Hilton Head Island, SC – April 19, 2020
The Chapel Without Walls
Joshua 6:15-21; John 8:1-11
A Sermon by John M. Miller
Text – Jesus looked up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again.” – John 8:10-11 (RS
Back when I took Introductory Sociology in college, we were taught that culture is the totality of the customs, laws, mores, religious influences, art forms of all sorts, and popular understanding which comprise the social life of a very large group of people or a sub-set of people. Thus, for example, there is an American culture, very broadly defined. But there is also a Southern culture, a Northeastern culture, a Midwestern culture, and a Western culture. Within those cultures there are various Indian (or Native American) cultures, an Appalachian culture, a Lutheran culture, a vegetarian culture, and so on. Having lived on Hilton Head Island for an accumulation of thirty years, and in Bluffton for six years, I can safely declare to you that there is a Hilton Head culture and a Bluffton culture, and nary the twain shall meet. Years ago bumper stickers proclaimed, “Bluffton Is a State of Mind.” It still is, but just more so now.
In the mid-1800s, I suspect that American culture was largely a copy of what was thought to be Christian culture specifically adapted to the United States of America. That is, many laws reflected overtly Christian values, and the great majority of people had no problem with that. In those days, and up until the 1930s and 40s, blue laws determined what happened on Sundays, the Christian Sabbath. The Jewish Sabbath is Friday sundown to Saturday sundown, the Muslim Sabbath (so to speak) is Friday, but the Christian Sabbath is Sunday. On Sundays for many decades, most businesses were closed, movie theaters were closed, you couldn’t get alcoholic beverages in restaurants, and so on and so on. And any county council anywhere in the country could put a nativity scene on the courthouse lawn and almost nobody would object.
As the melting pot melted much more expansively, however, and we had new immigrants from non-European countries and cultures, sensitivities to the very notion of “a Christian culture” became more intense. Agnostics and atheists also felt free to object to the imposition of Christian values upon them and their private lives. Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and others were unhappy with nativity scenes at Christmas, and maybe even with Christmas as a legal holiday, when we don’t legally recognize Yom Kippur, Ramadan, or other such holidays from other religions.
Let me cite two fairly minor contemporary cultural clashes. I was the interim pastor of a church in St. Paul, Minnesota. Once a year the Twin Cities Marathon was held on a Sunday morning. Part of the course was laid out on Summit Avenue, on which the church was located. On that Sunday, people couldn’t park in the church parking lot on the other side of Summit Avenue, because access to the lot was blocked off. A few church members groused because they held the marathon on Sunday in the first place, but most of the other grousers groused because they couldn’t park where they normally parked, and they thought the race should start in the afternoon. But since some marathoners take a leisurely eight or ten hours to finish their 26+ miles, they wouldn’t end the race until after dark, and then they might get run over on Summit Avenue, or elsewhere. So how was that issue resolved? The city allowed the race, that’s how.
Most American churches, including The Chapel Without Walls, stopped having Sunday services over a month ago because of the COVID-19 national lockdown. It was considered too big a risk to have people packed too closely together in a large room. However, a few states or municipalities allowed churches, but no other organizations to hold services, and a few pastors in a few places insisted on holding services even when they were forbidden to do so. A few of those few were arrested for having done so.
Should churches be allowed to prevent a marathon from being held on Sunday on the streets on which they are located? Should churches hold services when the citizens of that nation, state, or municipality are forbidden from leaving their homes because of a pandemic? In such instances, Christians might wonder, is that really just? Is it right? Is it proper?
David Gushee is a man who is pro-life on the issue of abortion. In an article he wrote about what we have long been called “the culture war,” he said, “By ‘culture war,’ I mean the conflict over American moral values and public policy on such issues as sexual morality, abortion, and homosexuality. On one side are the traditionalists, largely motivated by religion; on the other side are the liberals, either motivated by a different version of religion or by other moral commitments such as personal autonomy or keeping religion out of the public square.” He explained the conflict further by saying, “The fight over abortion is not just over abortion; it is a proxy for the battle between the pro-choice Democrats and the (half) pro-life Republicans…. And the fight over abortion is also a proxy for the divisions within religious communities. The culture war is not just between religious folks and secularists, but also between different factions within religious communities – where, if anything, the conflict is at its most intense.”
