Confidentiality, Anonymity, Privacy and Healthy Communication

           This last Sunday our lectionary passage was the one in which Jesus talks about how you are to talk to people directly when you are upset with them.  We are not to talk ABOUT people, but TO people, one on one, when we are upset.  If that doesn’t work, we can take someone along as a “witness”, not as someone to back up our claim, or to be our voice for us, or to defend us, or to interfere in anyway.  They come as a witness.  Why?  Because we don’t always hear one another well.  I’d actually take that a step farther and say we rarely hear each other well, especially when we are upset.  But when there is another person present, we tend to hear better.  It is almost as if their ears, and their way of hearing extend out to us and enable us to hear through more clearly, if only a little bit.  A witness is a gift to both parties because both can hear better in the presence of a third person, assuming that person is able to truly be a “witness” rather than someone who is taking sides.

There are many things that can be said about all of this.  My last sermon focused on gossip and why it is so harmful, especially if given power.  But today I want to take that a step further because I realize people easily become confused about what is gossip versus what is processing.  And more, what is confidentiality versus what is anonymity.  And what is therefore healthy in different situations.

Do we need to process through what we will say when we do talk to people with whom we are upset?  Sometimes we do.  It helps us to think aloud about what we will say and how we will say it.  It also can help us to talk through whether or not we are really upset about something or whether we have taken offense when none was meant, intended or even an appropriate response to what was said or done.  But there is a difference between processing and gossiping.

1. Are we talking about the problem because we plan to address it and need to work through how we will do that (processing) or are we talking about it to try to garner support for our side, for our position, while discrediting, devaluing, or disempowering the other person (gossiping)?

2. Are we sharing a story that is ours to work through (processing) or are we sharing someone else’s story that really has very little to do with us (gossiping)?

3. Am I talking to someone who will keep what I share to themselves and who is able to recognize that all stories have more than one side and that I am only sharing my own in order to think through my future responses (processing), or are we talking to someone who will spread around what I say, contribute to the creation of schisms, or feel the need to “take up our cause” which disempowers me in my ability to repair and tackle my issue directly with another (gossiping)? 

         These are not small or insignificant questions that we should ask ourselves when we are talking with others.  These questions are vitally important to the health of a community and how we move through.

       Then we come to the question of anonymity vs confidentiality.  Confidentiality is the keeping of another’s story to ourselves.  It is the decision to honor what someone tells us as simply and wholly between that person and us.  Confidentiality is important in that it protects a person’s story, allows a person to share their experiences in a place and in a way that is safe, honors the reality that someone’s story is theirs and only theirs to share.

      Anonymity has to do more with sharing what was said or what occurred but not revealing who said it or did it.  Pastors tend to use “anonymity” when they preach stories.  They often share stories without revealing who the stories involve.  It is extremely important that when this is done, it is done in a way that does not lead the listeners to “figure out” or even to try to guess who the story was really about.  For this reason, I personally only use stories about people my congregation does not know and would not meet.  12-step programs also have a code of anonymity.  This allows for people to use and pass on stories that have helped them heal, but to do so in a way that preserves the privacy of individuals, that does not ever reveal their identity.  

        In these contexts, both confidentiality and anonymity have their place.  People usually do not have a problem understanding confidentiality, though sometimes they forget to uphold or honor it.  “You never told me not to tell” is a common excuse for passing along another person’s story.  But the truth is, we should never pass along other people’s stories, but should assume confidentiality when a story is told to us that is about the teller and is only the teller’s experience and story to tell.  

       Anonymity is harder for people.  People often use the word “anonymity” and sometimes the word “confidentiality” as a way to pass along critiques, judgements, and accusations, without revealing where they originated.  But this is extremely damaging and unhealthy for a number of reasons:

1. We are called to be communities where people have, claim and use their voices to speak their own truths.  “Anonymity” in the sense of passing along a critique someone else has told us does not empower other people to speak for themselves, to own their truth, and to deal with their issues, complaints, and difficulties directly.

2. When comments are "anonymous", it is difficult to get a handle on how serious, pervasive or widespread the critique or problem really is.  The person or groups receiving negative feedback can feel that everyone is against them, and that everyone does not have the courage to speak to them directly. They can start feeling anxious or negative towards the group as a whole.  This usually backfires and has the opposite result intended.  Instead of the problem then being addressed and worked on, those receiving the critique often can become entrenched in their behavior, either from a place of feeling, “nothing I do is right” or from a place of being truly unclear about what is being asked.  

3.      Often there are people on both sides of an divisive issue who are unhappy with a decision.  If only one voice is passed along, and it is anonymously quoted, a clear picture of the reality of the situation is not being offered. 

4. If a person offering a critique is “anonymous” there is no way to ask for clarity, to work together to bridge, understand, reconcile or work through the problem.  

5. Hearing a story second or third hand is a guarantee that what we are hearing is not completely what was intended or meant.  We all hear, understand and take in comments differently.  So, whatever someone else tells us will change slightly in the re-telling, regardless of our best intentions.  Encouraging people to speak their truth directly allows for communication first hand, and offers up the possibility of truly working through problems in healthy ways.

        The basic rule of healthy church communities in dealing with complaints: if a person does not own their own words, the critique should be discounted.  In other words, the anonymous letters that come to a church go directly into the garbage.  This is also true of anonymous comments.  If a person is unwilling to stand behind their words, they should not be spoken.  Period.  Using “anonymity” as a shield in the church allows for gossip to run rampant, it does not encourage people to claim their own power and voice, and it creates turmoil, dissention, and rifts in communities.  

          So what can we do about this?

1. If someone has something they want you to pass on to someone else, it is best to encourage that person to say it directly.  Offer to be the “witness” standing with them if they are nervous about speaking their truth, but empower them to speak with their own voice.

2. If you are a representative for a group and they are telling you as that representative, make it clear that you will tell the group who it is who has made the original comment.  If they are uncomfortable with having their name passed on, that says one of three things:

      a. They aren’t comfortable because they know or suspect that part of what they are saying is false.

     b. They do not feel the church or group is “safe” for them to speak their truth.  If this is the case, it needs to be addressed.

     c. They want the complaint to appear more general than it is. If there is no name attached to the complaint, then it looks like it might be more than one person.

3. Be consistent about all of this.

        The unfortunate truth is that when you try to change a long-standing pattern in a community, there will be push-back.  Change does not happen overnight.  And people do not tend to like change, especially when it involves changing something that is basic to a group’s culture.  People may stop sharing their complaints and feelings all together for a while in reaction to the new policy.  But people are not good at holding on to their feelings over the long run, and my experience is that communities not only adjust, but come to appreciate the change.  They will learn that their voices are valued, they will feel empowered to speak for themselves and own their own words, and they will be more thoughtful about their complaints and critiques, taking time before speaking them (always a good thing for any community!).  

