Who will Bind the Strong Man? (Mark 3: 20ff)
A sermon preached by J. Stuart Taylor III
St. Mark’s Presbyterian Church
November 7, 2004
On this Sunday following what many consider to be the most important election in our lifetime, there are two primary questions that I want to reflect on with you. The first question concerns the deeply divided reality of our nation. As a nation, where do we go from here? And the second question after an election that was seemingly decided on religious and moral values, I want to think with you about the core values that will direct us as a church through the months and years to come. As a church, what do we stand for? What is our calling?
In our Gospel text today the opponents of Jesus are slinging mud at him. Jesus has been accused of being under the control of demons so he weaves a parable that declares if Satan’s house is so divided against itself it cannot stand. Of course this is the Biblical metaphor that President Lincoln used in his famous debates with Stephen Douglas in which he first spoke out about the politically explosive subject of slavery. Even Lincoln’s strongest allies and supporters thought this was an imprudent choice of words. But Lincoln knew there could be no national unity until the issue of slavery was addressed. President Lincoln’s speech reminds us that however divided we may feel ourselves to be, there have been worse moments for our nation. And Lincoln also reminds us that the goal of finding national unity does not come simply by papering over our differences or by refusing to face the conflicts which divide us. Today we face a deeply polarized nation, a house divided against itself. What do we do about that?
In that extreme polarization that we are experiencing as a nation it is very easy to demonize the other just as the opponents of Jesus sought to demonize him. In this moment in our nation, voters on both sides are left wondering how we relate to our fellow citizens who sincerely see this reality differently. I know that there are many, many reasonable people of good will who voted for Pres. Bush, who see the issues differently from how I may see them. There is room for honest disagreement. And there is room for working together. Voices locally and nationally are calling for national reconciliation. I was struck by comments from Sen. Obama from Illinois who said there are many pressing issues before us and we must find common ground in order to govern ourselves and move forward.
What does reconciliation and dialogue mean when we are so divided? How do we engage in dialogue with others who disagree? How do we remain humble enough to recognize the truth on the other side and even more humble to realize that we are part of the problem? This is no easy task because many Christians and people of good will sincerely and passionately disagree with where this administration is leading our nation. In this moment with so much at stake, reconciliation and dialogue cannot mean that we pretend that all of that has changed. It cannot mean that we stick our heads in the sand and hope for the best. Reconciliation and dialogue cannot mean that we abdicate our convictions and concerns. We must speak our truth persistently, relentlessly. We must remember that those who oppose the policies of this administration both inside and outside the church are not a small remnant. The opposition may be a minority but it is a large and engaged minority of some 50 million citizens. More and more citizens are understanding that our responsibility for democracy goes far beyond the vote on Election Day. This engaged citizenry is one genuine sign of hope. And now more than ever we must remain engaged as citizens must and as Christians who do care about values. But what are those values that we care about?
The second question I want to reflect on with you are the core values at the heart of our faith.
Jim Wallis editor of Sojourners magazine, reports that in the months leading up to the election he was doing 2 and 3 interviews a day with the media. And whenever the media asked him about religious values in the elections, they were almost inevitably referring to abortion, gay marriage, and stem cell research. These are important questions. But Wallis said that he took on as his personal mission the task of broadening for the media what are the religious issues of the election. The religious community is concerned about the war in Iraq. The religious community is concerned about the reduction of poverty, the creation of jobs. We are concerned about health care, immigration and the protection of our environment. All of these are religious issues. And so in the months and years to come, it is so very important that we define the values that will shape our mission in the world. And not let them be defined for us. We must reclaim these core beliefs and values, and find creative ways to bear witness to them in the public domain.
And so I come to the disturbing heart of our Gospel text? The question posed by Jesus: Who will bind the strong man? For Jesus the strong man was metaphorical short hand for Satan, and demonic powers and principalities that seemingly rule our world. It seems to me that we need to take this head on. We need to reject the tactics used by the religious right when they lined up and said God is with this candidate. The devil is behind this candidate. We cannot look upon those who disagree with us as evil. There is an incredibly fine line here. And it is absolutely crucial that we find that line and that we remain clear about it. In my opinion, Pres. Bush is not an evil man. Nor is the Republican Party the incarnation of evil. But evil is being done in our world. If we must resist the temptation of looking upon individuals and groups as evil, which we must do. We cannot pretend that evil is not happening.
