In Defense of Polarization

TENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST

Jeremiah 23:23-29

Psalm 82

Hebrews 11:29—12:2

Luke 12:49-56

Prayer of the Day: O God, judge eternal, you love justice and hate oppression, and you call us to share your zeal for truth. Give us courage to take our stand with all victims of bloodshed and greed, and, following your servants and prophets, to look to the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, your Son, Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord.

“Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division!” Luke 12:51.

I recently heard a speaker at a Christian gathering say, “I am glad this country is polarized. I wish it were more polarized.” That remark sent some shock waves through the audience. I don’t doubt Jesus’ remarks had much the same effect. We usually view polarization, division and dissension as harmful and destructive. Many times, they are. I have lived through family rifts, church conflicts and political upheavals that disrupted the efforts of communities to pursue the common good, led churches to disband, ended friendships and alienated family members from one another. There is no question that polarization is destructive and contrary to God’s mission of reconciling the world to God’s self.

That said, there is something worse than polarization and conflict. Far worse than open conflict is a false peace offered by prophets, preachers and demagogues who “treat[] the wound of [God’s] people carelessly, saying, ‘peace, peace,’ when there is no peace.” Jeremiah 6:14. Far worse it is to remain silent in the face of comforting lies, cruelty and injustice, all for the sake of avoiding conflict, than to speak a hard truth rupturing the façade of a false peace that hides, shelters and perpetuates evil. Our wounded world cannot be healed with soothing words assuring it that all is well, no repentance is required and the status quo is the way things are and should always be. Such peace is no peace at all. It is poles apart from the peace God wills for our planet.

In order for the peace of God to reign, peace that follows justice, repentance and reconciliation in just that order, the false peace resting on the appeasement of evil, toleration of injustice and blindness to the suffering and persecution of our neighbors must be shattered. I suggest that the job of a disciple of Jesus in days such as these is to be a disturber of the peace. There can be no peaceful coexistence with a government that uses its military against peaceful protesters, sends masked goons to snatch honest and hardworking people from their homes, schools and places of work, divides families, propagates racist propaganda, ruthlessly persecutes transgender families and their children and denies medical care and treatment to the most vulnerable among us. These are not the ways of a righteous nation. They are the ways of an evil empire, the likes of which Jesus condemns in his parable of the last judgment and John of Patmos foretells destruction in the book of Revelation. There is no middle ground between equality and racism, rapists and their victims, truth and “alternative facts,” otherwise known as “lies.” There is no middle ground between the peace of God’s reign over a new creation and the fragile peace of despots and cowardly subjects desperately holding together the crumbling remnants of the old. Standing with Jesus sometimes means standing against your country, standing against members of your church or even standing against your own family.

I have previously related the story of Clarence Jordan and his part in founding Koinonia Farm. I think that story bears repeating here. Recall that Koinonia Farm was an intentional Christian community established in the State of Georgia back in 1942. It continues as a vital witness to the gospel to this day. Clarence Jordan intended for Koinonia to be a “demonstration plot for the Kingdom of God.”  For him, this meant a community of believers sharing life and following the example of the first Christian communities as described in the Acts of the Apostles. In order to bear witness to the church as a family in which there is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female, Koinonia was constituted from its inception as a place where African Americans lived side by side with their white sisters and brothers. Not surprisingly, Koinonia Farm was a frequent target of Klan hostility and government initiated opposition in the deeply segregated south. In his book, Unleashing the Scripture, Duke University professor of religion and ethics Stanley Haueraus relates a pivotal incident in the story about Koinonia.

Shortly after Koinonia was founded, Georgia’s state attorney general made several attempts to outlaw the community, confiscate its property and evict the residents. Clarence Jordan sought the help of his brother Robert Jordan, a prominent lawyer with political aspirations. Clarence asked Robert to take on the defense of Koinonia Farm. According to a passage from a book written by James McClendon, the following exchange took place:

“Clarence, I can’t [represent you]. You know my political aspirations. Why, if I represented you, I might lose my job, my house, everything I’ve got.”

We might lose everything too, Bob,” [Clarence replied.]

“It’s different for you.”

“Why is it different? I remember, it seems to me, that you and I joined the church the same Sunday, as boys. I expect when we came forward the preacher asked me about the same question he did you. He asked me, ‘Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior.’ And I said, ‘Yes.’ What did you say?”

“I follow Jesus, Clarence, up to a point.”

“Could that point by any chance be—the cross?”

