Near the end of my friend Ryan Danker’s
very fine book, Wesley and the Anglicans:
Political Division in Early Evangelicalism, something caught my eye. In 1764, John Wesley wrote a letter to “forty
or fifty clergymen” as his last, determined effort to bring unity to the
evangelicals in England. We don’t often
attend to this: among those who would be
on fire for Jesus, and who sought desperately needed reform within the Church,
there was great division, and intense rancor.
His letter challenged evangelicals of
every stripe to “speak respectfully, honourably, kind of each other; defend
each other’s character; speak all the good we can of each other; recommend each
other where we have influence, and to help each other on in his work and
enlarge his influence by all the honest means he can.”
Divided as we United Methodist are today,
252 years after Wesley penned this letter, and wondering if we can stay
together, I wonder if a wise starting point might be what Wesley commended way
back then. Is it possible, not merely
that we might “speak respectfully,” which feels like little more than
politeness, or some basic obligation of Christian charity, but actually “defend
each other’s character.” I believe this
is entirely possible, quite do-able, and utterly essential if we harbor any
pretensions of being the Body of Christ, of viewing no one from a merely human
point of view (2 Corinthians 5:16).
Imagine: we differ on whatever the issue
might be, although most frequently, and most inflammably, is on the issue of
homosexuality – but we might ask a few questions about the character of the one
with whom we disagree. I am thinking
quite specifically at the moment about a case before our bishop in Western
North Carolina. One of our pastors
performed a same gender wedding ceremony on April 23 of this year. She is a
longtime friend whom I know very well.
Shortly after that wedding, charges were filed by more than a dozen
people, including two clergy in our own annual conference whom I know
very well, both longtime friends - and they filed charges for very different reasons.
What I can assure everyone of is
this: all three of my friends, and
colleagues, who find themselves as combatants in a case requiring episcopal or
court resolution, are of impeccable integrity.
All three love God. All are passionate
about the Scriptures. They have profound
ministries. They are striving to serve
God. They have significant track records
of reaching the lost for Jesus. All three are
incapable of duplicity. They are deeply
trusted, by me and by many others. All three
carry on their ministries with great courage and faithfulness. They love our United Methodist Church. They are so very much beloved – by me.
Where we get derailed is when we disparage
the character of someone we don’t know, or who diverges from the way we think,
however passionately and truthfully about an issue. He does not need to say Oh, it doesn’t matter
what she did or what she thinks; and she does not need to say Oh he’s just so
wrong, and what he’s doing is crazy. But
if truth is a real thing, if truth has to do with looking reality in the eye
and naming it honestly, then he and she should be able to say of the other, I
can defend his character; I can defend her character. She is a marvelous servant of God; he is a
zealous campaigner for God’s kingdom.
We are all, in our hearts, doing our very best for God. I so very strongly disagree with the way that person's courageous ministry of character played out one day; but the character plainly is there.
Neither is wicked, or stupid, or
vile. We demonize the ‘other,’ but our
demonization of the other says more about our own uneasy selves than about the
other person. Wesley was quite clever,
but really just theologically on point, when he suggested that those who are
striving for the good of the kingdom who disagree “defend each other’s
character.” We can do this. We actually have no choice but to do this,
unless we are like those trumped up witnesses who ambled in and accused Jesus
of perfidy.
And if we can acknowledge that there
indeed is character, and holiness, and immense love for God and compassion in
ministry in the other guy, then we stand a chance of listening, and
understanding, and even loving, and making a rather astonishing witness to the
world, where the “character” of the foe is never praised but only smashed.
If we could do this, and I can’t think of
a single good reason why we can’t, we might have building block number one in
place for how to move forward as God’s people.
What if we tried to move forward without putting this block in
place? Whatever we devise would be a
sham, rooted in what is not true or real.
In the United Methodist Church, we have nothing at all except noble,
broken, lovely, flawed, passionate, confused and committed people who gave
their lives to Jesus and would do flat out anything for him.
Who knows? We might even move on to the rest of Wesley’s counsel – to “speak all the good we can of each other; recommend each other where we have influence, and to help each other on in his work and enlarge his influence by all the honest means he can.” That indeed would be a surprise to a cynical world – and the movement of the Holy Spirit we say we seek so eagerly.
