading of the New Testament, apart from our exclusive biases, shows that he
walked in differont, contrasting places: into the temple for instance, as
well as the strects: into the homes of wealthy, powerful men of the estab-—
lishment, as well as among the poor: and that he was buried in the tomb of
a very influential man, as well as dying between two thieves. .

The person of Jesus, in its wholeness, reflects the basic stance of the
Judeo-Christian tradition. The philosophers call it a synthesis; a combin-
ation of two logically contrasting points of view. I tried to chose Old
and New Testament readings this morning which express the two positions.

From the prophet Micah we heard those familiar words, “tthat does the Lord
require of you? To do justice, to be merciful, to walk humbly." Taken by
itself that passage would lead us to conelude that the essence of Judaism

was in life lived justly, mercifully and hambly in the larger community.

But over against that emphasis there aro passages such as Isaiah 40 with

its basically individual words of comfort, and Psalm 23, about one man walking

through the valley of death. Both positions are evident in the Old Testament -

the strong societal concern for justice and fair play, but also the individ- + %
ualistic word of comfort and love. | an
The same synthesis occurs in the New Testament. In Luke 4 Jesus spells
out his ministry in terms of announcing good news to the poor, proclaiming
release for the captives and giving sight to the blind. It is an aggresive,
society oriented ministry. But then in Luke 4 we encounter his story about
the one lost sheep, and the rejoicing in heaven when one lone individual
repents and returns to the fold.
That's wholeness. His contemporaries didn't know how to handle it and
I don't think we do either. For the modern day Church of Jesus Christ is z
badly split at precisely this point, wanting very much to do with Jesus and fy)
the Christian witness what his contemporaries could not do, namely come up. |
with on exclusive position at the expense of other, contrasting positions. i
The universal, catholic, church of Christ has not ever experienced
unanimity on much of anything, and our inability to get along is expressed in
the fragmentation of denominationalism. But in our day 2 very curious
phenomenon has occured. Major denominations have moved ever closer together
so that today the theological differences between, say Presbyterians,
Methodists and the United Church of Christ are negligible. While at the
same time every denomination has experienced a serious division within its
own ranks. ‘Tho external conflict has beem internalized. Denominational
differences have become party divisions within each denomination and all the
way down to the local congregation. nd the nature of the division is over
the two contrasting models which we have been thinking about. The two positions
can be called Pictist and Activist.
Trueblood defines them as follows: “an activist is a person who holds
that an attack on entrenched social evils is the only part of Christian life
worth considering. The characteristic activist pickets, organizes, marches,
signs petitions and engages in protests. A pietist, on the other hand, '
emphasizes the life of prayer, worship, devotion and personal evangelism. “ne ~) re!

wo

he is concerned with the salvation of his own soul . . . and his own peace ~ ws “nee
of mind. [p. 17]

That is where wo are in the United Presbyterian Church today. I ey
guess that there isn't a meeting of Presbyterians on the national, synod or i
local level that does not, at some point, include a confrontation between the
two opposing positions. There is a sizeable block of people in our communion
that wants the church to empty itself of all its resources in the cause of :
equal justice and human liberation. There is an equally sizeable block that
wants us to get off the streets and out of the courts and start dealing with
the individual souls of men and women. That's the issue that will one day
characterize the mid-twentieth, century Presbyterian Church in the history
books.

It has been suggested, and I think rightly, that this ecclesiastical
crises reflects a philosophic split that cuts across our whole culture. There
are a couple different ways of seeing it and defining it. Politically, there
are power blocks within cach major party that have far more in common with
each other than the leadership of their own party. Thus successful legis-
lation needs o coalition of conservative Democrats and Republicans, or a
similar liberal coalition, and the suggestion is seriously made that we need
two new parties that express the differences more accurately.

Another way of sceing it igs in terms of those who accept and those who
reject the traditional Protestant Ethic. The accepters honor the paying of
debts, fidelity to promises, an honest day's work. Unfortunately, some \
representatives of this position exhibit very little compassion - revealed
in that questionable shiboleth, "I worked to get where I am. Why can't
they?" ‘The siseetaes of the Protestant Ethic, on the other hand reveal deep
compassion for the poor, peace and oppressed minorities; and all too often
a total lack of sensitivity to responsibility, honestly and tolerance.
Neither group shows much tolerance for the dias each has staked out the

the other as the enemy ~ the adversary - and as a consequence we find our~ |
} rea A Ars

i

“listen for the truth we have to. offer each other.

