Catholic Spirit

A Sermon by Rev Debra McKnight
Preached at Urban Abbey on August 7, 2016

“Though we can’t think alike, may we not love alike?
May we not be of one heart, though we are not of one opinion?
Without a doubt, we may.”
-Wesley Catholic Spirit


“Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

 Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. For we know only in part, and we prophesy only in part; but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love.”
             -1 Cor 13 4-13

This scripture seems like something that belongs in a wedding…but I thought it would be a good change of pace in this political season of divisive words, parties, posts, comments and commercials.  Perhaps these divisions of liberal and conservative or progressive and fundamentalist are always under the surface, but in an election season they are hard to ignore.  Perhaps you have shown up to a family reunion in your “I’m with HER” shirt as everyone else is watching Fox news.  Perhaps you have had hard conversations at the dinner table or a Christmas ruined over debates around virtues or lack of virtues that are presented in a ‘Jesus Fish American Flag’ image.  Perhaps an cousin has stopped speaking to you over healthcare reform, your new church or marching in Pride Parade.  Perhaps you have had to remove friends from your Facebook feed or demand that your Grandma stop forwarding you emails.  Perhaps you have considered getting your baby a bib that says, “My diaper is full of Republican/Democratic talking points.”  When babies are involved in debates, you know unity is hard to come by.

In Wesley’s sermon, “Catholic Spirit,” Wesley names a hope for deep connection, even when we all have different preferences and practices.  Catholic spirit is not about the Roman Catholic tradition; rather it is a way of naming Christian unity and broad connection, it is a way of saying universal.  When looking at political or theological difference, rather than limiting us, Wesley urges us to love.

Wesley calls for unity and love…because he understood conflict. It would be a mistake to underestimate the conflicts of the past or somehow imagine our present discourse is of greater weight.  Wesley knew conflict in a different time.  If he wasn't an expert at managing conflict he became better through experience.  He was as the center of conflict, with people that challenged his faith, the Methodist movement and his theological claims.  Some people argued that his care for moving to perfection and practicing faith with works of mercy was a little too Roman Catholic…some argued that he lacked something in his disagreement with Calvinist theologies like Predestination or Double Predestination, where God chooses some people to win and some to lose.  Wesley understood conflict, not only from his own ministry but also from the standpoint of a pastor’s kid watching his Dad manage or not-manage conflict in his parish.

Samuel Wesley seems to have been a man of conviction.  He was so clear and honest and direct…and perhaps as clear about the authority of his office, that the community he served often responded in ways that are less then graceful.  The Wesley family visited their Dad is in debtor’s prison when a parishioner called in a debt he could not pay.  The family’s parsonage went up in flames, the origin of this fire was a mystery, and the community…rumor has it was slow to respond to the fire.  These things did not deter Samuel Wesley.  He was clear about who he was, and this helped John understand conflict in the community.

Wesley understood conflict in his own family. His Grandparents were Puritans.  They were dissenters, non-conformists, living at odds with the crown and yet these two men raise children who choose a different party and a different path.  John’s mother, Susanna, and his father, Samuel, are conformists.  They love the Church of England.  They uphold the Book of Common Prayer, they support the monarchy.  If there was a rally they might have held up a huge sign that said, “We love the Articles of Religion”….ok that’s not catchy but it gets the point across.  These are all things that must have seemed unimaginable to their dissenter, Puritan parents.  If Wesley was looking at our political system today, he would have seen his mother’s story in Hillary Clinton, a woman raised by two Republican parents that joined the Democrats in college.  If Wesley was watching 80’s tv, he would have totally gotten the hilarity of Alex P. Keaton spouting Reagan era conservative ideology to the surprise of his hippy parents on Family Ties.  Wesley might have felt the tension at the Christmas party or the family table.  But he must have seen how in some amazing way his parents and his grandparents had so much in common, particularly in the way they were clear about their convictions and in how they raised children to do this crazy thing…think.

In 1689 the Act of Toleration offered nonconformists space in England but “toleration” only goes so far.  Wesley’s grandparents would have been a part of this structure that required non-conforming preachers to be licensed and limited meeting places to those public houses registered with the government.  Of course the Act of Toleration, did not tolerate Unitarians or Roman Catholics, but for 1689, it might have seemed quite progressive.  Or at least compared to the history that preceded the Act where non-conformists were non-survivors …it seems like an improvement to me.

