Good morning! First, it’s so nice to be back with you. Second, I might have preferred a different Gospel passage for my re-entry. :)
I think it’s fair to say that When we think of Jesus teaching to the masses in far-off rural Galilee, this isn’t the kind of passage that comes to mind:
I come to bring division--
father against son
and son against father,
mother against daughter
and daughter against mother,
mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law
and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.
(I feel like the women got it a little worse here. Definitely the in-laws.)
In Matthew’s account of these teachings, Jesus says “I come to bring a sword,” rather than “division.” That’s a whole other topic, so let’s just stick with Luke’s account. Which doesn’t sound quite as bad, compared with that.
This is really quite relatable, actually. Who here hasn’t (isn’t even now?) facing this tension between what you believe to be right and good, and the relationships you hold dear with those who don’t share your convictions. When do those convictions ask hard things of us, like parting ways, even with people as close to us as family members? I’ve had many conversations with some right here about this very question.
Years ago I came across a reflection on this passage by a writer and minister Nancy Rockwell. Here’s what she wrote--and you’ll note by her examples that she grew up in the sixties and seventies.
The theme song of my generation was The times, they are a-changin’ ... We marched for peace, we changed the styles of clothes and hair and food. Many parents raged against these things, and families were divided as [many in] my generation refused to consider Vietnam a just war. Because of this division, because of our insistent refusal to conform, compulsory conscription into the military came to an end. Because of our division, a Presidency failed, and an appalling chapter of corruption was exposed and dealt with publicly.
[She continues] Some think Jesus, in this week’s reading, is talking about the end of the world. Some think he is speaking of the downfall of his own nation, Israel, which happened in 69, not too long after he died. And some think Jesus was speaking of his own death. But perhaps we look at his words with too small a focus, perhaps we need to acknowledge the ways in which Division, which is painful, causes hurt, and brings sorrow, has midwifed the birth of God’s justice into this world.
[Then she concludes] Could apartheid have ended in South Africa, or slavery in America, or segregation and a century of Jim Crow, without division? And what about the divisive struggles over science, that cost many their jobs, if not their lives, as the Church refused ideas about planets and stars, about evolution, the intelligence of women, justice for the poor, respect for same gender love? Voting was unheard of in the old order. Then it was unheard of for women, and after that, still kept from people of color.
(She’s referring there to the Voting Rights Act, which conferred the right to vote truly to people of color.)
I wrote her words down more than ten years ago now and haven’t looked at them again until this week. What a different world it feels like we’re in, in so short a time. (Though what a similar world today to the one she writes about.) If not in our own families or communities, we all know someone who has struggled in these times to stay close to family and friends who hold views that challenge our deepest convictions. We all know what it’s like to weigh our commitment to our convictions against loyalty to a relationship.
These are hard decisions -- some of the hardest we face in life when you think about it. If you’re not up against this question from time to time, on one side or the other, it’s worth considering whether you’re active enough in the world. Those who grow, and change, are alert to others and continue to engage will forever be needing to reassess old views and loyalties against new beliefs and passions.
Al Hirschman, 20th century philosopher, wrote a book wonderfully titled “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States.” It’s mostly about economics -- but in it, he considers whether, in the face of difference or disagreement with another person or a group (or company), we’re called to exit the relationship or situation altogether, stay within it and continue to disagree (have a “voice”), or stay within it, suppress our difference, maybe even conform to the other’s view, and be loyal. Exit, Voice, Loyalty.
Not every difference requires division; in fact, many don’t, and shouldn’t. I would even say there are few things we can be so certain of as to put division over loyalty. But where matters of major and needed social change are involved, we may need to walk away.
Maybe a question to ask yourself at your next extended family gathering is: is division motivated by a sincere desire for and commitment to social change and betterment for others, or is it just that I’m disagreeable and don’t want to be around this person and their views? Can I not act on my convictions while continuing my relationship with this person who doesn’t at all share them? Might there be more room in this relationship than I think to hold all this? Isn’t it worth finding out before deciding to cut someone out?
Thirty years ago, I had to leave a religious tradition that went back many generations in my family because I had a call to the priesthood, as a woman. Would I have left my family to follow this call? I’m not sure. I didn’t need to find out. I just kept visiting home, acted like my same old self, enjoyed my family like I always had, yet moved ahead with my calling. They didn’t shut me out, and I didn’t leave. (I guess I chose not “exit” or “loyalty,” but “voice.”) Such an approach sometimes works--maybe more often than we think. But not always. And where social change is needed to save lives or secure rights, there’s not always time.
From today’s reading from prophet Jeremiah: “Is not my word like fire, says the Lord, and like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?”
Sometimes it is. That’s what today’s Gospel reading reminds us. Jesus came to bring about a better world, and he came to bring division. Sometimes you can’t have the one without the other. This teaching is a reassurance that we haven’t failed if that’s the path we need to take. May God give us the wisdom it takes to know when we’re called down that path, and then, the grace to pursue it. Amen.