16 Pentecost
September 8, 2002
Christ Church Covington

“As I live,” says the Lord God, “I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from their ways and live;. . .turn back from your evil ways; for why will you die, O house of Israel?”
“If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.”
Today’s scriptures speak about the mutual responsibility of Christians for admonition and correction of each other.
Our reading from Ezekiel (which was chosen to go with today’s gospel) addresses the responsibility of the prophetic office to warn individuals and the community of faith when they have strayed from the ways of God. This is one of the most difficult and distasteful tasks of a prophet. There are numerous passages in the Hebrew scriptures where the prophets lament having to speak unwelcome words, admonitions, and warnings which are God’s message to his people. This is also most probably the primary reason prophets were and are unpopular, and as a rule, are persecuted, stoned and killed. None of us like to be corrected. None of us enjoy having our faults pointed out to us.
In our gospel, the evangelist is not addressing the responsibilities of the prophetic office, but he is addressing the need for correction and admonition—the need for discipline—within the Christian community when one member of the church wrongs another.
It is helpful to remember that within the early church, there was a decided distaste for bringing matters of dispute and wrongdoing between Christians into the civil courts. This reluctance to bring disputes before the civil courts arose not out of a desire to keep them secret or to cover them up, but because it was believed that Christians were called to live in a state of charity and unity which reflected the divine attributes of charity, unity, and mercy. When one member of the Body of Christ wronged another member, it was a transgression of the law of mutual charity and tore the fabric of the harmony and unity of the church. The law of mutual charity was the new commandment of Jesus: “Love one another as I have loved you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you.” The church as a divine society was called to live by both a higher and more demanding ethic than that of civil society. If she failed to reconcile her internal disputes, she failed to live up to her divine calling.
So the evangelist in today’s gospel proposes an internal disciplinary procedure for the Body of Christ, which is one of mutual responsibility for correction and admonition. The procedure is threefold. If one member wrongs another, that member has a responsibility to speak privately with the one who wronged him, and seek the other’s repentance and change of heart. If the offender will not listen, one or two other members are enjoined to seek the offender’s willingness to amend his ways. If the offender still will not listen, the matter is to be brought before the local Christian community.
As Americans, who have been brought up in a society, which, as a rule, values individual rights and freedom over those of the community, this procedure may strike us as high-handed. It may even sound like sticking our noses into someone else’s business.
But I would like for us to try to view it through a different lens—the lens of mercy and the responsibility of mutual love. Notice that the evangelist begins with the most gracious form of correction—going to another directly and in private with a grievance. Not talking behind another’s back. Not airing our grievance first with others or in public. Not attempting to persuade or manipulate others into doing our difficult task for us or settling our issues for us. Going directly and in private to another when we have been wronged is charitable, merciful, and healthy. It precludes gossip and it precludes maligning others behind their backs or in public.
Only if this first attempt fails are others—one or two—asked to share the responsibility for attempting to bring another to amendment of life. Then, as a last recourse, and only after two failed attempts, is the matter brought before the local church.
And let us take note also that this procedure for admonishing and correcting others is not motivated by desire for punishment, retribution, vengeance, retaliation or recompense for the wrong. It is motivated by a desire for “regaining” the other—for the other’s amendment of life, reconciliation and restoration. Biblical commentaries tell us that the word translated “regain” is a “technical rabbinic term for missionary conversion” (NJBC, p. 661). In other words, the motivation for this disciplinary procedure is that the offender may be reconciled with God, with the one he has wronged, and with the community of faith. “As I live,” says the Lord, “I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from their ways and live.” The Church, as the community of the law of mutual charity, is to mirror the divine desire for repentance and amendment of life out of love for the other—out of desire for the other’s health and well being.
Truth to tell, we do not know whether this practice was followed in the evangelist’s Christian community or in other communities of the early church. We do know, however, that in the early centuries of the church’s existence, those who had committed grave sins (so serious that they had been excluded from receiving the Eucharist) were brought before the bishop at the beginning of Lent. During Lent, they did penance for these transgressions, and on Maundy Thursday they were restored to the fellowship of the church and reception of communion. It is called the rite of public penance, and reference is made to it in our Ash Wednesday invitation to the observance of a Holy Lent.
I do not mean to propose that we, as a church, return to Matthew’s procedure or re-institute the rite of public penance, but before we dismiss today’s reading as useless and irrelevant due to its culturally-conditioned nature, I would suggest that there are some valuable reminders about the nature of our life in Christ to be remembered here.
Firstly, mutual charity includes a responsibility for admonishment and correction. Mutual charity is not the equivalent of the “I’m O.K., you’re O.K’ philosophy. We all know this with our children. We discipline children in order to guide and direct them in the right paths. Because we love them, we intervene when their behavior is self-destructive, or destructive toward others. Because we love them, we want them to grow in the habits of virtue, the habits of faith, charity, and hope. Parents must walk that fine line of correcting children not on the basis of who they are as persons, but on the basis of their behavior. As persons, they are beloved children of God; but their behavior does not always reflect that reality. Just as we adults are beloved children of God, but neither does our behavior always reflect that reality. Parenting is a delicate and difficult task which requires skills of listening and patience, discipline and affirmation.
Family intervention in situations of substance abuse is another example of the responsibility of mutual charity to confront those whom we love when their behavior is both self-destructive and destructive of others. Its intent is not to tear down, but to heal. It is salvific for those who will listen and accept it.
Secondly, if we accept the responsibility of mutual love in correcting and admonishing others directly when they are at fault, then we must also be willing to accept correction from others when we are at fault. None of us are faultless. All of us at times need correction. Others are sometimes able to perceive our self-destructive ways better than we do ourselves, given the great human capacity for self-deception. The key word in mutual charity is mutual. If we are quick to correct and admonish others, a healthy question to ask ourselves is whether we are willing to accept the correction and admonishment of others. If we think of ourselves as above or beyond correction when we are at fault, then chances are we need to think again about why and whether we need to be correcting others. Mutual charity is not a license to judge or criticize others, or set ourselves up as righteous or all-knowing. It requires humility and an awareness of our own need of it and a willingness on our part to accept correction.
Finally, and most importantly, true admonishment in charity is not motivated by retribution, retaliation, vengeance, or desire for punishment. It is grounded in desire for the other’s well being and motivated by a desire for their health. The word for salvation after all, comes from the Latin word, salus, meaning health.
St. Paul’s words this morning from the letter to the Romans are an apt summary of the law of mutual charity:
“Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly; do not claim to be wiser than you are. Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves…Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”

The Rev’d Pamela P. SnareThe Rev’d Pamela P. Snare is Curate at Christ Church, Covington.

Return to Recent Sermons