Who Counts?
Exploring Inclusivity as a Vow of Membership

September 27, 2020 • 17th Sunday after Pentecost
Reading: Luke 15:4-10
Pastor Alexis Waggoner

<start with video of Fable of the Ant and the Caterpillar>

The “moral” of this story, as the clip tells us, is work first play after. At the time of Aesop this probably meant literally plant and harvest first! That’s not how we hear it now. Not to mention there are some other possible interpretations, like the importance of caring for people without judging them.

Jesus’ parables are like this — they are meant to be timeless. Not because they have one interpretation for all of time! … but bc they can continue to be re-understood and re-interpreted. If you found the last couple lines of each of these parables a little unsettling — the talk of making sheep and coins connect to sinners and repenting — that’s ok. We’re getting an overlay of an interpretation that doesn’t make much sense for us today. Just like the moral of the Ant and the Grasshopper for us is probably not to literally plant and harvest. The author of Luke is showing how Jesus’ stories can be returned to again and again for new meaning.

My favorite commentator on this, and many, parables, is a woman named Amy-Jill Levine. She is Jewish and a NT scholar. And so she has some new — or really, ancient-but-made-new — interpretations. She points out that parables — stories that have multiple layers of meaning — were stand-alone stories common to Jewish audiences, and the interpretation the authors put on them are unique to their context. She says:

[SLIDE]
“Few of [Jesus’ parable] explanations have been preserved. The crowds then needed to find their own understandings, and we too must find ours. … Each reader will hear a distinct message and may find that the same parable leaves multiple impressions over time.”

The author of Luke is finding their own meaning! The author is speaking to the Pharisees, as seen in intro verse: 

[SLIDE]
“All the tax collectors and sinners were coming near to him. And the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, “This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.” 

It makes sense that the author of Luke would want to prove that there is great rejoicing at a “sinner” who returns to the fold. We can confirm this is what’s happening because one of these parables shows up elsewhere in scripture. Matthew has a similar parable to the lost sheep. He contextualizes it for his audience (his disciples) — makes it about protecting followers of Jesus from being deceived by false doctrine. These gospel writers show us that it makes sense, and is biblical, to try to get at the meat of what Jesus was saying, and to contextualize it for our time. 

Interpreting these stories as Luke or Matthew do  is still good news — what is lost, is found … but here is another layer of loss if we only read them that way. The stories have lost their challenge for us today. And parables are meant to be challenging! So where do we find this challenge, in 2020, in NYC, at COTV?

Well… what’s going on in the original — or, as original-as-we-have — un-interpreted story? The shepherd has 100 sheep, the woman has 10 coins. Large numbers really, especially of sheep! And yet they notice when something is missing. They know the parts of the whole so well that there is awareness of just one missing thing. And not just awareness … but apparently such a sense of loss because of its absence, that extreme action is taken to make it right: Leaving the 99! Tearing the house apart!… Just to include the sheep and the coin again! 

There’s an element here of having to know what is missing, to sense what needs to be included. 

We’re talking today about our membership vow of inclusion and I want to suggest that we can’t aspire to inclusion when we don’t know who or what is missing, when we’re not sensing an absence. So we have to ask ourselves: 

[SLIDE]
What is missing?
Is it ok that it’s missing?
Can we seek it out and invite it in?  

A common refrain — and a valuable one — is, “all are welcome,” or “all means all.” But who is missed when they aren’t among us? Whose presence is sought after?  Who is found? Inclusion sounds deceptively passive — if you find us, you are welcome, we will include you. But how are we seeking out what is missing?… like the shepherd with the sheep and the woman with the coin. Like them… are we even able to identify what is missing? 

Inclusion is bigger than the important work of valuing peoples’ presence as individuals. We vow inclusion not only because we think a vibrant, multi-faceted, and differently-experienced group is most reflective of the community of God… but because we ALL benefit from existing in this type of space. Even when / if it is uncomfortable. 

But what kind of discomfort are we talking about, that goes alongside this inclusion? It doesn’t seem right to include someone who refuses to see me as a child of God. Someone who isn’t willing to acknowledge your humanity. I don’t really want to welcome them! This reality, I think, can be a stumbling block for the progressive church. Because we DON’T really mean “all are welcome.” We are not, actually, seeing to “include” everyone. 

AND THAT’S OK. Here’s why: Jesus prioritized certain “people.” We see it in this parable! (Here, the stand-ins are sheep and coins :)) He prioritized people who were off in the wilderness, people whose presence was missed and had to be really searched for to be found. 

He did NOT generously accommodate those who were causing harm to these groups. In fact, he spoke pretty strongly against the religious leaders who were causing such harm. Here are some words he used:

[SLIDE]
Woe to you, hypocrites, brood of vipers, whitewashed tombs, wicked

And he prioritized folks — I think of Zaccheus — who may have been causing harm but who were ready to have a change of heart. We’re trying to take our cues from Jesus as we live out this value of Inclusion. And so, yes, we are “preferring” or prioritizing some folks’ inclusion, as it were, over others. 

In the spirit of the lost coin and the lost sheep we must ask ourselves: what presences — whether that’s people, experiences, contingents of voices — are we missing, that should be here, that the community could benefit from? This could be in our own lives, or in the life of the church

[SLIDE]

Let’s take a minute to reflect on this, and to respond in the chat. As you think and type, I offer an example I thought of. A question was posed to me a few months back to consider when was the last time I was in the home of a person of a different race from you? I have been sitting with this for a while now, and thinking about how do I prioritize the inclusion of people of color in my intimate circle? Are their voices missing from the influential spaces in my life? 

Inclusion isn’t just putting up a rainbow flag or a Black Lives Matter banner. It’s also asking ourselves: 

[SLIDE]
What is missing?
Is it ok that it’s missing?
Can we seek it out and invite it in? 

May we have the clarity and discernment to prioritize the voices and experiences that are missing from our lives and community... as we seek to be actively inclusive.

(c) 2020 Alexis Waggoner
All rights reserved.

            201 West 13th Street, New York, NY 10011               
212.243.5470