July
13, 2014
Numbers
13:25-33
It was a great experience at camp last week,
although I am really feeling it this morning. Today, and next Sunday, I am doing something that I rarely
do – I am recycling old sermons. I
don’t like to reuse sermons, just as I don’t like to eat leftovers, because
once I’m done with a message I move on.
As we are between sermon series, however, and as I was at camp all of
last week, it seemed to be the prudent thing to do. As usual though, when I use an older sermon, I find that I
spend a good deal of time changing and rewriting it.
In our nation, we have a time-honored tradition
of the dissenting opinion on our Supreme Court. And we can recognize how important those dissenting opinions
– those minority reports – can be.
The Dred Scott Decision, for instance, handed down on March 6, 1857, in
a 7 – 2 decision, ruled that African-Americans could not be citizens. That ruling is widely considered to be
the worse decision in the history of the Supreme Court.
That was a time that needed a blistering
dissenting opinion.
There are times when we need a dissenting
opinion, and those dissenting opinions generally come as a “minority report.” Imagine where we would be as a nation
if not for the minority report. The
Abolition movement, women’s suffrage, and the Civil Rights movement all began
as a “minority report.” Today,
there are still voices – too often in the minority – that continue to call upon
us to live up to our ideals of freedom and equality.
This morning, our Scripture reading tells us
about a “minority report.” The
passage comes from the Old Testament, where we have been spending a good deal
of time as of late. One of the
reasons why I have spent a good deal of time in the Old Testament in recent
months is because we too easily ignore so much of what it has to teach us. We are, we often say, “people of the
New Testament” and forget the many valuable lessons found in the pages of the
Old Testament.
Numbers 13:25-33
–
25 At the end of forty days they returned from
exploring the land.
26 They came back to Moses and Aaron and
the whole Israelite community at Kadesh in the Desert of Paran. There they reported to them
and to the whole assembly and
showed them the fruit of the land.
27 They gave Moses this account: “We went
into the land to which you sent us, and it does flow with milk and honey! Here
is its fruit.
28 But the people who live there are
powerful, and the cities are fortified and very large. We even saw descendants
of Anak there.
29 The Amalekites live in the Negev; the
Hittites, Jebusites and Amorites live in the hill country; and the Canaanites
live near the sea and along the Jordan.”
30 Then Caleb silenced the people before
Moses and said, “We should go up and take possession of the land, for we can
certainly do it.”
31 But the men who had gone up with him
said, “We can’t attack those people; they are stronger than we are.”
32 And they spread among the Israelites a
bad report about the land they had explored. They said, “The land we explored
devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size. 33 We saw the Nephilim there (the
descendants of Anak)
come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we
looked the same to them.”
In three brief points, I want to share with you
about the importance of the minority report –
Caleb and Joshua were an important voice for
the minority report. They were
part of a group, sent by Moses, to spy out the land of Canaan – the Promised
Land. Most of us know the Hebrew
people spent forty years wandering in the wilderness before entering the land,
but you may not know the people were on the borders of the land not long after gaining
their freedom from Egypt.
It is not a long journey from Egypt to
Canaan. Even traveling by foot,
the Hebrew people were able to reach the borders of Canaan in a relatively
short period of time. Upon their
arrival at the borders, Moses sent in the group of spies. When they returned, their report was
very discouraging. The land was, as
promised, flowing with milk and honey and other bounty, but the majority of the
group felt they could not enter the land because of the power of those who
lived there. Caleb and Joshua
provided the minority report, convinced they could – and should – enter the
land. But the people went with the
majority, which condemned them to a generation of wandering in the wilderness,
and with the exception of Joshua and Caleb, none of them would enter into the
Promised Land.
We often talk about the principle of majority rule in our political system,
but we must always remember that the majority is not always correct. This is why the majority is not
permitted absolute rule, because there is such as things as the tyranny of the majority, where the
rights of the minority can be trampled upon. The majority rules in terms of our electoral process, but
the majority cannot infringe upon the rights and freedoms of the minority. This is an important point to remember
when we hear the voices that criticize activist
judges who overrule certain majority decisions. If the majority wields their power to infringe upon the
rights of the minority, that minority must be protected.
