Matthew 18.15-20
“If your brother or sister or sibling in
Christ sins against you, go and correct them when you are alone together. If
they listen to you, then you’ve won over your brother or sister. But if they
won’t listen, take with you one or two others so that every word may be
established by the mouth of two or three witnesses. But if they
still won’t pay attention, report it to the church. If they won’t pay attention
even to the church, treat them as you would a Gentile and tax collector.
I assure you that whatever you fasten on earth will be
fastened in heaven. And whatever you loosen on earth will be loosened in
heaven. Again I assure you that if two of you agree on earth about anything you
ask, then my Father who is in heaven will do it for you. For where two or three
are gathered in my name, I’m there with them.”
***
There has been a lot in the news about speaking out, and
about, “freedom of speech,” and as we watch the newscasters, politicians and
the President, volley critiques all the way across the country, it is hard to
know how to enter in. It is hard to know how violent marches in Charlottesville, and peaceful protests in Boston,
can be any of our business back here in Baker City.
But I believe it starts with one person.
Each person at that Charlottesville
rally was one person, each person at the Boston
protest was one person, and so are we, and perhaps out here in the middle of
nowhere, where the thing to which people flock is the eclipse, we can have our
own impact, one person to one person.
Of all I read in the news, it was this personal perspective
which struck me the most. I read about a letter a father posted in which he
publicly denounced his son. It was an article from the New York Post, by
Natalie Musumeci, on August 14, 2017. The article reads,
“The family of a white nationalist who joined in the violent
supremacy rally in Charlottesville,
Va., on Saturday has publicly
announced they are disowning him and his “hateful beliefs.”
Pete Tefft of Fargo,
ND was one of many neo-Nazi
marchers to have his identity revealed, along with his photo, on the “Yes,
You’re Racist” Twitter account after the deadly demonstration, prompting his
family to speak out.
“I, along with all of his siblings and his entire family,
wish to loudly repudiate my son’s vile, hateful and racist rhetoric and
actions,” Tefft’s father, Pearce Tefft, wrote in an online letter regarding his
youngest son’s behavior.
In the letter, published Monday on Inforum.com, the elder Tefft
calls his son “an avowed white nationalist” as he blasted his hateful views.
“We do not know specifically where he learned these beliefs.
He did not learn them at home,” Pearce Tefft wrote, adding “I have shared my
home and hearth with friends and acquaintances of every race, gender and creed.
I have taught all of my children that all men and women are created equal. That
we must love each other all the same.”
The father continued: “Evidently Peter has chosen to unlearn
these lessons, much to my and his family’s heartbreak and distress. We have
been silent up until now, but now we see that this was a mistake. It was the
silence of good people that allowed the Nazis to flourish the first time
around, and it is the silence of good people that is allowing them to flourish
now.”
Pearce Tefft proclaimed that “Peter Tefft, my son, is not
welcome at our family gatherings any longer. I pray my prodigal son will
renounce his hateful beliefs and return home. Then and only then will I lay out
the feast.
The dad noted that his son’s “hateful opinions” are bringing
“hateful rhetoric” to the Tefft family.
“Why must we be guilty by association? Again, none of his
beliefs were learned at home. We do not, never have, and never will, accept his
twisted worldview.”
The father close the letter with:…Please son, renounce the
hate, accept and love all.”
First let me say, that I cannot imagine the grief this
family must be experiencing, which they describe as heartbreak and distress. I
can not fathom what it would feel like to see a member of my own family holding
a torch or a Nazi sign and I do not deny that white supremacist propaganda is
strong enough to convert even the most loving among us. Discerning how to
respond to such a personal and public tragedy must feel a blitzkrieg. To that
end, the letter states that the family believes they have made a mistake in
being silent. From my understanding this is a personal silence in the family
which they are now addressing nationally. Moreover, I am glad that at last the
family has spoken out, and I believe to do so must feel like taking out your
own heart. They are victims and yet, even as they say, of those who remained
and remain silent, good people make mistakes. I think it is important to
remember that this family, though they have mistakes, are good people.
Yet, it seems when your son in on the national news, so too
shall be the family’s response and I wonder if this is a mistake. You see, what
strikes me about this article is the concept of silence and the concept of
speaking out. I am stuck that the family said they had been silent until now,
and I am struck that this public letter was how they spoke out first. I want to
know why the initial silence, and why the speaking out this way. Because it seems
if we are to apply this scripture they missed a lot of steps.
They believe, that they made a mistake, and we have to
wonder, what would it have been like when the son started spouting off racist
propaganda he read online, or heard on bad rural radio, if they addressed it
then. What might have happened, if a member of the family went to him. What if
it wasn’t about this is the father’s house and the father’s rules, but if they
to where he was, just as the scripture says, go and explained. I would hope they
would have gone, not in a big group accusing, but as the scripture says, one by
one. What if when they told him, they said it in a way the son could hear. What
if they told how it made them feel, shared their grief. Shared their fear.
Maybe it wouldn’t have helped much, you can’t change people very easily, and
hate and fear is a strong force, but maybe, if they did it just right, if they
came with love, if they came with listening, if they came explaining their need
for their family to be a place and people of welcome, they could have touched
some spot somewhere, maybe.
I wonder too if instead of this public letter, which seems
just as much a defense against those accusing their family as it does an
admonishment toward their son, what if they welcomed him home like the prodigal
son. That Biblical father’s welcome wasn’t contingent on his beliefs, but
instead perhaps because of the son’s abandoning of those beliefs. In the story
of the Prodigal Son, the father upon seeing the son far away, lifts up his tunic
and runs. What if this family, who saw that picture of their son online, ran to
him and said come home, learn what love is. What if once the family began to be
accused by others, and knowing the pain of that scorn, they showed their racist
son how to welcome and how to love those whom he deemed as “others,” even if
those others were his own family. Maybe it would not have been different. Maybe
he was and is too far gone. But part of me thinks, at the beginning, it is the
first response. Then after the shelter and accountability of that love, would
the son be able to show that love to others? I have to wonder.
I believe when we haven’t spoken of an issue, when we remain
silent, we swallow the sin. I believe also, when we don’t go first to the
person with whom we have an issue, and instead we decry them publicly, even if
to just a third person, we increase the sin. It makes it a lot harder to come
home when your family has disowned you in the national news and I believe too
it is harder to welcome someone home when we have first made a public
statement. It would be one thing if this family had tried all they could, and
then like the scripture advises the church, then let him go, but this public
letter, this was their their first response, and so I implore us, let it not be
ours.
I think you especially First Presbyterian, are well suited
to this type of conversation. Here in rural Oregon you live in a place which is small
enough that to publicly slander another is to literally turn against your
neighbor. And I believe, you as a church, have a great propensity for loving
your neighbor as yourself. I have seen you have conversations for and against
GLBTQ rights, the place of the American Flag in worship and prayer in schools,
opposing ideas about ranching and farming and forest service and yet when I
arrived at this town you also tell that that same rancher pulled your mint
green forest service truck out of the snow and visa-versa. You are good at
one-on one conversations about issues or call them as the scripture says, sins.
And while rallies and protests are happening in larger places, all it takes is
one son from Fargo, ND to raise a touch of unwelcome, but
perhaps all it takes is one father from equally as rural a place, to welcome
him and others home, and remind them of love. It begins with us, one on one,
this is what we can do.
