Down to the Hard Work of Reconciliation - Part 2

In his sermon, Resentment and Forgiveness, Orthodox Priest Hieromonk Damascene says, “The Holy Fathers tell us that, in order to be reconciled to someone with whom we are at odds, the first thing we are to do is to accuse ourselves, not the other person. If we do not accuse ourselves, we will never find rest, and we will never make true and lasting peace with our neighbor. We will always be holding onto our pride.”

This is Jesus’ ‘step 1’ to reconciliation within the church body: if someone commits a wrong – against you or another*, go to them.  Speak privately.  Try to work it out between the two of you – and here’s the twist – beginning not with their wrong, but with your own.  In 12-step programs, that’s called looking at my part.

This is humility.  This is integrity.  And this is crucial to true reconciliation.

Only if that doesn’t work do you invoke the 1-2 other witnesses ‘clause’.  What do you suppose the point of the ‘witnesses’ is?  It certainly ups the ante to involve other people.

But it does something else as well that often gets overlooked: other people may have more objectivity.  They may actually see the other person’s point of view.  If there’s more to the story, the witnesses can bring that out.

Maybe both of you need to do some repenting.  Maybe not.  But having others present means this is no longer simply between the two of you and that has consequence for both parties.

What if even that does not work?  Well, then, you take it to the church – to the body as a whole.  Most interpret this to mean some sort of judicial process is initiated to excommunicate the offender – to kick them out of the body.

But is it?  Why else might we bring a matter to the attention of the entire body?

John Wesley sees Jesus’ method here as the means to avoid committing an offense in the first place: Wesley reasons that if we know this is the process and that it will occur regardless of our station in life, it operates as a disincentive for us to do wrong – much as knowing the fine for speeding and knowing that our local cop (yes, Duane, I mean you) always sits in that one certain place will prevent us from doing the speeding in the first place.

And maybe the invitation to take it to the body as a whole is driven by the body’s work of prayer – that is the very next thing Jesus mentions – recognizing that when the body prays, minds and hearts and lives are changed, truly changed.

Regardless of Jesus’ original intention, what both Wesley and the Genevan Reformers grasped that we seem to have forgotten is that the kingdom of heaven is not a courtroom drama.  Rather, it is a herculean effort by the God of All to reconcile humanity with God’s self – by avoiding human vengeance, by seeking to prevent sin before it has the chance to gain root.

And this God of loving restoration invites us to do likewise.


___________________
*Some mss. say ‘against you’ while others simply say if a brother/sister ‘sins’

Why the Anger at the Poor?

If you’re not poor, I’ve got a question for you.  Have you found yourself angry of late with those who have less than you?  And a follow-up, if you would allow me: why?

Why, oh why, oh why, are we so angry with the poor?  Why do commentators trash talk folks who work at MacDonalds and other fast-food chains for staging a walk out seeking higher wages?  Is it wrong to protest?  What’s so bad about going public with your desires?  About banding together with others in similar situations?  About exercising the same power that the corporations use in order to try to change your circumstances?

Whether you think someone ‘deserves’ a higher wage isn’t the point in a protest by workers.  This isn’t about changing existing laws.  This is about employees seeking a raise.

To compare your situation when you were 16 and presumably living at home with no expenses save those your parents assigned to you to the situation of someone who actually must survive on their wages is specious and insulting.

To tell someone who may only ever be qualified for a minimum wage job to move up the ladder is condescending.

The valuation of labor in a society has little to do with intrinsic worth to the society.  A corporate CEO is not inherently more valuable to a society than a food service worker.  Think of it this way: one of them, if they get it wrong, could actually kill you on the spot.  (Hint: it’s not the CEO – it usually takes a CEO much longer).  And while I enjoy sporting events as much as the next person (well, okay, I probably don’t), intrinsic worth has nothing to do with their levels of pay, especially at the higher end of the scale.  Ditto movie stars.  Ditto, ditto, ditto.

If we measured pay based on intrinsic worth, wouldn’t we begin with those who provide food and shelter?  The farmers, grocers, restaurant workers, home builders (meaning the actual carpenters and joiners and not the company’s head), etc.?

Walking in the shoes of another is more a good and healthy exercise than it is a catchy bumper sticker.  The next best thing is to imagine those shoes.  Imagine trying to actually live on a minimum wage.

It’s not, perhaps, that it can’t be done.  I’m not in a position to say.  But even if it can be done, the thing is that there’s no margin for error – none.  There is no breathing room.  One blip and the whole house can come tumbling down.  One trip to the emergency room and the budget’s shot for months, if not years.  One request home for money for a school trip is a family crisis.  And one family member with out-of-the-norm expenses (such as an on-going medical problem) renders the entire family unit unviable.

When those who have groan and worry, those who do not have have long been beyond the place of groan and worry and wonder what all the fuss is about.  When those who have lament, those who do not have pray, not necessarily because their faith is deeper, but because there is no other place to go.  I think, anyway, for I’ve been either blessed or cursed never up to now to have to know.

But this I do know: it is unseemly at best for we who have so much to begrudge those who do not in trying to attain more.  And if you think organizing a labor movement isn’t work, I suggest you give it a try.

Years ago, I asked my uncle Harvey, who worked his adult life as an executive for Good Year International, what the solution is to low wages, inequalities, and poor conditions in the work place.  His answer was quick, unequivocal and clear: labor unions.  Genuine, international, independent labor unions.

I was surprised at the answer coming from him as it did – this, after all, was a man who spent his adult life on the corporate side of the equation.  It took me years to understand that his work had actually given him a bird’s eye view, leading him to the obvious conclusion that only with parity of power can there be fairness.

So to the fast-food workers who go on strike seeking higher wages and benefits, I say well done and Godspeed.

And shame on you, Brian Kikmeade, Steve Docy, the Employment Policies Institute, Neil Cavuto, Tracy Burns, for a failure of moral imagination that at the least, cannot appreciate folks with less using the same strategies that you use to advance in your own lives (making allies, expressing your concerns, seeking advantage, working together cooperatively, to name but a few).

The Envy of the Dead

When I was fifteen, my Grandmother on my mother’s side died.  Grandmother and I were separated by great distance most of the time, so I did not know her as well as my other grandmother.  But I can remember being outraged on her behalf with the sense of propriety that only an adolescent can muster against the lesser-ness of her elders, in the face of the laughter and loud and even boisterous chatter of those visiting the family at the funeral home.  There was even cigar smoke, for God’s sake.  Who were these people and how dare they ignore the reality of my grandmother’s body lying right in front of them?  It was an insufferable affront.

My memories of that time remind me of Tolstoy’s novella The Death of Ivan Ilyich, in which, as I recall it, Ivan Ilyich grows increasingly resentful over the seeming lack of care from his family about the very clear reality that he is dying.

I wonder, though, were they truly uncaring or were they simply doing what the living do: living?

As I sit with others in caring for my dear and dying friend Stu, it is clear that Stu does not resent that our lives continue without him.  He regrets it; he is sad for what he will miss.  But he does not begrudge the living their lives, their continuity.

Should I suffer like Stu and Ivan Ilyich, should I have the slow rather than quick kind of meeting with death and dying, will I begrudge the living?  Or will I rejoice in their largess even as I regret its loss in my own journey?

Will I hate the laughter surrounding my body as the living discuss the cares of the living; will I resent it even then?

I hope that my corpse will be filled with grace rather than resentment, acceptance and love rather than envy.

That would be a good death, I think.