Proper 23 (A) + A garment of hospitality + 10.12.14

Rublev, Trinity

M. Campbell-Langdell

All Santos, Oxnard

(Exodus 32:1-14; Ps. 106:1-6, 19-23; Philippians 4:1-9; Matthew 22:1-14)

What a gospel reading, huh? It seems like a grand invitation to a feast, but there are parts that chafe. What about these wrongdoers who get destroyed and their city torched? What about this poor fellow who, invited in from the streets, is somehow expected to wear a wedding garment? Aren’t we all about “come as you are” around here?
Surely if we pay attention to the advice of St. Paul to the Philippians, about keeping in mind what is just, honorable and so forth, this gospel goes out the window?
Not so fast, I think. There are many layers to this one, and unwinding them may help us.

One is a fairly straightforward historical fact. We read today’s gospel in Matthew. If you read the parallel parable in Luke 14 (verses 15-24), you will notice that almost the same actions occur, but without the violence. What makes the Matthean community different? Why the violence, guys? Well, they were processing the violent and earth-shattering event of the destruction of the temple in 70 C.E., and as Jewish Christians this was world-changing for them. As we know, those who have been through violence often need to include violent imagery in their processing of those events to make new sense of things.
Well that helps us to understand the community of Matthew’s gospel, but what do we make of this gospel story today?
When unraveling a story that has many layers of truth, a touch of mysticism helps.

So here is a slice of the Jewish mystical book called Zohar from the Kabbalah that may help:

“Come and see: When those days draw near to the Holy King, if the person leaving the world is pure he ascends and enters into those days and they become a radiant garment for his soul! But only his days of virtue, not his days of fault. Woe to him who has decreased his days up above! For when he comes to be clothed in his days, the days that he ruined are missing and he is clothed in a tattered garment. It is worse if there are many such days; then he will have nothing to wear in that world! Woe to him! Woe to his soul!”[1]

So this author sees our lives and how we live them as a garment. And he says that we are either weaving our garment to be worthy to attend the heavenly feast or actively putting holes in, leaving us with a garment that may be so hole-ridden as to barely cover us at all!
To add another layer, we know that we as Christians need never fear that we will be exactly like this poor guest because we are already clothed in Christ in our baptism. But we baptized Christians are still challenged to live out our own lives in such a way as to be worthy of Christ and spiritually ready to attend the supper of the Lamb. Since we are eternal beings, we are not done yet at any point—whether before we are baptized or after—until we are at one with God in the Kingdom. We may be redeemed and clothed in Christ in baptism, but how we act affects the quality of the pristine robe with which Christ has clothed us.

In the reading from Philippians today, we hear this sage advice:  “beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things (4:8).”

And yet, are we doing this as a society? My friend Diana Glyer recently gave a talk at the C.S. Lewis Foundation’s Oxbridge Conference in Oxford, England. And, drawing on the fact that the Pew Research Center has noted that American society is becoming more and more polarized; she noted that the numbers of those on the two extremes of liberalism and conservatism have doubled while the center has shrunk.[2] When I look at this study, it points out that partisan antipathy has grown, and increasingly on each side “compromise” has been increasingly seen as each one’s side getting more of what it wants.[3] Now, none of this is a surprise to those of us following what Congress has been up to. But we may not be aware of what the Pew Research Center noticed, and that is the extent to which these trends are affecting all Americans’ everyday lives. We are less willing to relate to those who are different from us.
Diana Glyer suggests that if we Christians see each other as eternal beings, as each of us a beloved child of God, we have a responsibility. And that is to show each other a measure of intellectual hospitality. She says that this concept is not about entertaining and showing off our best side, but it is a way of approaching one another in which we are open to another’s difference and we strive to understand another before we strive to react against what we perceive as his or her false belief system. She suggests that we can hold on to our convictions about what is true, trusting that, as she says, “truth is durable,” that we don’t have to defend it or God but that we can be open to another’s truth enough to share together rather than isolate ourselves.^[4]

I think this is a special challenge for us not just as Christians, but as Episcopalians. We are famous for a concept called Via Media, which means that we strive to find the middle way, a way to balance various points of view in our tradition. We are constantly searching for whatever is good and true and honorable in each person’s experience and building a bridge between these realities.
This is why Bishop Scott Hayashi of the Episcopal Diocese of Utah is one of my heroes this week. In response to that quiet non-decision by the Supreme Court that effectively made gay marriage legal in several states including Utah this week, Bishop Hayashi was aware of something. He knew that this was a happy and blessed moment for many couples, couples who have yearned to be something other than second-class citizens for years. But he also knew that there would be those in his diocese who would feel discomfort with this decision. So he announced that the diocese of Utah would be officiating same sex marriages and he said this: “because we live in a web of relationships it is very important that we proceed forward with care for all people regardless of their opinion in this matter.”[5] This is heroic to me because he is responding and acting out the truth of his own heart but he also shows respect for those who believe differently.

This to me is exactly what Diana Glyer is talking about. How can we move forward with our convictions, but in a sense of compassion and respect for others who may differ from us?

Because others might have a truth that we don’t yet understand. Or they may feel they are doing the right thing. Notice that in today’s reading from Exodus those making the golden calf are doing all these great religious rituals around the false image of a god. Aaron talks about offering a feast for Yahweh. They’re all confused! And Moses knows this, and asks God to hold back God’s anger. We are all human, and might get it wrong sometimes. Or we might get it right, but we need to have compassion for those who are still figuring it all out as well as for those who might genuinely hold a different truth than we do.

Because if we people of faith don’t show this compassion, who will? In a society that is increasingly divided, we are called to be the peacemakers. To be faithful to our truths, yes, but also to be hospitable with others who hold different values.

So, let’s work on those heavenly garments by showing each other and those in our various communities intellectual hospitality. Let us “be of the same mind,” not in that we all think the same, but in that we are able to see each other’s point of view. And let us follow the advice of St. Paul to those in Philippi:

“Finally, beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you (Phil 4:8-9).”

---

[1] Zohar, as quoted by Suzanne Guthrie in: http://edgeofenclosure.org/proper23a.html.

[2] Diana Pavlac Glyer, “C.S. Lewis at Table with Dante and Zeus: Pushing (Against) the Limits of Intellectual Hospitality”2014 CS Lewis Summer Institute: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7GTtZEW9Kk&list=UULdNC2VvA62bTDWd3ERRsHg.

[3] Pew Research Center, “7 Things to Know about Polarization in America,”  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/06/12/7-things-to-know-about-polarization-in-america/.

[4] Glyer.

[5] Mary Frances Schjonberg, “Dioceses respond to marriage equality decision by U.S. Supreme Court,” from: http://episcopaldigitalnetwork.com/ens/2014/10/10/dioceses-respond-to-marriage-equality-decision-by-u-s-supreme-court/ (October 10, 2014).