How true that is! If the United States Congress passed a law outlawing abortion under all circumstances, many people in this congregation would be greatly upset, even though at our stage in life it personally would affect virtually none of us. There certainly are non-religious citizens who oppose abortion, but most of the opposition comes from some, though by no means all of American evangelical Protestants, by a smaller percentage of American Catholics, and even a much smaller number of Mainline Protestants. Nobody is happy with the idea of abortion, but a sizeable majority of Americans, religious and secular, do not want to see it completely outlawed.
The Bible doesn’t help much on these questions. In most of its pages, it shows precious little tolerance for non-biblical religions or for secular morality. I chose the passage from Joshua for a very specific reason. The complete genocide of all the men, women, and children in Jericho illustrates what I am convinced is the perverted notion that God intended Israelite biblical culture utterly to crush pagan Canaanite culture. Later, looking back on those times, Psalm 44 applauds genocide. “We have heard with our ears, O God, our fathers have told us, what deeds thou didst perform in the days of old: thou with thine own hand didst drive out the nations…. Thou didst afflict the peoples [the Gentiles], but them [Israel] thou didst set free” (44:1-2).
Most of us in The Chapel Without Walls are fairly liberal in our views toward culture; we are a crowd of multiculturalists as opposed to a gaggle of uniculturalists. But we need to understand that for the most part the Bible doesn’t lean in our direction. It seems happy in a heavy-handed way to impose its values on other peoples and cultures outside its worldview.
Does that reflect God’s will, or does it reflect the understanding of God’s will of the people who wrote the Bible? Let me be incautiously candid: if God wants us to shove what we think are Christian values down the throats of every citizen around us, I want no part of God. It is immoral to impose our morality on others who have a different and sometimes opposing morality. At a minimum, we need to discuss rather than dictate our ethical principles. Besides, who has the colossal chutzpah to proclaim that their morality is unfailingly synonymous with God’s morality? Again, if God is as inflexible in ethical issues as are many humans, I want no part of Him. Many ethical concerns facing us are beyond ironclad decrees or unbendable dogmas.
In the USA in the 21st century, there are many Christians who are firmly convinced it is their God-given duty to see to it that American culture reflects what they believe are genuine Christian values. Over the past nearly fifty years, whenever there has been a Supreme Court vacancy, the Senate Judiciary Committee has done its best to ferret out the thinking of any prospective nominees on the issue of abortion. And always the prospects cagily attempt not to be pinned down, fearing that their hopes will be obliterated by one side or the other if their honest opinion is known before they are confirmed.
I am a person who has always had strong opinions on practically every matter facing mankind. If you want to know what I think about anything, ask me, and I’ll tell you. For example, I think it is unjust for Christians to use the democratic process to compel others always to do what we think they should do, or to prevent them from doing what we think they should not do. I believe the concept of a day of rest once a week is an excellent idea, but I would not want state legislatures or the Congress to revert to blue laws. People need a day off once a week, whether or not they worship on that day. It is a faulty notion, however, legally to oblige everyone to cease from working on the Sabbath. Yea verily, it is probably unconstitutional, says I.
In a similar vein, it is wrong for democratically elected officials at any level of government to outlaw interracial marriage or homosexual marriage, or to prevent abortions, or to require loyalty oaths of all citizens. Even if a majority of voters should vote such laws into existence, it is not ethically or even politically proper to do so. There are certain things “the people” should neither prohibit nor mandate. Some matters are too legally and morally murky to allow either prohibitions or mandates.
