Quarreling over
Opinions
Romans 14:1-12[1]
I don’t know about you guys, but
when I take a look at our society, it seems to me that we’ve gotten really good
at arguing with each other. I don’t mean that we have good and productive
arguments by “fighting fairly.” It’s my impression that we’re quick to take
offense, quick to get angry, and quick with a comeback that is demeaning or
offensive. I guess I should really say that we’ve gotten really bad at arguing
with each other! It seems that every significant issue facing our society at
least potentially leads to a fight. In fact, as some have observed, our country
may be more divided at this time than in any other part of our history--even
the Civil War![2]
If you think that’s not the case,
all you have to do is look at people’s opinions about the last two presidents.
It seems there’s no middle ground: people despise one, insisting that he
brought our country to ruin, and they respect the other, and think he took our
the country in the right direction. But whichever side of that divide you’re
on, all someone has to do to make your blood boil is mention a name and express
an opinion different than yours. We’ve gotten to the point where we can’t even
express different opinions without getting hostile toward one another.
I think part of the reason for
this is fear. We’re more afraid now than perhaps ever before. We’re afraid
because the things we used to count on for security in life seem to have
evaporated. And we’re afraid because the forces that control our lives seem so
much bigger than they once did. And all that fear converts into hostility. And
as much of a “techie” as I am, I’m afraid social media like email and Facebook
have only poured fuel on the fire. When you get on the internet, there’s a
false feeling of anonymity that induces us to say things we’d never dream of
saying in person. And so the divisiveness and the arguing continue, and they
just make the hard feelings worse.
But in our lesson from St. Paul
for today, the Apostle tells us that it ought not be so, especially in the Body
of Christ. We might be tempted to think that the church in the days of the New
Testament was much more spiritual, and didn’t have arguments like we do in our
churches today. But that’s not the case. In fact, in just about every book of
the New Testament the Apostles had to deal with some kind of dispute or
another. But as St. Paul tells Timothy, “wrangling over words ... does no good
but only ruins those who are listening” (2 Tim. 2:14). He goes on to tell
Timothy to “have nothing to do with stupid and senseless controversies; you
know that they breed quarrels” (2 Tim 2:23).
And so it should come as no
surprise when St. Paul tells the Church at Rome that they are to avoid
“quarreling over opinions.” But if you read between the lines, you might be
surprised at the “opinions” about which he was urging them to practice
tolerance. When he refers to some people having the faith to eat everything while
the “weak” only eat vegetables, he’s referring to the way meat was processed
and sold in that day.[3]
A significant amount of the meat sold in the open-air market was left over from
a sacrifice that was offered at a pagan temple that morning. So to eat meat in
that context could be construed by some as participating in the worship of
false gods! And yet others had a strong enough faith to recognize that all
things come from God, and so they ate meat. And on an issue of this potential
significance, Paul urges tolerance!
We might wonder how St. Paul could
make such an apparently offensive compromise as to allow the eating of meat
that had been used in the worship of a false god. To some in his day, he was
essentially turning a blind eye to at least an indirect participation in
idolatry.[4]
How could he encourage behavior that some viewed as a violation of the command,
“You shall have no other gods before me”? I think that at least part of the
answer is that he realized that whether or not eating meat constituted the
practice idolatry was a matter of interpretation, and therefore a matter of
opinion. And St. Paul didn’t want the Body of Christ divided over matters of
opinion. Rather, Paul urged that Christians take the attitude that, even when
we disagree about significant issues, we all “belong to the Lord” (Rom. 14:8).
And in case there is any doubt about whether we can all belong to the same Lord
and disagree with one another, he makes it clear that we have no place passing
judgment on other “servants of the Lord” (Rom. 14:4).[5]
So how do we translate this into
our day and time, when we are debating matters like the Middle East, or gay
marriage, or immigration policy. How are we who live together in the community
of faith to relate to one another when we disagree over strongly held opinions?