Here is the question before us: a spiritual and theological and political question: if people of faith and conscience look upon these policies as evil, what are we called to do? In the months and years ahead, What will be the prophetic stance of a church that is called by God to speak truth to power? Or In the words of our text: Who will bind the strong man?
The only thing scarier to me than the President’s inaction on key issues like immigration, health care, nuclear proliferation, and the deficit are the places where this administration will be active, pro-active and aggressively pursuing its agenda. On Friday the headlines quoted the President as saying, he has an overwhelming mandate. And pundits predict that much of what the administration is seeking to do will be laid out in the next 100 days and will be implemented in the next year. Now let me be perfectly clear to you. As a registered democrat, I do believe that there would have been significant differences between the Bush administration and the Kerry administration. As a democrat, I am profoundly disappointed by the outcome of the election. But as a Christian, I am forced by this moment to a deeper discernment. I truly believe that ultimately it does not matter whether it is democrats or republicans who are in power in the White House and in Congress. Because both parties share the fundamental assumptions about the place of American power in the world.
The strong man that must be bound is not finally this president or this administration or this party. The strong man that must be bound is the empire. For there is one reality that links together many different issues and struggles. What is it the common denominator between such seemingly different situations like the war in Iraq, the immigration crisis on our border, and the destruction of Arctic habitat through global warming? The common denominator in all these situations is the defense of empire. I believe that at the core of our global struggle is the reality of empire that transcends even the power of the United States. The strong man of empire in today’s world is centered in America but it transcends national boundaries in vast global economic structures that benefit the few and enslave the vast majority of the human family.
Last week I talked about the World alliance of reformed churches that met in Ghana Africa and the intense debate that issued between 1st world and 2/3’s world delegates about the theological diagnosis of empire. Their profession of faith was a prophetic call for the global church to come together in a new sense of global mission. This was not the latest anti-American rant. This was and is a profoundly Biblical understanding of the role of empires through out history and the ways in which our God resists and undermines empires that disregard justice. In two weeks on Reign of Christ Sunday I want to lay out what the bible teaches about empire and sketch how that empire impacts people of faith today in our global reality.
Who will bind the strong man? It is not the church we who will bind the strong man but Christ working in us and through us in thousands of different places; only the living Christ working inside and outside the church can bind the strong man and plunder his goods. In the coming weeks and months we must be prepared to reaffirm our faith in Christ. And to act on our faith. And so we must come together for a new confession of Christ, a confession that we make not just with our words but with our actions. In your bulletin you find thoughts from Jim Wallis the editor of Sojourners magazine. On the shape of the new confession of Christ. I hope you will ponder those. But let me close by sharing another reflection that came across my desk this week. A priest in Casa Grande writes this one.
(The Most Rev. Bennett D. D. Burke, November 2004)
The man I admire most didn't win the presidential election. Even though he consistently stayed "on message," to use a term familiar to pundits and campaign consultants, a majority of the electorate didn't seem to identify with his core values: Love your neighbor. Put the needs of others ahead of your own. Do good to those who hate you. Choose peace, not war.
But the man one of the candidates called his "favorite philosopher" didn't lose the election, either. Truth be told, he wasn't even running. And he's certainly not a politician. For example, he doesn't kiss babies - he welcomes them into God's family. He doesn't shake his followers' hands - he washes their feet. He doesn't respond to polls - he responds to peoples' human and spiritual needs. He doesn't raise money - he raises our awareness of the need for economic justice and equality. He doesn't lay up treasures on earth - he tells those who would join his party to give all they have to the poor. His only "special interests" are those on the margins of society. He doesn't run negative ads - he teaches us to first confess our own mistakes. He doesn't support harsh treatment of prisoners - he tells us that as we do unto them, we're doing unto him. He doesn't cut taxes - he cares for the sick. He doesn't use fear and intolerance to divide us - he counsels faith, hope, love, tolerance, forgiveness, and acceptance.
He doesn't ask us to vote for him. He asks us to learn from him. He doesn't ask us to send him to the White House. He asks us to welcome the poor, the immigrant, the stranger, the outcast and the disenfranchised into our houses.
The man I admire most didn't win or lose the election. He doesn't need four more years, and isn't even concerned about 2008. He doesn't appear at the top of a ticket, but at the head of a kingdom - a kingdom that was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. We don't need to vote for him. We just need to listen to him, love him, and care for the least of his children.
The Most Rev. Bennett D. D. Burke is pastor of St. Michael and All Angels Liberal Catholic Cathedral in Casa Grande, Arizona.