        I know none of this is easy.  But we are called to be in community together.  And that means working hard to hear, support, speak and be brothers and sisters to one another.  Setting policies that encourage direct communication and bridge building is just one step in becoming healthier, thriving communities.

Truth Telling

(I apologize that the spacing, etc is so weird.  Blogger has changed things and I can't seem to edit some of the hidden codes in this to fix it). 

James 1:19-27, Matthew 18:15-22, Luke 11:2-4

            Today’s passage from Matthew is a familiar one.  It comes around every three years through the regular lectionary, as it has this week.  But it is also a familiar passage because I think we refer to it often in our congregations when we are talking about confrontation, problems, disagreements, and how to work them through.  We all know that people almost universally in our culture find it easier and more compelling to talk about one another than to talk to one another.  And we know that this is a serious problem in many communities, but perhaps especially in the church.  In professional settings behaviors such as gossip and talking behind backs tends to be more regulated and have more consequences.  But in volunteer communities, such as the church, people can behave in ways that are very destructive.  For example, the tendency towards gossip is strong everywhere, but in our congregations perhaps it is even more so.  It happens in every congregation.  But I think one of the number one signs of the health of a congregation is how much power that gossip is given within a church community.  Do people take what they hear through gossip, treat it as “truth” and pass it forward, anonymously?  Or do they insist that people speak only for themselves, telling their own stories only, not what “someone in the church has said”? 

         The congregation that I served in Ohio was, frankly, an incredibly healthy congregation.  And when someone tried to spread nasty gossip, or to attack others behind their backs, not only were those comments not treated as ‘truth”, not only were they not passed along, but the people who the gossips tried to attack were NEVER told, “someone in the church told me in confidence, but I think you should know…”  Or “I can’t tell you who said this, but x, y, z.”  These are unhealthy behaviors.  If someone has said something, we are told in Matthew, they need to speak it directly to the person, to claim it, to own it.  If they have to hide behind, “well, don’t tell anyone where you heard this,” or “don’t tell so-and-so that I said this” then it should NEVER be said in the first place.  If we cannot own the stories we are speaking, they should never be spoken.  And if it is someone else’s story, it is never ours to share.  The only anecdote to the poison of gossip is transparency.  I want to say that again: the ONLY anecdote to the poison of gossip is transparency.  That means owning what we are saying, not passing on things that are not ours to tell, making sure that everyone owns their own actions and own words. 

Why?  Well, this is important for a multitude of reasons. 

We all know the story of the game operator.  One person whispers a story to another.  That person doesn’t quite hear it the way it was said, or more often, the way it was intended and whispers it to the next person.  By the time it comes back to the original speaker again, it has changed into something unrecognizable.  Gossip recreates that game, usually in destructive ways.  This is not because people are intentionally unkind.  It’s just that we all like a good drama and so we tend, both in our hearing but also in our retelling of events, to build them up, just a little, which then is built up more by the next person, etc.  I think about the parishioner of one of my congregations who told me she was leaving the church because of something she had heard.  What she told me she had heard had maybe 5% truth in it.  But she believed it.  When asked who told her this, she hid behind “confidentiality” which meant that there was no possible way to do the truth telling that was needed in the community to dispel this particular rumor.  She left because she gave gossip power; the power to determine for her what was true.  She clung to the gossip, even when faced with the truth, and she left the church body because of it.  Her story is not unique.  This happens everywhere, and it is one of the many reasons Jesus wrote that when we are upset with someone or hurt by someone we are to go to them directly, speak to them directly.  Not talk ABOUT it, but talk TO the persons with whom we are having issues. 

There is another important reason why we should own our own stuff, not gossip, not speak for or about others.  And that is that when we choose to champion someone else’s problem for them, we believe we are doing something good, something heroic and kind even.  We are standing up for someone.  We are being their savior, defender.  But the truth is that what we are really doing is saying that that person is weak, incapable of defending themself, incapable of speaking their own truth.  We are not respecting or honoring someone by doing the work of speaking for them. 

My family watched Murdock Mysteries for a time.  This is a historical fiction murder mystery series that takes place in the early 1900’s.  At one point the woman coroner, Julia Ogden, is arguing with the chief of police.  She is holding her own, but she at one point turns to Murdock who is just watching the argument and not saying anything.  She expresses frustration that he is not defending her and stomps out of the police station.  Later she confronts him on it.  “Why didn’t you defend me!”  To which he replied, “you did not need me to do that for you!  I knew that you were a strong enough woman that you did not need to be ‘rescued’ or ‘saved’ by the big powerful man.   If I had jumped in, the police chief never would have come to respect YOUR strength and your ability to speak for yourself as a full human being.”  Julia was stunned, but also realized the truth of what Murdock had said.  If he had jumped in to “rescue” her, it would have been a strong statement of her inability to stand up for herself and be counted as a full adult to be respected and trusted for her own words and abilities.

We do and should stand up for children. But we also know that it is more important for us to empower them to speak for themselves. We should and do stand up for people who are oppressed by the larger system.  But in doing so, we are recognizing that they have limited power and that it is much, much better to empower their words than to speak for them.  When we choose to “stand up” for someone else, we are taking away from them the power they do have on their own: we are lessening their perceived strength if not, in fact, their actual strength.  We diminish them in so doing.  

A third reason we should not do this is that those who are victimized by our unkindness, by our gossiping, by our slander, by our love of drama and our failure to listen tend to be the people who have less privilege in the first place.  They have less privilege for a number of reasons: fewer social skills, less standing in the community: or in the larger world, less power because of being marginalized for one reason or another.  We are called to “check our privilege” and to not live that out or act that out.   

To take that a step further, a commentary written by Audrey West in the Working Preacher said it this way, “This passage (from Matthew on how to confront) can easily become dangerous and abusive if it is interpreted in the context of either individualism or legalism, both of which can result in the attempted control and manipulation of the offender due to a sense of victimization.”

The truth of this is obvious when we hear white people claiming to be victims of racism.  We are the people in power.  But when we abuse that privilege by claiming to be the victims ourselves, we control the situation in dangerous ways. Sometimes those with “lesser” power use these behaviors, gossip, victimization, to reclaim their own power.  But there is great danger in doing so.