In the past decade there has been a large flood of Muslim refugees into Europe. Some European governments have outlawed Muslim women from wearing traditional coverings over their heads or faces. That is an example of what I mean by a morally murky prohibition. Who in heaven’s name does any government think they are, doing such a thing? And if they thought they were doing it in heaven’s name (which I’m sure most French governmental deputies didn’t think, since the French are quite secular), they are wrong. I doubt that God gets very exercised one way or the other about such an issue, but even if He does, I can’t imagine He would approve a national legislature enforcing such a hard-headed ban.
In some versions of the Bible, there is no John, chapter 8, verses 1-11. The Bible I use, which is the Oxford Annotated RSV, has that passage in the regular text. However, as the footnote says, “most ancient authorities omit John 7:53-8:1-11,” which is certainly true. Whether this story should or should not be included in the Fourth Gospel, it is a universally famous episode about Jesus and a woman caught in the act of adultery. It is found only in John, and most of the oldest copies of John don’t even include it.
Why not? Did this incident actually happen? I don’t know. But I do believe this: On the basis of what it says, I can well imagine either this or something like this did happen at some point in Jesus’ ministry. Its conclusion is quintessentially Jesus: “Neither do I condemn you; go, and sin no more.” The story says the woman had been “caught in adultery.” I don’t know how anyone would have managed to verify that, or how, or even why, but let us overlook that issue. In any case, first century religious custom required that such a woman should be stoned to death.
Before the crowd had started to kill the woman, some Pharisees asked Jesus what he thought should be done with her or to her. The text says that Jesus leaned down and wrote something in the dust with his finger. The Pharisees persisted with their question; what should be done to her? Jesus answered with a statement which is known by millions of people the world over: “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” Then Jesus again wrote something in the dust. And then the crowd slowly dissipated, leaving Jesus standing alone with the woman.
Three minor observations: First, what did Jesus write? I don’t know. Second, nobody talked about killing the man with whom this lady committed adultery. The double standard was alive and well then as it is now. Third, this is the only passage in any Gospel which clearly claims that Jesus could write. Interesting. But not central to our purposes.
For us, it is central to this story that Jesus seemed to indicate that the religious culture was wrong on the stoning of adulterers, and the secular culture, such as it was, would be correct to let her go free. Religious folks are almost always much more enthusiastic about executions than are totally secular folks. It is evil to use religion to execute anyone for anything. It is especially evil for religion to try to force that horrendous ethic onto the larger society.
Randall Balmer is an evangelical writer. Referring to how Christians should be engaged in promoting their cultural values, he said, “Am I arguing that people of faith should not make their voices heard in the arena of public discourse? On the contrary: I believe that public discourse would be impoverished without those voices. But we should never delude ourselves into thinking that ‘doing politics’ represents the highest or the best or even a proximate expression of our prophetic mission. A prophet stands at the margins, calling people to account. Misplaced allegiance to political power represents a form of idolatry, and the failure of evangelicals generally and the Religious Right in particular to call politicians to account, especially those politicians they propelled into office, is the stuff of, well, scandal.”
Christians need to be the light of the world, as Jesus told us. But too often some Christians work too hard to enforce their views regarding ethically ambiguous situations (same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, abortion, and the like), and they expend far too little energy on issues with relatively little moral ambiguity (Yemen and other genocides, nuclear disarmament, justice for the poor, feeding the hungry, and so on). Christian culture and secular culture can combine forces to strive for change via the political arena when both sides strongly support the same agenda. But when Christian culture and secular culture clash, especially when Christians themselves do not all agree on certain positions, it is best not to attempt to utilize the democratic process to achieve goals which are not universally shared.
As the hymn says, we are encouraged to “Stand up, stand up for Jesus,” but when we do so, let it be for things which nearly all of us support, and about which we have no ambivalence among ourselves. Further, let us in our own personal lives conduct ourselves as we believe Christians should act. Let us also have the grace to allow others who are not Christians to conduct themselves as they believe is right for them. Further, and finally, let there be peace on earth, and let it begin with us.