Sociologists tell us about something called the
plausibility factor. The plausibility
factor is a tool that helps us to understand the ways in which groups of
people think. Because we tend to
reflect the thinking of those with whom we surround ourselves, we might not
realize when we take upon ourselves a way of thinking that is harmful to
others. This is when we need the
minority to remind us that the majority is not always correct.
In one church I served we never had a unanimous
vote. If it appeared an issue was
going to be decided unanimously one hand always went up in opposition. Once, when the issue was so innocent
and innocuous – and with the traditional, single no vote – I was amazed that anyone could vote against the
issue. A few days later, when I
asked him why he voted against everything, he said I’m not opposed to most of it.
I just don’t think anything should be unanimous. Everything needs a little opposition.
In retrospect, I understand his point, because,
as I have said, sometimes we need to hear a voice of dissension. I should hasten to add, however, that
just as the majority isn’t always correct, neither is the minority. Some people just don’t like change and
they’ll do whatever it takes to prevent it.
When I was in seminary, a professor gave us
some helpful advice. He said there will be 5% of the people in the
congregation who will think you walk on water. Another 5% will think you don’t have the sense to come in
out of the rain. The other 90%
just want to get out of church on time. After all these years I’ve decided that outside of perhaps
quibbling about the percentages, he was correct. I also have learned that you can apply that formula to just
about anything in the church.
About 5% will be out on the leading edge, pulling the church forward,
and another 5% will be against just about anything that is proposed. Sadly, many churches play to that 5% or
less who are always trying to stifle progress and forward movement.
So if the majority isn’t always correct, and
neither is the minority, how do we discern the difference between what is right
and what is wrong in the life of the church?
As people of faith we say that there is a
standard by which we measure truth, but who gets to determine that
standard? We will turn to the
Scriptures for guidance, but who gets to determine the proper interpretation of
Scripture?
The answer, I believe, is working it out in
community, as the body of Christ.
How many of you, if I asked to give me three
occasions when you were wrong could do so in five seconds? You might be able to tell me when you acted incorrectly, but how many could
tell me when your point of view was wrong?
We all say I’m
not always right, but the reality is, we have a very hard time figuring out
when we’re wrong about something.
This is why I am not much on solitary faith. Although I believe we can worship on our own, and should, I
don’t believe it leads to a healthy faith if we do not gather with others. It is in the give-and-take, the living
and striving together, that we discern what the Spirit is calling us to be and
do. There is a pull and pull, a
give and take that exists among a group of people, and it is a healthy and
needed dynamic.
At camp last week I witnessed an interesting
moment. When you spend a week with
junior high students there is always the potential for some kind of crisis,
especially with the boys. One day,
something happened that required discussion at the daily staff meeting. We wondered if something should be said
or if it would be best simply to ignore it. We decided to let it go and not say anything about it. The next day, it happened again. We couldn’t ignore it the second time,
so Rob, the camp director, gathered the guys together. Rob was not a happy camper, so to
speak. He told the boys they had
to work it out and sent them off by themselves.
After thinking about it for a few moments, I
thought that it might be best if one of the camp staff was nearby, just to keep
an eye on them. I stood at a
distance where I could still here, but most of the guys didn’t notice me. It was interesting as one of the guys –
who could be a challenge – rose to the occasion. I was worried that the group might unfairly blame one of the
campers and take it out on him in an unhealthy manner, which is how it appeared
might happen. There were some
recriminations being offered, but the one young man rose to leadership, pulled
them together, and they worked it out very effectively. I was impressed with the manner in
which the problem was handled.
It was a minority report that saved the day for
the young men, and reminded me that sometimes all it takes is for one person to
speak up and an crowd of people can be directed in the proper direction.
As we worship together as God’s people, may be
strive together always to be under the leadership of his Spirit.
No comments:
Post a Comment