In the movie My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Toula was upset because her father had told her that she cannot go to college.  In his words, “women don’t need education.”  And Toula approached her mother in tears saying, “Dad is so stubborn.  And what he says goes.  ‘The man is the head of the house.’”  Her mother responded with, “Let me tell you something, Toula.  The man is the head of the house.  But the woman is the neck.  And she can turn the head any way she wants!”  At the time that I heard that, I was impressed with that thinking.  In Patriarchal cultures and families, then, there still is some power in the female of the couple.  But then I saw the way in which she claimed her power.  And it was through the victimization that we named before.  “Oh, so women don’t need education because we aren’t as smart?  You don’t think I’m as smart as you?”  It was manipulative, but also harmful to herself because it was lacking in honesty, it did not allow her to claim her power with authenticity or strength.

I think about the phrase I’ve heard so many people use, “Who wears the pants in the family?”  Usually what we mean by that is who appears to be in charge, the more dominant member of the household, the alpha dog as it were.  But I remember very clearly counseling a couple where the one who “wore the pants” by everyone else’s understanding really had no ultimate power because his wife again used the victimization behavior to get whatever she wanted.  If her husband would not listen to her “you’ve wronged me”, “you’ve mistreated me” statements that were made in response to any decision he made (whether it affected her or not) that she didn’t agree with, then she would take her complaint to the larger family group.  “He wronged me, he mistreated me!” until the husband was badgered, bullied and pressured into doing what she wanted.  People use victimization as a weapon, as much as others use dominance as a weapon.  They use gossip as a way to control others, to reclaim power.  But these methods of claiming power damage our own souls.  We know we are exaggerating the stories, we know that we are not being honest or truthful, we know that we are being manipulative.  And that lack of honest claiming of one’s own voice, one’s own truth harms no one more than it harms ourselves.  It obfuscates truth.  People think they are making choices based on reality, but they are not.  They are making choices based on falsehoods.  This happens at all levels: politically, personally, and in smaller communities as well.  (It takes keen perception to see where the power truly lies in any situation.  It is often not where we think it really is.)

This passage from Matthew addresses all of that.  By insisting that people stop the victimization, stop the gossiping, stop the excuse of “I was told not to say who said this but…”, all of these power plays, abuses of power and dishonest interactions are ended.  Relationships have a chance then of being restored based on honesty and truth and trust, rather than destroyed because of gossip and lies. 

I think it is vital to notice that what this passage emphasizes again and again is that true communication, healthy confrontation, a commitment to working out problems in community begins with listening.  Listening is mentioned here four times in the first three verses of this passage from Matthew.  James said it this way, “Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires.”

But people really struggle to listen.  And what I find the most interesting is that it is often those who claim others aren’t listening who themselves listen the least.   Let me say that another way: it is often true that no one listens less than the person who is accusing others of not listening. 

Let me give you an example.  The Presbytery I used to be part of went through a long discernment process on whether or not they would vote to support the ordination of LGBTQ+ folk.  They had three separate presbytery meetings on the issue.  At the first one a well-known speaker in favor of the ordination came and presented for an hour followed by break out groups for discussion.  Not surprisingly, those against the ordination simply chose to not attend this meeting.  They simply did not come.  The next month we reversed it.  We had someone speak against the ordination for an hour, again followed by break out groups for discussion.  Interestingly, everyone turned out for this one, even our LGBTQ+ members for whom it was an extremely painful day.  At the third meeting then we took our vote.  And as a Presbytery we voted overwhelmingly in favor of the ordination of LGBTQ+ persons.  The response from those who disagreed?  “You didn’t listen!”  The clerk of the Presbytery meeting had the numbers.  She was able to point out that everyone had shown up to hear the person arguing against this stand, and that many of those who were angry with the decision, in contrast, had chosen not to listen or attend the meeting where the person in favor of the decision had spoken.  And yet still, the cry rallied long and hard, “You didn’t listen!” 

There is a strong difference between not listening and not agreeing.  It is very possible to listen and still not agree.  But while we know that is true from our own perspectives, do we give others that same benefit of the doubt? 

So, returning to the Matthew passage and his clarity around how we are to talk to one another, especially when there are problems, what does all of this really mean?  Several things:

1.        1. First and foremost, we are called to speak directly to others when we are upset or feel mistreated about something.  I gave reasons above why this is important.  To reiterate, speaking truth directly prevents the harm of growing misinformation, it empowers others to claim their own voice and speak for themselves, and it avoids the evil and damage of malicious gossip.   2. When someone does repeat gossip to us about someone else, we need to not give it power.  That means it is OUR responsibility to say, “it sounds like you need to go and speak to that person directly.”  If they are asking you to stand up for them, ask them to come along, tell them that you will use their name if you are being asked to repeat the information.  If you hear, “please say something but don’t tell them it came from me,” then I would first off be very suspicious about the truth of the story at all.  Why don’t they want to be associated with their own words?  We must encourage one another to grow in courage if people are afraid to speak their own truth.  This is supposed to be a trusted community where people can speak for themselves.  If it is not, then work must be done to fix that. 3.       Call them on it.  “Do not tell me things that you are not willing to own.”  If that means they stop gossiping to you?  That would be a good thing!  Maybe less interesting story and drama for you, but in the end, a healthier, safer community.  4.       Refuse to repeat gossip.  Again, if it is not your story to tell, don’t tell it.  Give others enough credit and respect to believe they have the strength to speak for themselves and do not need you to treat them as a child needing you to defend them.  They can speak directly about their own upsets and you should do the same.  Go directly to those who hurt you, not to other people trying to drum up their support for your cause.  5.       Choose transparency therefore.  Speak your truth and YOUR truth only.  Speak it directly. 6.       And finally, and what is most important in all of this: today’s passage from Matthew ends with forgiveness.  There is a reason that the passages on forgiving is part of this mandate to speak directly to people when you are harmed or upset.  Do your best to reconcile.  Speak your truth.  But beyond all of that, let it go and forgive.  Jesus says, “if they don’t listen then, treat them as a gentile or tax collector.”  How did Jesus treat the Gentiles and tax collectors?  He loved them, he forgave them repeatedly, he invited them into relationship.  In other words, if they don’t listen, love them anyway.  Let it go.  Forgive.  One of my colleagues in ministry said to our lectionary group this week, “the one thing Satan can’t tolerate is forgiveness”.  Yes.  Because evil thrives on our anger, on our hate, on our rage, on our inability to be open and compassionate, and grace-full and loving.  When we choose compassion and grace and forgiveness, we are freed.  As the Lord’s Prayer teaches us, God is OUR parent, Our father – this is communal.  We are stuck with one another.  And the question for us, then, is how do we live that out as people of faith?  As the Lord’s prayer tells us, but also as the passage in Matthew ends, we are to forgive one another again and again and again. 