Part of the problem is that when we in the church are seen so visibly fighting
with so much hostility toward one another, we invalidate the message of the
Gospel in the eyes of those around us. It seems to me that in this community
where we all “belong to the Lord,” we have to start with the conviction that
our connection to one other in the Body of Christ supersedes all of our
opinions.[6]
Hopefully, we all seek to serve the Lord to the best of our ability. Ideally,
we all strive to submit matters of conscience to God’s judgment.[7]
It seems to me that means that there simply is no place for “quarreling over
opinions” in the Body of Christ. Rather, this is a community in which mutual
respect and love must always trump differences of opinion. [8]
[1] © 2014
Alan Brehm. A sermon delivered by Rev. Dr. Alan Brehm on 9/14/2014 at Hickman
Presbyterian Church, Hickman, NE.
[2] See Dave
Bryan, “Jerry Brown: California, Country Facing ‘Regime Crisis’ Similar To The
Civil War,” CBS Los Angeles 10 April 2010; accessed at http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/04/10/jerry-brown-gop-stalling-budget-reform/.
[3] Many
scholars suggest that part of the problem here was an expulsion of the Jews
from Rome which some ancient historians recount. After some years, the Jewish
population began to trickle back into Rome. However, whatever accommodations
there may have been before the expulsion for the proper processing of meat
according to Jewish food laws would likely no longer have been in place. This
would have created a crisis for Jewish Christians who felt obligated to follow
those laws. See James D. G. Dunn, Romans
9-16, 801, 810-11; Robert Jewett, Romans: A Commentary, 838.
[4] Cf. B.
B. Blue, “Food Offered to Idols and Jewish Food Laws,” in Dictionary of Paul and his letters, edited by G. F. Hawthorne, R.
P. Martin & D. G. Reid, 306-310.
[5] Cf. Paul
J. Achtemeier, Romans, 215, where he
observes that “The danger of self-righteousness lies in its tendency to make
one’s own convictions the measure of the validity of the convictions of all
others.” He also says (p. 217) in connection with the temptation to “set
oneself up as judge” in the place of God that “The danger of self-righteousness
is therefore closely allied to the danger of self-idolatry.” Cf. also Edgar
Krenz, “Relationships Count,” The
Christian Century (Aug 28, 1996): 811. He says that St. Paul “is not a
weak-kneed Christian who has no standards. But his concept of judgment is
shaped by his knowledge of the judge. Christians are ultimately responsible to
their Lord.” See further Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics 2.2:725: Christians
holding different opinions cannot judge each other “Because both are servants, each serving the Lord with their better or
less good faith, each finding in the Lord his own Judge and Saviour. They
cannot exclude each other when God has accepted both and will judge their
faithfulness or unfaithfulness by His mercy.” Cf. also Jewett, Romans, 843.
[6] Cf.
Achtemeier, Romans, 216: “Paul does
not take sides on whether the ‘weak’ or the ‘strong’ are more correct. He is
intent rather on meeting the threat to Christian unity posed by the attempts of
one of the groups to make its convictions about conduct the sole and exclusive
measure of true and faithful response to God’s gift of his Son. The advice to
both groups is the same: Respect the convictions of the other group.”
[7] Cf.
Achtemeier, Romans, 218, where he
points out that Paul urges both tolerance on differences of opinion as well as
the intention to “do everything one does to the honor of God.”
[8] It would
seem that Paul would endorse the maxim, “In essentials, unity; in
non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity.” On the history of this
often-quoted phrase which is erroneously attributed to St. Augustine, see James
J. O’Donnell, “A Common Quotation from ‘Augustine’?” accessed at http://faculty.georgetown.edu/jod/augustine/
quote.html and Hans Rollman, “The Pre-History of a Restoration Movement
Slogan,” in Restoration Quarterly
39.3, accessed at http://www.acu.edu/sponsored/restoration_quarterly/archives/1990s/vol_39_no_3_contents/
rollmann.html
No comments:
Post a Comment