Liturgy: Division – Not Just for Mathematicians

What is the King’s Liturgy? King’s Liturgy defines our experience together as a Christian community. It outlines the rhythms we celebrate with the Church at large: Scripture readings, Sabbath habits, and celebration of Holy Days and historical events.

This Week’s Lectionary Readings
Isaiah 9:1-4
1 Corinthians 1:10-18
Matthew 4:12-23
Psalm 27:1, 5-13

This week’s liturgy is contributed by Joshua Blander, Assistant Professor of Philosophy:

This past fall, I was blessed to watch the election process unfold while I was far away from home, conducting research on humility at Biola University.  Southern California has enough sunshine to make even the most discouraging events seem not so terrible. But I was still on a coast (west coast—best coast … east coast—least coast), and the themes of division, anger, and bitterness dominated there just as much as they did here. Reports from Inauguration Weekend suggest that this continues unabated.

Even within Christian communities—including theologically conservative schools like The King’s College and Biola—there were rifts as a result of impassioned beliefs about what a president should or should not be, what sort of character should be expected, and whether one or the other of the candidates (or both) satisfied any such criteria. Many Christians identified with Trump, while others identified with Clinton, and still others identified with neither. Those who identified with Trump or Clinton were quite obviously divided, and we have seen (and continue to see) deep-seated anger between those two groups, even within the church.

Then there is the group which identified with neither, encouraging unity and avoiding division. Or not.

As a member of that third group, I found myself to be morally superior to those dreadful folks who supported or endorsed either candidate. And my moral superiority was supported by the many like-minded folks who fit into this morally superior camp. We had a wonderful time of self-congratulation, especially when we pointed out to each other and to the unwise that neither candidate is fit to represent the true Jesus-follower, and (therefore) only those who reject both candidates can be true Jesus-followers.

Oops.

In the midst of studying humility, I had nearly perfected my commitment to pride and arrogance. I wasn’t morally superior at all; I was creating my own divisions by coming to believe that I could identify via a person’s political commitments whether or not she was a genuine follower of Jesus. That is an incredibly presumptuous litmus test.

And consider this: my life, like the lives of many (most? all?), is filled with moral failure, yet I am confident in my commitment to a life of Jesus-following (even when I do it very badly). Thus even if one’s political commitments were any indication of moral failure, why should that count against the person’s Jesus-following any more than my own deep-seated moral failure?

If we take seriously the exhortation Paul offers in 1 Corinthians 1:10 to avoid all divisions in the church, what should our lesson be from this past election? Perhaps it is this: for the sake of the life of the church, it doesn’t matter which group you identified with. God has called all of us “into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9) – not fellowships, but one fellowship. Furthermore, the current state of political affairs should remind us that our true hope will never be found through our political leaders or elected officials.  True power is never found in Washington DC or New York City, but is found in “the word of the cross . . . [which] is the power of God.” (1 Cor 1:18)

Therefore:

“Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord.” (1 Cor 1:31)

And let us be united in that boasting.