    Gossip is not an act of reconciliation or forgiveness.  It is cruel, it is unkind and it is unacceptable.  Today’s passage begins with a call to go and speak directly to those who upset you.  And it ends with the call to forgiveness, not seven times, but seventy seven times.  This would have been understood at the time to mean “for good” or “completely”.  Seven was considered a number of completion.  Seven times Seventy meant “forever.”  Each week we say the Lord’s prayer and we say “forgive us our debts (or sins) as we forgive those who sin against us.”  We are praying not only for God to forgive us, but that we can forgive others.  Because the reality is that when we cannot forgive others, we cannot understand or accept the forgiveness of God into our own hearts.  It’s not because God doesn’t forgive us.  But accepting forgiveness in requires a peace that only comes from letting go of our anger towards others.  Anger is a taking a poison and expecting the other person to die.

We are not free from each other.  We are free in each other, when we can be in relationship with those who are different from ourselves and choose honest, open, transparent, forgiving, caring.

None of this is easy.  It is a growing edge for all of us.  But it is vital to a healthy and thriving community that we work on this with intention, with faith, and most of all with love.  Go and speak your truth, but do it with love, preparing always to forgive.  Amen.

Failure to see our own wrongs.

          I have said this before in a variety of ways, but I feel it must be said again, and this time perhaps more directly. 
           Whatever it is that bothers you most in other people is almost always a serious flaw within yourself.
          As our scriptures say it,  (Matthew 7:1-5): "Don’t judge, so that you won’t be judged. You’ll receive the same judgment you give. Whatever you deal out will be dealt out to you.  Why do you see the splinter that’s in your brother’s or sister’s eye, but don’t notice the log in your own eye?  How can you say to your brother or sister, ‘Let me take the splinter out of your eye,’ when there’s a log in your eye?  You deceive yourself! First take the log out of your eye, and then you’ll see clearly to take the splinter out of your brother’s or sister’s eye." 
          Scott Peck, in his book, People of the Lie, describes the truth of my statement above as the root of evil behavior.  He says that people project out onto others the parts of themselves that they cannot face, cannot see, cannot accept and then they actively work to destroy it in the other: that this is what leads to evil.
          It's so easy to see the truth of this in others, and to know that as a result, our choice to self-reflect is absolutely critical for the well-being of the world.  Yet, most people still do not do this.  And even those who understand the depth of this at a core level will find it so much easier to see in other people than in ourselves.  But perhaps we need to start there, with our observation of others, to enable us to apply it in our own lives.
        I think about the first time I really understood the seriousness or the truth of this.  As a child I knew someone who was constantly putting down another woman whom she felt chose to be a victim and more, chose to use that victimization to manipulate and control the people around her into doing what she wanted them to do.  The person complaining absolutely hated this other woman, and actively worked to discredit her with other people, constantly pointing out her victimization stance and the way she controlled her world with it.  But even as I child I could see with absolute clarity that the woman complaining was actually a master at the very same behavior she was criticizing in this other woman. 
        I see this constantly: the person who says everything comes down to a power play is the one for whom power plays are paramount.  The person who says people don't listen who, himself, does not listen.  The person who becomes enraged at someone else's bullying who is themself a bully.  The person who says gossip is an issue who uses that same gossip as their primary weapon.  We see this at a national level, too - the ones condemning LGBTQ folk who are so often LGBTQ folk themselves who cannot face it until they are caught in a same-gender liaison; the person who condemns others as liars who cannot himself say one word of truth; those who brag about their humility when they are narcissists in every sense of the word; the one shouting about not being valued or treated as a full human being who cannot see the ways in which she oppresses everyone who does not look like herself.  I could go on and on.
        On an almost daily basis I hear or see someone being critical of others for doing exactly what they embody as a human being.  And, like Scott Peck, I have come to believe that this behavior is itself causing an amazing amount of the damage in our world.  The call to self-reflect, to face our own flaws, to admit them: these are actions that lead to healing, not only for ourselves but for the world.  And yet, these are the hardest things to do.   
        My own worship committee has debated about the importance of the prayer of confession in our worship services.  They have felt that it does not raise us up, but slams down those who already have low self-esteem.  I understand this thinking.  But the truth is that we don't get to healing, we don't move to a place of being able to accept grace, accept a new beginning, start again; without naming those things that have hurt us the most.  And the thing that has hurt us the most, nine out of ten times, I am convinced, is our own refusal to face ourselves: our shadows, the parts of our own beings that we don't want to see.  If we can seriously take self-inventory (as our 12-step brothers and sisters do), then we can change, we can grow, and we can heal.  By facing ourselves, we begin to heal ourselves, which in turn begins the healing of our society.
        As a country we are being called to look at a flaw that many of us don't want to see, and that is our racism.  We don't want to be part of this problem, we don't want to see it, and so we deny it.  But it is real.  It is part of our culture, it is deep in our history, it is in the very fabric of our being.  You might say it is in our blood.  And we can see that those who deny it are the very ones who are acting it out most in this moment with violence, with aggression, with terror on our brothers and sisters of color.  I understand that it is hard to look at, but it is necessary to look, to name it, to be willing to take a deep and hard look at the messages that are part of our being, at the ways in which we live those out and act those out, at the ways in which we are damaging ourselves by allowing harm to happen to our brothers and sisters of color.  We are called in this moment to self-reflection of a very painful, but deep, important and true kind.
        How?
        Start with education: There are wonderful books out there to read on the subject.  Some of the ones I've read include Biased by Jennifer L. Eberhardt, Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson, White Fragility by Robin J. DiAngelo, to name a few.  Join a book group that is reading these books so you have a place to discuss, to learn together, to face racism and our part in it, together.
        Move to action.  There are many groups that are taking action on this and if you would like to be hooked up with one, let me know.
        Most importantly, be willing to look at yourself.  I know it's hard.  I know this.  I comforted a very unhappy young woman yesterday who was lamenting her whiteness and feeling like she shouldn't exist in this world because of it.  But there is so much good we can do, as those with privilege, to support, empower, and challenge the system of oppression that denies power to our brothers and sisters.  I understand that self-reflection can lead at moments to despair, but without that intense inner look, there is no hope for movement out of destruction and into being helpers.  We are all on this journey.  All of us.  We need to take the steps together. 
        I started this post by pointing out that self-reflection is hard.  It is so easy to see the flaws of others and so hard to look at ourselves.  I include myself in this critique and I'm working with others to look at my own contribution to harm in this world.  I am grateful for the friends and community that allow me to do that work.  I encourage you to find the same.  We have to begin somewhere.  Being with those who love you enough to tell you the truth is the best place to start.  Thanks be to God for our communities of truth-telling. 

