2 Samuel 7:1-14a
Ephesians 2:11-22
In the United Church of Christ, we believe authorized ministers are ultimately called by God. However, since so many of us have abandoned the idea of God as a puppet master in the sky, we get a little fuzzy on the details. We also believe in a formation process for clergy, traditionally a 4+3 education of undergraduate and graduate work, as well as clinical training and internships. But ultimately, it is the church that discerns a call to the Ministry of Word and Sacrament, the local church that recognizes the call of one of its members and the gathered church in the local association that authorizes and ordains the new minister.
We’ve created some alternative paths to authorized ministry in response to a serious clergy shortage, but I generally support the traditional model. Clergy, even properly formed, authorized, and held accountable, can do incredible harm, so I have little time for self-proclaimed pastors operating out of storefronts. I’m a little embarrassed to admit this, as it smacks of elitism. I’d have never let the prophet Amos in the door, which I do recognize as a problem. Still, having a system of support and accountability is consistent with the Christian Testament. Members of the early church held one another accountable.
One of the best un-credentialed pastors in America, also a prolific author of contemporary Christian thought, is Brian McLaren. Among his bestsellers is the rather lengthily-titled “A Generous Orthodoxy: Why I am a missional + evangelical + post/protestant + liberal/conservative + mystical/poetic + biblical + charismatic/contemplative + fundamentalist/Calvinist + anabaptist/Anglican + Methodist + catholic + green + incarnational + depressed-yet-hopeful + emergent + unfinished Christian.”
More manageable is “A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions That AreTransforming Faith,” published in 2010. In it, he tells the story of having a disconcerting lunch with an American Evangelical theologian. His companion asked him how he would define the gospel. McLaren responded with the very orthodox Protestant formula drawn from the work of Paul, “justification by grace through faith.” I’ll let McLaren pick up the story from here:
He followed up with this simple but annoying rhetorical question: “You’re quoting Paul. Shouldn’t you let Jesus define the gospel?” When I gave him a quizzical look, he asked, “What was the gospel according to Jesus?” A little humiliated, I mumbled something akin to “You tell me,” and he replied, “For Jesus, the gospel was very clear: The kingdom of God is at hand. That’s the gospel according to Jesus. Right?” I again mumbled something, maybe “I guess so.” Seeing my lack of conviction, he added, “Shouldn’t you read Paul in light of Jesus, instead of reading Jesus in light of Paul?”
Yeah, all that, and oh yeah… also absolutely impossible. Paul is already the dominant voice in Christianity before the gospels are even written. The words of institution we use in communion come from Paul, not the gospels.
But not all of Paul is really Paul. Minimalists believe only six of the letters in the Christian Testament are authentic, while many of the rest of us would include a few more, texts like 2nd Thessalonians that appear to have been cobbled together from authentic Pauline texts. There is general agreement among scholars and most pastors that some works attributed to Paul are most certainly not Paul.
Five of the six universally accepted letters were written to congregations Paul helped establish. There is practical theology in 1st Corinthians, pretty foundational theology in our progressive tradition, but we should not lose sight of the fact that it is a letter written to people he knew and is an intervention in a church where there was division.
The sixth, the letter to a church he did not establish, was his theological treatise and letter of introduction to the churches in Rome. We have no way of knowing if he ever got there for his trial and possible execution, or if he died while on the way. The texts are silent on this matter.
Before his uncomfortable lunch with the theologian, Brian McLaren thought of himself as a “Romans Christian.” For folks who know history, that might be a little uncomfortable, for Paul’s letter to the Romans has often been the starting point of Christian antisemitism, including the antisemitism of Martin Luther, the nominal founder of Protestantism.
Around the turn of this century, there was a surge in interest in Paul, and from unusual quarters. He became the darling of a group of philosophers and cultural theorists. Among the new books was that of Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, who wrote a commentary on the letter to the Romans. The Israeli-American anti-Zionist Daniel Boyarin wrote “A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity.” And the French philosopher Alain Badiou wrote a work with an astonishing claim in the title: “Saint Paul: The Foundation of Universalism.”
While Romans gets the most attention, today’s reading from Ephesians echoes this claim of universalism. Ephesians is often placed among the doubted letters. It is missing some features of the more personal letters sent to specific congregations, and even the addressee is missing in some of the Greek manuscripts. It seems likely that the letter was written as a circular letter, a letter to communities Paul did not know personally, much like the letter to the Romans. One scholar, Douglas Campbell, believes we have a letter written to the Laodiceans from a sort of template. If it is not authentically Paul, it is certainly proximate to Paul, written by a close follower, and includes core themes, including the real gospel that eluded Brian McLaren, the one identified by the universalist Paul advocates. And to get to it, let’s look at a passage that fails in translation and out of context.
Ephesians calls Christ “our peace.” It continues, saying that “in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us.” The groups are Jews and Gentiles. But the dividing wall is not some abstraction.
Just as non-Muslims are banned from Mecca, just as non-Mormons and even some Mormons are banned from Mormon Tabernacles, Gentiles were banned from entering the Second Temple. There was a wall dividing the Court of the Gentiles from the inner precincts accessible only to Jews. And of course, men could enter places women could not enter. And priests could enter spaces even the most faithful Jews could not enter, with the ultimate exclusion being the “Holy of Holies,” accessible only to the high priest.
Hebrew Scripture texts, whether in their order in the Jewish Scripture called the Tanakh, or in their order in the portion of the Christian Bible called the “Old Testament,” are neither chronological nor consistent. Where we can discern a timeline, a trajectory of thought, we see a slow and fitful evolution in the understanding of God.
In the earliest layers, Yahweh is one god among many, albeit the particular god of the Israelites, and possibly the chief god of the pantheon. Yahweh is thin-skinned and violent. As we move into a sort of golden age of prophecy, the age that runs from approximately first Isaiah to Ezekiel, we see the Israelites reconstructing their understanding of God, moving toward an ethical monotheism, one good god. The image of Yahweh as violent king is often replaced by the image of Yahweh as a patient and forgiving lover, ready to take Israel back when she had gone astray, for the language was still gendered.
Jesus takes this one step further. Yahweh is not the spouse of Israel, but is the parent of Jesus, and by choice, of all who would follow him. Stories like the Prodigal Son and the teaching that call us to forgive seventy times seven times are radical. It sometimes seems that grace, the holy parent, exceeds our capacity to do wrong.
The Kin-dom of God is at hand. Jesus clearly believed in life after bodily death, a belief developed by the Pharisees, but his message is about right now.
We can debate whether Jesus meant for his ministry to take in Gentiles as well. The region was diverse, and though his encounters with non-Jews are inconsistent, stories like the Good Samaritan suggest he saw holiness in those who practiced love. But there is zero question that Paul was the gospels DEI officer, preaching a gospel of diversity, equality, and inclusion.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free, for all are on in Christ. The wall that kept out the Gentiles has been broken down. The Kin-dom of God is like a treasure hidden in a field. It is already there. Let’s go look for it.
Maybe we give Paul too much credit. Maybe the radical love and grace preached by Jesus was meant to take in the Gentiles. But the gospel we have received, the gospel abandoned by so many Christians, so many American Christians, is that God’s love, God Kin-dom, is big enough for everyone, Queer or Questioning, Samaritans or Samoans, rich or poor, though the gospel clearly says none should be rich so long as any are poor.
The key to that kin-dom is not some magic prayer or Jesus cookie or secret visit to some restricted holy space. It is way easier and way harder than all of those things, for the key to the kin-dom of God is love. And always will be. Amen.