“That’s right, [Clarence]. I follow him to the cross, but not on the cross. I’m not getting myself crucified.”

“Then, [Robert,] I don’t believe you’re a disciple. You’re an admirer of Jesus, but not a disciple. I think you ought to go back to the church you belong to, and tell them you’re an admirer and not a disciple.”

“Well now, [Robert replied,] if everyone who felt like I do did that, we wouldn’t have a church, would we?”

“The question is” Clarence said, ‘Do you have a church?’”

My own Lutheran tradition is big on giving government the benefit of the doubt. Citing (mis-citing) Saint Paul in his letter to the Romans, we have often drawn the wrong conclusion that whatever government exists has been established by God, serves as God’s minister of justice and should therefore receive the same degree of obedience as given to God.[1] Even unjust, ineffective or foolish laws must be obeyed-unless they forbid preaching of the gospel. Then and only then do we “obey God rather than human authority.” That is true, so long as we understand that proclaiming the gospel is not a matter of mere preaching, but of practicing the way of Jesus as he lived the precepts of the Sermon on the Mount which ultimately led to his execution under government authority. Showing mercy, granting protection and offering care to our neighbors who are transgender, undocumented or the victims of federal, state or local censorship requires breaking some humanly instituted laws. Discipleship requires no less, even if it splits churches, alienates long time members, divides families and triggers legal prosecution. A church divided over the gospel is far preferable to a church united under anything less.

These times call for preachers unafraid to unleash the sword of division on behalf of our most vulnerable neighbors in whom we cannot help but recognize the face of Jesus. Matthew 25:37-41. I have said it before and I will say it again: If you, as a preacher, are unable or unwilling to do this work, then for the sake of the church, for the sake of the world and for your own sake, step out of the pulpit and make way for someone who will.

Here is a poem by Denise Levertov that shatters the false and fragile peace of silence and complicity.

Goodbye to Tolerance

Genial poets, pink-faced

earnest wits—

you have given the world

some choice morsels,

gobbets of language presented

as one presents T-bone steak

and Cherries Jubilee.

Goodbye, goodbye,

                            I don’t care

if I never taste your fine food again,

neutral fellows, seers of every side.

Tolerance, what crimes

are committed in your name.

And you, good women, bakers of nicest bread,

blood donors. Your crumbs

choke me, I would not want

a drop of your blood in me, it is pumped

by weak hearts, perfect pulses that never

falter: irresponsive

to nightmare reality.

It is my brothers, my sisters,

whose blood spurts out and stops

forever

because you choose to believe it is not your business.

Goodbye, goodbye,

your poems

shut their little mouths,

your loaves grow moldy,

a gulf has split

                     the ground between us,

and you won’t wave, you’re looking

another way.

We shan’t meet again—

unless you leap it, leaving

behind you the cherished

worms of your dispassion,

your pallid ironies,

your jovial, murderous,

wry-humored balanced judgment,

leap over, un-

balanced? … then

how our fanatic tears

would flow and mingle

for joy …

Source: Breathing the Water (New Directions Publishing Corporation, 1987). Denise Levertov (1923–1997) never received a formal education. Nevertheless, she created a highly regarded body of poetry that earned her recognition as one of America’s most respected poets. Her father, Paul Philip Levertov, was a Russian Jew who converted to Christianity and subsequently moved to England where he became an Anglican minister.  Levertov grew up in a household surrounded by books and people talking about them in many languages. During World War II, Levertov pursued nurse’s training and spent three years as a civilian nurse at several hospitals in London. Levertov came to the United States in 1948, after marrying American writer Mitchell Goodman. During the 1960s Levertov became a staunch critic of the Vietnam war, a topic addressed in many of her poems of that era. Levertov died of lymphoma at the age of seventy-four. You can read more about Denise Levertov and sample more of her poetry at the Poetry Foundation Website.


[1] The reference is to Romans 13:1. Paul says no more than what Jeremiah and Isaiah said concerning Assyria and Babylon, namely, that they were being used by God as instruments of God’s judgment. Consequently, resistance to them would be futile. It is a long and speculative leap from there to conclude that Israel should support these nations in their military campaigns of conquest or that Christians should support the exploitive policies of the Roman Empire. Thus, while disciples of Jesus should pay their taxes, recycle their refuse and follow the rules of the road when operating an automobile, it does not follow that they should acquiesce, much less participate in governmental acts of oppression.

1 thought on “In Defense of Polarization

Leave a reply to TRACEY LIND Cancel reply