To Love as Called, Part II

Matthew 18:15-22

Luke 6:27-45

Last week I preached on how loving one another is hard and involves being patient, kind and truthful.  I said that sometimes the being truthful part is especially difficult.  But that loving one another doesn’t just mean being nice, but really means being willing to help one another grow – which sometimes means telling people truths that may be hard to tell, truths that may be hard to hear. 

Well today I want to follow up on that with the other side of the coin, because, as some have pointed out, there are some people who, in the name of “truth,” are also nothing but critical.  Often these people are also critical in a way that is impossible to hear, and impossible to actually grow from.  And I just want to assure you that this was not what I am advocating.  Again, if loving is working towards the highest spiritual good for the other, we have to find ways to live in truth and peace with one another that won’t tear each other down.

Todays’ reading from Matthew is very clear that we are to confront each other when we have been injured by one another – something we’ve talked about not just last week, but other times as well.  Still, when we do tell the truth, when we do confront one another, we have to find loving ways to do this.  Because while the passages that encourage truth telling are important, we have more passages that tell us that first and foremost the job is to support one another and uplift one another. 

For example, Romans 14:10-13 says, “You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat. It is written:  'As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.'  So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.  Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way.”

Romans 12:9-10 “Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. ¹⁰Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves.”

Romans 12:15-20  “Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn.  Live in harmony with one another.  Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.  Do not be conceited.  Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.  Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord.  On the contrary: If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink."

And, as we read from Luke today, Jesus is clear that we are not to be critical of one another without serious introspection, and self-reflection first.  We are to look at our own flaws first and work hard to remove them, before we ever even consider saying something to someone else.  Jesus still says that we do this in order to help the other.   “first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.”  So, we still aren’t let off the hook from helping one another grow, too. 

But again, we are first called to look at our own flaws, our own challenges, our own areas of growth.  These, then, can help us to help one another. 

 A young couple moved into a new neighborhood. The next morning while they are eating breakfast, the young woman saw her neighbor hanging the wash outside. "That laundry is not very clean; she doesn't know how to wash correctly. Perhaps she needs better laundry soap."

Her husband looked on, remaining silent. Every time her neighbor hung her wash to dry, the young woman made the same comments. A month later, the woman was surprised to see a nice clean wash on the line and says to her husband: "Look, she's finally learned how to wash correctly. I wonder who taught her this? "

The husband replies, "I got up early this morning and cleaned our windows."

But today I especially want to talk about how we discuss our criticisms with others.

            In book two of  Anne of Green Gables series, Anne of Avonlea, Anne has made friends with a crotchety old man who is very critical of others.  (p.66 – 67)

“That old nuisance of a Rachel Lynde was here again today, pestering me for a subscription towards buying a carpet for the vestry room,” said Mr. Harrison wrathfully.  “I detest that woman more than anybody I know.  She can put a whole sermon, text, comment, and application into six words, and throw it at you like a brick.”

…(Anne replied), “The trouble is, you and Mrs. Lynde don’t understand one another,” she explained.  “That is always what is wrong when people don’t like each other.  I didn’t like Mrs. Lynde at first either, but as soon as I came to understand her I learned to.”

“Mrs. Lynde may be an acquired taste with some folks, but I didn’t keep on eating bananas because I was told I’d learn to like them if I did,” growled Mr. Harrison.  “And as for understanding her, I understand that she is a confirmed busybody and I told her so.”

“Oh, that must have hurt her feelings very much,” said Anne reproachfully.  “How could you say such a thing?  I said some dreadful things to Mrs. Lynde long ago but it was when I had lost my temper.  I couldn’t say them deliberately.”

“It was the truth and I believe in telling the truth to everybody.”

“But you didn’t tell the whole truth,” objected Anne.  “You only tell the disagreeable part of the truth.  Now, you’ve told me a dozen times that my hair was red, but you’ve never once told me that I had a nice nose.”

“I daresay you know it without any telling,” chuckled Mr. Harrison.

“I know I have red hair too.. although it’s much darker than it used to be.. so there’s no need of telling me that either.”

“Well, well.  I’ll try and not mention it again since you’re so sensitive.  You must excuse me, Anne.  I’ve got a habit of being outspoken and folks mustn’t mind it.”

“But they can’t help minding it.  And I don’t think it’s any help that it’s your habit.  What would you think of a person who went about sticking pins and needles into people and saying, ‘Excuse me, you mustn’t mind it. It’s just a habit I’ve got.’ You’d think he was crazy, wouldn’t you?  And as for Mrs. Lynde being a busybody, perhaps she is.  But did you tell her she had a very kind heart and always helped the poor, and never said a word when Timothy Cotton stole a crock of butter out of her dairy and told his wife he’d bought it from her?  Mrs. Cotton cast it up to her the next time they met that it tasted of turnips and Mrs. Lynde just said she was sorry it had turned out so poorly.”

“I suppose she has some good qualities,” conceded Mr. Harrison grudgingly.  “Most folks have….”

As Anne put it so eloquently, it isn’t the whole truth to just criticize.  And we have to be careful about judging others.  You know the quote, “When given the choice between being right and being kind, choose to be kind.”  Wayne Dyer. 

I don’t know if any of you know anything about William’s syndrome, but it is a disease in which the person who has it cannot be discriminating and instead just loves and trusts everyone.  There is gift in that.  But sometimes people become extremely uncomfortable with that kind of care and love from a total stranger.  There was a show on PBS that was talking about this disease and a mom was sharing that her daughter had this condition.  People who didn’t know that she was struggling with a condition would sometimes yell at the mother out of their own discomfort or fear for the girl, “Haven’t you taught her to be careful of strangers?  It is extremely dangerous for her to just walk up to someone and sit on their lap, or climb in their car, or take someone’s hand!  What’s the matter with you for not teaching her these things?!!”  And we understand their judgment.  When we do not understand the whole of any situation, it is easy for us to judge.  Who here does not have judgment about someone about something;  Something someone said, something someone has done, something someone believes, something someone is? 

I’d like to ask you to think for a moment about the things that you judge in others.  Are there specific things or attitudes or behaviors that you find yourself judging in others?  Are there reasons why you have those specific judgments?  Past experiences?  Maybe it is hard to understand certain things?  As the Matthew passage tells us, even as the Luke passage tells us, in the case of our families, our friends, our church communities, and even others, there is a time and place for the gentle corrections that lead to growth.  But we have to speak without judgment.  We have to speak because of a genuine desire to serve the other.  We have to speak out of love.  If we aren’t, if we are speaking in anger, or judgment, or worse, in hatred, then we are not doing what we are called to do.  Speak your truth…speak with love….but try to speak the whole truth, including the good stuff. 