selves polarized anid often immobilized. et ; t | han

= Migr sure af identatying Yue Aivision ame those who might be ontled ~ 55a
"present—oricntecd" as opposed to "past oxientes"s “individualism vs ee
collectivism". Thus one group wants to preserve the past while looking with Tee a
grave suspicion at anything new: while the other side wades into the present :
discarding the traditions and wisdom of history. One group views the solu- | BS
tion of our problems in terms of changing the attitudes of the individual: A % -
while the other focuses on restructuring the institutions and laws of the ss
whole society. y, € 3
Well someone wisely has noted that "error is often truth out of context.” S. -
Thus, healing will begin in our society when we develop an appreciation for - | a
the fact that opposing positions may both be true - that to deny the validity aa
of the opponent's position is to be fadioalineds It is to see that conser } a
vatives need liberals: and liberals need conservatives: that wisdom dictates © - 3
a combination of tradition and newness: that our society needs both changed 7 z
inaiviauhde and changed institutions. The processes of polarization have E =
gone far enough. We are not helped by extremists from either side of the >
spectrum. We need "wholeness". We are hindered rather than helped by the . =.
student who throws a bomb to demonstrate his concern for peace: just as we : eS
are hindered by the arrogance of the politician pm school official who won't i,
aves Lieten to what the student has to say. . ; A :
dnd the Church of Jesus Christ is the one place in our culture where ‘
that "wholeness" ought to be practiced and visible for all to sec. Just as ; 3 a
Jesus Christ is God's model of manhood, so the chica paigion to be his model Ee
of men working together in a spirit of openness and love and wholeness. But fe
we don't stop fighting long enough for it to happen. We can't quite muster oN af

the courage to climb down from our rigid positions to see each other and to

I've come to believe that there is nothing so sterile as the social (le
activist position in the church that is not rooted in s personal sensitivity J s

=i." 5 iat a ey = 4s Py Prt ee oe he Ree ee am i cee a,

i

opt

an
ae ‘ J

t %

EOS

a

=

i

7

“hi

1 f

~

th

we

a ere

a

are ee TS
ee)
‘

o

af

a

~

TS

PERS

oo”

of
i .

nn
ta

“+

to the love of God in Jesus Christ, I don't think it is onough to give a cup

| of cold water. We must know and be able to tell the reason why. I think th
that's why we're coming apart at the seams over jngela Davis - because
Christian people have not been able to connect the love of God and the legal
defense fund. Likewise, I think there is nothing more phony than the zealous ee
evangelism that talks about salvation as if it were a private transaction “ ee
between God and the individual. George Buttrick once said: "If religion y
é ‘does not begin with ‘the individual it never aR a but if it ends with the ee
individual - it ends."

4s I look for illustrations of men who havo found and expressed Christian
"wholeness" I think of men like Albert Schweitzer who knew the value of socaal | te
change — but sow also the value of. individual health. Or John Woolman , an
18th century Quaker who was both personally devout but at the same time one % ed

of the first to work for the abolition of slavery. Woolman's gift of

ae oe

"wholeness" lead him to regard the slaves as human beings - and also the
slave owners: a winsome approach that isn'+ much in evidence in comtemporary ~ ‘

racial conflict. ee

But most/of all I think of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, German Christian, pastor ae

and theologian. Bonhoffer saw the evils of Naziam so clearly that he found

‘himself involved in an assasination attempt on the life of Hitler, He was

a thorough activist. But he was also thoroughly devout and unapalogetically ;

pious. The last thing the prison doctor at Flossenburg saw him do before his

execution was fall to his knees in prayer.

Well, it is that synthesis: that wholeness that I think needs to be “age
reborn within the church, and within each one of us. We need +6 become whole ( a
men: whole Christians. We need to become the kind of people who can slug
it out in the political arena and then pray about it. We need to develop Ss ip
the ability to become aroused at the injustices in society anid at! the same

time aroused at the wonder of God's personal love. We need to be concerned

4 =,
iam eel ae ' <-ipealikake ty 4 ’

7 . 7 + Lae tk as face eg eel or, i
ee 2 2 set = “i , = ~~ SS ve | ee ‘= on ee

2.

about

man who docs not know the joy
and goodness of God's salvation. We need to be tough and gentle - at the same

about the victim of raoiemt but also

time. We nced to learn how to hate what is wrong while loving those who

perpetrate what is wrong. We need to know how to take opposite positions

wi teoak beocming so isolated from each other that we no longer care, and can
no longer share mitual concern or joy. We need to learn how to be honest
with each other — but also considerate and loving.

That's whet wholeness is. That's what Christians are. ind that is what
needs to be happening in the life of this congregation. Our culture needs that
from the church: our own community needs to see an institution that is whole
cnough to include people who are on opposing sides of important issues
during the week, But can sono tix extend to each other the right hand of
fellowship on Sunday.

And in the final analysis ~ we need it. You and I need each other. None
of ds stands along: none of us has a corner on the truth: all of us need
the benefit of open communication with someone whese views we don't like.

It can happen here = if we allow it to. Jesus Christ is the model.

His wholeness may become ours.
LMen «

Our father, we allow all kinds of little differences to divide us:
but most of all we are divided because we presume to have a monopoly on
the truth. Help us to be open to cach other. Help us to be whole.

Through Jesus Christ our Lord.
imen.

saci -

“a

1

ce po ae

\
=

aA Soee

an i