Epistle Traditionally Attributed to James the Lesser 3:1-12
The New York Times recently published an article on the use of gestures by apes. The behavior was first observed by Jane Goodall in the 1960’s. Apes turn out to have more than 80 meaningful gestures, most common across species, like reaching out when they want something, or signaling the young to climb up on the mother’s back. The earliest theories fell in line with bad science and bad theology, the idea that this was not true communication, but was instead habit or genetics. To me this felt like the now discredited idea that animals could not have empathy or anything resembling emotions.
Last month, a trio of researchers introduced a new theory on the origin of these gestures. While not really addressing the issue of empathy and emotion, they acknowledge that apes have an innate ability we might consider communication, and that the development of common gestures across species is based on a shared physiology. It is a sort of ASL, in this case Ape Sign Language.
Helen Keller developed a set of about 60 meaningful gestures or signs during her childhood, though there can be little doubt that empathy and emotion were part of that landscape. Most of us know her story. Rendered deaf and blind as a small child by what doctors today believe was meningitis, she found the right teacher and companion in Anne Sullivan, and would go on to graduate from Radcliffe, which was then the women’s college at Harvard. She had a long career as a writer and public intellectual, and even has a connection of sorts to the Park Church, for she was a founding member of the National Civil Liberties Bureau, co-founded by Crystal Eastman, and now known as the American Civil Liberties Union.
Scientists have come to believe that plants communicate in a way, though few have suggested what we think of as thought and will. Animals communicate, send alarms when a predator approaches, dance off directions to a field of clover. Communication is critical for life in any collective, in a pack or a herd or a small city. And because humans are walking repositories of accumulated knowledge, because we are only human as we are in relation to other humans, communication is absolutely critical. First language, and then writing, allowed us to collect collective interest on the discoveries of earlier generations. The most radical libertarian holed up with an AR-15 in the woods did not invent that AR-15 or for that matter go from newborn to lunatic without a lot of communication, help, and socialization along the way.
We read from the Letter traditionally attributed to James this week, as we did last week. The James in question is James the brother of Jesus, not James the disciple. The disciple is sometimes called “the Greater” while the brother is identified as “the Lesser” or sometimes “James the Just.” Neither actually wrote the letter.
It does not appear in a document we call the “Muratorian Canon,” the earliest known list of Christian Testament books, dated to the latter half of the Second Century. The first reference to the Epistle of James and the earliest known manuscripts of it are from the Third Century.
The text’s unknown authors provide some guidance on communications to the early church, for where two or more are gathered in Christ’s name, there Christ is also. Where three or more are gathered in Christ’s name, the first two are talking about the third.
Gossip is so incredibly human, and can be so incredibly toxic. “Haitian immigrants are killing and eating pets.” This is not actually happening, but it has gone from gossip to truth in the minds of some because it has been amplified by political candidates and spread on social media by racists who want us to believe all brown-skinned immigrants are a threat, even when they are legal, as is the case in Springfield.
When a network de-platforms someone for hate speech, we hear immediate cries about the First Amendment by people who do not understand the First Amendment, which only applies to government restrictions on speech. The Constitution does not protect Rosanne Barr’s right to use network television to spew lies and hate.
Communication styles trip us up almost as often as communicated content. We think someone who rarely speaks is very wise or incredibly dumb. Internal processors get steam-rolled by verbal processors, while verbal processors get lambasted for provisional steps in the thought processes they often and maybe unwisely share aloud.
So I want to spend a few minutes talking about talking, communicating about communication, speaking about speaking, with all of the attached irony. I mean, one of the best things about being a “childless dog gentleman” is that Oscar never talks back, but congregants, constituents, and random social media users all do. I am thankful that at least I don’t have the stress of being in a P.T.A. or homeowners association!
And I’m not really going to wrestle with chit-chat, about the weather or the Bills’ game, though those sorts of conversations can convey important information too, especially after Thursday. I’m going to focus on what we might think of as substantive and sometimes even prophetic speech.
Most will have heard some version of the rubric that asks if what you want to say is true, kind, and helpful. All three of these are more complex than they seem, so let’s take them one at a time.
True should be the easiest. There are things that are measurable. The 2016 inauguration was not bigger than the 2008 inauguration. Venezuela did not interfere in the 2020 election. Richard Nixon was indeed a crook. On a larger scale, Columbus did not discover the Americas, and the Enslaver’s Rebellion in the 19th century was not about states’ rights.
Sometimes we believe and repeat things, only to receive new information or to experience a paradigm shift. Sometimes, truth really is a matter of how you look at things, the famous story of the visually impaired folks trying to describe the elephant based on the part they are able to touch. The early 20th century saw a headfirst dive into the relativity of the quantum, and the positionality of the post-modern. Still, we should try to tell the truth.
One rule to communication I have learned as a pastor, one that also serves me well as an elected official, is that there is no such thing as an information vacuum. If people do not know, they make stuff up.
It is better to get out ahead of the questions, to communicate what you can as soon as you can. This isn’t always easy, for as a pastor and as an elected official, I often have confidential information I cannot share. The same is true for our medical professionals and social workers and teachers. Not all truths can be shared. But the fewer secrets the better. In all of life, either you set your agenda, or someone else will set it for you.
It is not enough for us to welcome the queer community, to be extravagant in our welcome, but we must be clear about the belief, that we do not support reproductive freedom despite our religion but because of our religion, so our agenda must include being articulate about both the beauty and risk of the Bible and the mystery of a God we can encounter but never know, much like that elephant.
Is is kind is the next question we should ask before we speak. I don’t know about you, but I have said things in my life that I intended to be hurtful, used words as a weapon. The Christian Testament calls us to speak truth with love, but I would suggest we speak truth with humility, for often people justify cruel comments as being helpful. Though sometimes it is precisely love, precisely kindness that requires truth as we try to call people to their better selves, as we sometimes speak words that might save a life.
Is it helpful has a corollary that I will get to in a moment. Helpful is a good standard in all prophetic communication, and it is one that requires the most attention in our tradition, for Congregationalism, like the parallel civic structure of the New England Town Meeting, is based on the idea that we make better decisions together, but there are always those who simply like to hear themselves, those who know the discernment is not going their way and throw grenades into the conversation, most often beginning with the phrase “point of order.”
And the corollary, and it is a big one: At this moment, can you speak and be heard. Are you compelled to speak even if you cannot be heard? We’ve wrestled with this a lot for the last forty-nine weeks in regard to the War in Gaza. Abolitionists in Elmira committed crimes, but they also spoke up. Many of us came out and insisted on a place at the table when aspects of queer life were criminalized and all queer life sanctioned. Some spoke out and took risks for reproductive freedom before Roe, and I have no doubt there are active movements of resistance action to match the prophetic speech where forced birth is law.
When we look at the ancient Israelite and Judahite prophets, they were sometimes effective at calling the people back to ethical and covenantal conduct, often effective at reconstructing pre-rabbinic theology so that it made sense and worked in changing contexts, but when Isaiah Bin Amoz and Jeremiah addressed geopolitical matters, spoke to kings, they were ignored, leaving them to explain how ignoring prophets was God’s will too.
When people stop listening your speech is wasted. And all too often, people stop listening when they do not feel heard. Which is another whole sermon.
The Catholic reformer Francis of Assisi is supposed to have said “Preach the gospel always. Use words when necessary.”
Words are often necessary. May our speech and our hearts be faithful to the gospel of radical love. Amen.