Psychologists give us a formula for this, a formula for confrontation which may seem hokey, but at least for me, I have found it to actually be very affective, very helpful.  It helps me to speak my truth.  More importantly, I believe it also helps the other person hear what I’m saying.  The formula is something like this: 1. You speak your care for the other person. 2.  You speak an affirmation about what is going well in the situation.  3. Then you talk about the thing that has upset you in terms of your own feelings and the way the other’s behavior has affected you.  For example, “I love you.  You are wonderful as a parent/teacher/friend.   AND, when you do x, I feel __________.”   

Today’s passage in Matthew follows the mandate to confront by telling us that we must forgive.  Forgiveness is also a part of all of this.  But as you see, forgiveness does not mean just forgetting about what someone has done, or failing to hold someone accountable.  Instead, it means dealing with a problem and then letting it go.  If you can’t deal directly with a problem because the person you are upset with isn’t willing or isn’t available, then you finally have to work it out within yourself, bring healing in yourself and forgive for your own sake.  As I’ve talked about before, our anger only hurts ourselves.  But most of the time, we are simply afraid to speak our truths.

Loving is not easy.  It involves kindness, it involves truth.  It is all the things that last week's passage from 1 Corinthians 13 mentioned: patience, faith, steadfastness.  But the author of love itself is there to help us.  And that is good news indeed.

To Love as Called

                                                1 Cor 13:1-13

John 13:33-35

1 John 3:11-18, 4:7-12

Most of you are probably familiar with this First Corinthians passage on love.  Where is it most often used?  Weddings.  The first time a couple I married asked to use this Corinthian passage, I found myself thinking it was odd and ironic because this passage was written to a church that was undergoing strife.  Paul is talking to a congregation in which the members are fighting with each other and Paul is trying to tell them how, in the midst of their discord and disharmony, they are still called to love and care for one another.  He says in the midst of your anger, in the midst of your dislike, even, you are called to find patience, and humility, you are called to be truthful, to trust and hope and persevere and work towards harmony.  You are called in the midst of pain to avoid self-righteousness and keeping score of wrongs.  And twenty years ago, I thought, what an odd thing that a couple in the height of new love, in the high of falling in love, would choose a passage in which they are being lectured on how to survive, how to be loving, in the midst of pain and strife and struggle.

But the more I have worked with this passage, and no doubt with the longer I’ve lived through a marriage, a divorce and now in another marriage, I have come to see it as the perfect wedding passage, for exactly the reason that it was written to a congregation in strife.  For no marriage, no matter how ideal, is without conflict or difficulties.  No marriage should be without conflict because we are called to come to every relationship honestly and wholly ourselves.  That honesty will necessarily lead to differences with others.  Those differences will cause disagreements, and sometimes those disagreements will cause strife.

           But obviously, it is not just in marriage that we are called to work through conflict and find ways to love one another.  And as this passage and all of scripture shows us, learning to truly love others is not easy.  It is not easy.  Scott Peck defines love as “the will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth.”  I love this definition and want to read it to you again.  Love, according to Peck, is “the will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth.”  This definition says several things which I think are valuable, two of which I want to point out today.  First, love is an action exercised by the will.  Love, in the biblical understanding of the word, is not a feeling, it is not a liking. It is a decision and then an act of the will.  We care for one another, we love one another not by feeling strongly about them, but by acting in the other’s best interest.  Secondly, this definition tells us that the highest end of love, according to Scott Peck, is growth - Spiritual growth.  We love by caring for and wanting the best growth for the person to whom we are extending love.  Notice that by this definition, acting loving does not mean making the other comfortable.  It does not mean flattering the other.  It does not mean making nice.  It does not mean leaving uncomfortable situations, either.  Is it loving to walk away from difficult people?  It isn’t loving towards those difficult people.
          We often hide our unloving behavior under the guise of “politeness.”  Of course, there are noted exceptions.  Have any of you seen the PBS miniseries of Jane Eyre that was originally aired about eight years ago, or even read the book?  In both I was struck by Jane’s refusal to lie to Mr. Rochester when he wanted to be flattered.  “Am I handsome, Jane?”  He asks.  “Not in the least,” she answered.  In the book, even more than in the movie, Jane is committed to Mr. Rochester’s highest growth, highest spiritual good, without regard of whether it might cause Mr. Rochester to care for her less, or whether her comments might hurt his feelings.  One conversation in particular struck me.  Mr. Rochester admitted to Jane that he had done a great wrong.  For many of us today, this would have been a solicitation for us to be comforting to the one who did the wrong.  “Oh, no, you aren’t wrong.” or “What you did isn’t as bad as you think.” Or, “Well, I’m sure it all worked out okay.” Or, “Even if it was bad, it’s okay because you didn’t really mean to hurt so-and-so.  And you’re really sorry now, so it’s okay.”  But Jane, instead, does not deny the wrong.  Instead she encourages repentance, reformation, the making of amends, and the commitment to do better.  This is love, truth, and a call for growth from one another.
           Have any of you seen the movie “Borat”?  Well, it’s actually a very offensive movie, but still, there is much in it that we can learn about ourselves, and about love. Sacha Baron Cohen, playing the character of Borat, approached different people using highly offensive words and behavior.  The behavior of those he approached was then recorded, and generally speaking, their reactions fell into three categories.  Some responded to Borat’s offensiveness by acting in kind with similar racist, sexist, offensive and horrible behavior.  Other people, people who would take serious offense at the ideas Borat expressed, were simply ruled more by manners, or perhaps by fear of confrontation than by love.  These people allowed Borat to express his terrible offensive ideas and even to act on them, but did nothing to defend the people Borat would insult or even injure, did nothing to stand up for or care for those who would be injured.  Additionally, they could not see Borat as someone they were also called to love, someone they might help, however unlikely it might be, by presenting another view point, another choice of a way to act in the world.  While I agree it was unlikely that their expression of better thought would really have changed the Borat character, even if he had been a real person, not a character, God does not put us in charge of the outcome of our loving actions, God simply calls us to act in love despite all possible outcomes.  
           There was a third reaction to his behavior. There were a few people who chose a different reaction, a very few people who did chose to act in love.  When Borat approached women from a group called the Veteran Feminists of America, with sexist, racist, horrible ideas, these women did choose, articulately and respectfully, to respond to Borat by suggesting other viewpoints.  They acted in love, even in the face of horrible, insulting, attacking ideas.  And while the character of Borat did not respond to their loving behavior by showing change or growth, it is again, not our job to determine the outcome of loving efforts.  It is only our job to choose love.
             It is hard to act loving.
             Aikido is a martial art based on the principle of peace. The founder of Aikido, Morihei Ueshiba, said, “To control aggression without inflicting injury is the art of peace.”  It is in that spirit that he developed the martial art of Aikido.  It is a form of self-defense which attempts to respond to an aggressor’s attacks by moving the aggressor’s energy away from violence or injury into a movement in which aggression is diffused and diminished.  The word Aikido uses a combination of three Japanese characters - joining, spirit, and way.  It emphasizes one-ness or blending together rather than clashing.  Practitioners of Aikido attempt to join in the rhythm and direction of the other person’s energy, and in doing so, the aggressive action becomes more dance-like, it becomes a joining rather than a fighting.  Aikido then seems to me to be an amazing way of practicing love.  It takes a flaw of another - it takes aggression, or anger, or violence.  And instead of returning anger for anger, instead of seeking revenge or striking out, aikido works for the highest good of the other and attempts to show that anger or aggression a new way: to mold it, to turn it, to spin it into an act of peace, without injury.
           What would happen in our world if we genuinely embraced Jesus’ principles of love?  What would happen, if instead of responding to the violence of things like war with more violence, more hatred, more aggression, we instead committed to loving our enemies and working towards their highest growth and highest gain?  What if we found ways to take negative, aggressive energy and use it towards genuine acts of peace, if our goal in acting was that we “controlled aggression without inflicting injury?”  If we are truly about loving the other, loving our enemy, then we cannot respond to aggression with more aggression.  It is not loving to try to hurt anyone, anytime, anyway.  How do we act with love both towards those we would defend and our enemies whom we are also called to love?  Turning the other cheek, loving our enemy, turning aggression into something else, something beautiful, something unifying, something graceful may be the challenge we are called to as we are called to love one another.  It is hard to act loving.
           While I don’t really enjoy watching American Idol, there was a time, fifteen years ago or so, when it was often on in my house, through no choice of my own, so I ended up watching a number of episodes.  On one of these American Idol evenings, we watched auditions that took place in Birmingham Alabama.  One of the interesting things that seemed to separate out the contestants in Birmingham from those in other places was their responses to the comments of the judges.  In other cities, when the judges, Simon in particular, became rude, many of the contestants would argue with his critiques, or return insult for insult: they would strike out at those who had struck out at them.  But in Birmingham, many of the contestants responded to the critiques with simple, “Thank yous.”  And I found myself thinking that this was a case in which the loving thing and the polite thing were, in fact, the same.  Maybe they said “thank you” because they genuinely understood that they could learn and grow from the critique.  Maybe they said “thank you” because they were genuinely thankful for the opportunity to audition and for the judges spending a little time with them that day.  Maybe they were simply being polite.  But whatever the reason, their politeness had an effect on the judges.  Maybe not a long lasting one.  But again, we are not responsible for the results of our loving behaviors.  I saw surprise and moments of genuine reflection cross the judges faces as they had to ask themselves why people were thanking them, even for their cruel and insulting rejections.  What’s more, as the evening went on, their attacks became less cruel, and turned into more constructive critique.  And I have to hope that in the face of others behaving better than they themselves usually do, that maybe they might reflect on ways they could continue to present their critiques less hurtfully, less harshly, with more truth, and also with more love.    
            It is not easy to love.  It is not easy to be patient, and kind and truthful in the face of rudeness, in the face of aggression, in the face of hatred.  And yet it is our call: the only call besides loving God.  The passage we read today from John tells us this is the defining call of Christians: loving each other, this is what sets us apart from other people.  What sets us apart as people of Christ, as Christians, is how we act.  Choosing to love, choosing the hard task of working to care for one another and even for our enemies, that is what will show you to be a disciple of Christ.
          While not easy, the good news in this call to love is shown to us in the 1^st John passage which tells us the reward for loving.  “If we love one another, God lives in us and God’s love is made complete in us.”  This is our reward: we have God, God-self, living in us and making God’s love complete in us through our loving.  What an awesome thing.  What an awesome opportunity for us.
          So, go, love, and find God within you, building God’s temple, bringing love to completion.  In Christ’s name we pray.  Amen.