See, Wesley’s family gives an intimate look at the longer history of religious difference and even violence.  This of course started when King Henry VIII needed the full authority to marry…and occasionally un-marry via beheading.  Henry’s reform of the church was perhaps less theological and more political.  But this action unleashes the debates within England.  Those that long for a church more deeply resembling the Protestant identity of Calvin or Luther saw an opportunity.  As the Protestant voices pushed against those loyal to Rome, power shifted back and forth under Henry’s children.  Dissenters, on both sides, were punished by death or exile.  Monarchs like Queen Mary earned nick names like Bloody Mary, and it was not because she loved brunch.  Monarchs bring the full brunt of their power to the religious conversation, and it was ugly.  Queen Elizabeth established a middle way, valuing the Roman ethic of tradition, the Protestant ethic of scripture and adding reason as a distinctly Church of England ethic (see Richard Hooker’s 1595 Laws of Ecclesial Policy).  Her middle way pleased very few, and the dissent simmered.  This theologically charged debate grew into a revolution that killed King Charles the First, established a commonwealth which was so successful that at Cromwell’s death, the people of England will said…”Hey we want that Prince to come back from exile.”  Charles II returns and among many new efforts he established the Act of Toleration.  Wesley’s politics and theology embody these differences and realities. His family was touched personally and professionally by these social debates that raged for generations and were occasionally intensely violent.

It is out of this experience that Wesley offers a few key suggestions to staying in relationship with people that hold different beliefs or opinions.  Wesley, I think, urges us to know ourselves.  He was opposed to the notion of “latitudinarianism” both speculative and practical.  This was a method that approached difference with indifference.  Think and let think.  But disregarding difference is another way of saying, it doesn’t really matter.  In part, Wesley, felt some of his fellow priests and leaders espoused this strategy because they were muddy in their own understanding of their faith.  You can’t really have strong convictions if you don’t have much clarity or deep understanding.  Secondly, he felt people should be rooted enough to believe in how they worship, that they should sense the way they understand communion or baptism is rooted in their understanding of scripture and tradition. It should hold up to the test of their reason, and it should be a moment that experiencing matters.  Wesley knew why he believed as he did and practiced as he did, and he believed others should as well.  It was not indifference but deep conviction that would permit him to be in relationship regardless of others options or convictions.  Wesley invited his communities to practice self-reflection in small groups, and he urged people to understand the limits of their knowledge.  His convictions allowed him to be in relationship with people of other perspectives without feeling insecure or unsure.  Perhaps being rooted, giving the time and study to really know why, allows us to be more widely open to difference and less intimidated or threatened by it.

In addition to knowing ourselves, we can take a note from Wesley on the nature of love.  Love is active and not easy.  This is not a sentimental love or a love of people that think like we do or act in a way we like.  It is loving, sometimes someone that if we would really be honest, we would deem as unloveable.  So I will leave you with this from Wesley’s sermon and invite you to imagine speaking it to someone you struggle with or hearing it from someone that you would rather avoid.

Love me with a love that is  ‘long suffering and kind’; that is patient if I am ignorant or out of the way, bearing and not increasing my burden; and is tender, soft, and compassionate still; that ‘envieth not’ if at any time it pleases God to prosper me in his work even more than thee.  Love me with the love that ‘is not provoked’ either at my follies or infirmities, or even at my acting (if it should sometimes so appear to thee) not according to the will of God.  Love me so as to ‘think no evil’ of me, to put away all jealousy….Love me with a love that ‘covereth all things’, that never reveals either my faults or infirmities; that ‘believeth all things’, is always willing to think the best, to put the first construction on my words an actions….commend me to God in all thy prayers; wrestle with God on my behalf that God would supply… what is wanting in me.  I mean, Lastly, Love me not in word only, but in deed and in truth.
 -John Wesley’s Sermons: An Anthology, Catholic Spirit, 306-307

May we have the courage.  Amen.

Questions to Consider:
Do you have any struggles or debates with people?
How do you feel when you are in a conversation where you disagree?
How can you approach disagreements with love?