Sunday's Sermon - Gentle and Loving Confrontation

Proverbs 8:1-14

Matthew 18: 15-22

Immediately after college I served as a volunteer in mission in New Mexico.  While I was there the local church music director offered to teach me organ lessons in exchange for working as her piano accompanist for the music and voice classes she taught at the local community college.  It was my first experience with the organ but after just a couple weeks, the music director called me one Sunday morning saying she was very ill and would I play for her in church that day.  Well, as a very nervous new organist I agreed.  The service went fine and afterwards people were very positive about how things had gone.  Three days later I received a letter in the mail.  The letter was written by Sally, a long term member, the widow of a Presbyterian Minister, and a fellow musician.  When I opened the letter the first thing I noticed was that it actually was not addressed to me.  Instead, it was a copy of a letter she had written to the pastor, the music director, the worship committee, and every member of the session.  She wrote,

“I was appalled on Sunday to hear the abominable organ playing done by Barbara Barkley.  She was a disaster.  I have rarely heard anything so disgraceful in church.  I’m writing to you in the hope that you will see to it that such an atrocity does not again take place.”

She concluded her letter by writing,

“In the future, I would be happy to voluntarily serve as a substitute organist at any time.  With love, Sally.”

As you can imagine, I was devastated.  Moreover, I was humiliated.  I had never before received anything like such a letter, and I was absolutely cut to the quick.  For a moment I thought it might be a joke.  But that idea was soon banished by a phone call I received from the music director, followed by another from the pastor.  They each were kind and reassuring in their own ways.  The music director assured me that Sally was just upset that I had been asked to play instead of her.  The pastor told me that I should feel I had really made it in their congregation: I wasn’t really part of the in-crowd at the church until I had received a devastating letter from Sally, something he received on a regular basis as well as most of the leadership in the church.  He also told me he thought I’d played well.  But for all their kind words, I still felt so ashamed that I wondered if I would ever again be able to show my face at the church, let alone continue to study organ.  A part of my confidence, my enthusiasm for learning and trying new things, my spirit was broken, a part that it took a long time to heal.  Sally sinned against me on that day.  She was right to say how she felt.  But out of love, she should have talked to me, alone and in person.  She was right to express her concerns, but in love, she should have been more careful about the words she chose and how she chose to use them.

But actually, it is not about Sally’s errors that I wish to focus today.  Instead, it is my own sin and sins of my cohorts at the church of which I want to speak.  It is about the lack of a loving response on my part, on the part of the pastor and music director and yes, on the part of the session.  Because we all responded to the letter - by ignoring it.  I ignored it, as I ignored Sally from then on, out of fear.  She had hurt me once, what would she do or say if I actually spoke to her?  The choir director ignored it because, as she said, “Sally is old and set in her ways.  She can’t really change at this point.”  The session ignored it because they received so many of these kinds of letters from Sally that they discounted them without a second thought.  And the pastor ignored it in the name of “forgiveness.”  “We need to forgive Sally,” he said, “by just letting it go.”

But in our failure to confront, each of us missed an opportunity for growth, and we failed to heal the wounds.  We also failed to prevent future hurtful letters to be written by her hands.  Most importantly, we failed to really hear Sally and we missed an opportunity to care for her in one of the truest senses of the word.

It is hard to confront.  It is hard to face people who are angry with us or with whom we are angry or upset.  And so we often choose to take the easy way out and not deal directly with the hurts and wrongs others have done to us.  We justify this in a number of ways, “It wouldn’t do any good to say anything” or “I can just as easily process this with someone else and then let it go.” or my favorite, “I don’t need to confront because I have forgiven them.”  But in today’s passage, Jesus does not say, “talk to those who have sinned against you IF you are still angry with them.”  He does not say, “Talk to them IF you think it will do any good.”  Jesus tells us to confront those in our community who have hurt us.  To act in a loving way, to act as a brother or sister to one another necessitates telling people the hard truth about how things affect us, how we feel, how another person’s actions have impacted us.

We confront to let go of our own anger so that we can really see each other as brothers and sisters.  We confront to help one another grow and walk together in our Christian journeys.  We confront so that other brothers and sisters are not hurt in the same way as we were.  Most importantly, we confront as a sign that we think the ones who have hurt us are important enough to deserve our communication, our honesty, even our correction leading to our ultimate forgiveness.

Jesus follows his instructions on confrontation with the command to forgive one another.  These two passages flow together: they are part of the same act.  Communicating hard truths is a necessary part of forgiveness because it says that I love you enough to not let anything come between us.  And I love you enough to want to work with you, together, in our growing.

God does not leave us simply with the difficult direction to lovingly confront.  Jesus gives us guidelines on how we are to deal with one another in our pain, how we are to lovingly confront.  And yet, the directions that Jesus gives us are not easy.  The first direction is perhaps the most difficult of all.  When someone has hurt or wronged us, the first thing we are to do is to go to the person themself and face to face express our pain and our opinions.  This is difficult.  I would much rather write a letter, forget about it, or get someone else to talk to the person for me.  We often want, and too often choose, to discuss the problem with other people.  Or at least process it with other people first.  We want to get our thoughts together, we want another’s opinion, we want support.  But whatever our good intentions in talking to others, often our conversations become gossip.  Our conversations with others can intensify our judgments of one another, and can bring others into a problem that is not their own.  After receiving Sally’s letter, I didn’t want to confront her, so I talked about her instead to the music director, the pastor and anyone else who would listen and care.  My words about her expressed my own hurt, but they were also condemning, critical and judging.  And through my pain, I incited others’ anger and judgment against her as well.  It wasn’t my intention to do this.  But in not dealing with Sally directly, these were the consequences.

In the church especially, avoiding loving confrontation can be damaging.  We are a close-knit community.  And so when there is a problem and it is not dealt with directly, the one hurt can end up bottling the pain.  More often I think when someone in the church is upset with something we have done, we will still hear critique.  But it will come through a third party. But there are many problems with this.  First of all, almost always when we are upset about something it says more about us than it does about whatever we are upset about. The real problems cannot therefore be addressed when issues are spoken about as coming from an anonymous person.  Secondly, when a person hears critique out of context, they often are unable to know what exactly they have done to cause the upset and so they can’t really use the criticism to fix the problem or to grow. We can also focus on the other person’s failure to speak directly about the problem and avoid looking at our own part.  Also when we do not know exactly where critique has come from we can feel that the church itself is judging us.  The anonymous accuser becomes in our minds a menacing group or even the church itself.  The church stops feeling safe or a place where we can trust and learn.

James Angell in his book, “Yes is a world” wrote, “Church ought to be a set of moments when we become most expansively, openly and honestly ourselves.  Yet it is in the church where we often find it hardest to be ourselves: where we are often the most guarded, the most paranoid, the most unsure of being accepted and understood.”  The church is a place in which, every Sunday, we take time to acknowledge our broken-ness and our need for God’s forgiveness to make us whole. But it still remains difficult for us to lovingly speak truth to one another thereby helping one another grow towards wholeness.

In our legal system we have rules that insist that an accused person has the right to see and hear their accuser.  Accusations are not admissible in court if they remain anonymous.  How much more so should this be the case in our church?  We are to be as family to one another.  The passage that we read today uses the phrase, “if another member sins against you,” but the word translated here as “another member” is actually “brother” in Greek.  With family we don’t have to hide behind anonymity. We are called to be fully who we are, to speak directly, to trust that love will carry us through any conflict. And finally, when we do not want others to know what we are saying, that may be a call for us to actually look at what we are saying, to determine if it is really appropriate, true, and helpful or if it is simply hurtful. 

There are times when taking the risk of speaking directly will lead us to nothing, when the person who has hurt us will not listen. It is at that point and only at that point that Jesus asks us to invite others in the church to witness and listen. But the key words here are “witness” and “listen”.  The other church members are there to aid in the conversation, but they remain observers.  The discussion itself still remains between the one hurt and the one being confronted.

The directions that Jesus gives us for confrontation are not easy.  But we alone suffer the consequences of not following Jesus’ words.  Because I never confronted Sally, my fear of her and her judgment remained with me.  It took me eight years after receiving her letter before I could even mention the story with people who weren’t directly involved in the situation.  And while I can share about it now, simply talking to her at the time might have saved me years of shame and insecurity. 

Was Sally wrong? Was she unkind? Was she just unnecessarily cruel in her words and manner of addressing this? Of course. We are called to be direct – a letter is not direct. But more importantly, we are called to speak to one another in love. Attacking words, an attacking posture, attacking, angry language is also not okay. We are called to be direct, but still loving.  And that must affect how we speak things, how we phrase things, and the posture with which we speak.  But recognizing Sally’s fault in this does not, did not give us permission to act in a similarly unloving way. Failing to talk to her, ignoring her unkindness, ignoring her was unkind, and I was the one left scarred by that decision.

Jesus asks a lot of us. And loving confrontation may seem to be one more difficult task for us to take on. But, each of Jesus’ instructions are gifts to the person asked to do them. So today we celebrate the gift that Jesus has given us in this request to lovingly confront one another. We celebrate that we are family to each other and we are called to love each other enough to risk telling the truth, face to face, to our brothers and sisters. We celebrate that as we confront, we ourselves will grow in our ability to care, to understand, to remember that even those who hurt us are human and make mistakes just as we do.  We will grow in our ability to forgive and truly love one another.