Redemption for the Salt-less

Matthew 5:13 reads, “‘You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything, but is thrown out and trampled under foot.”

Often this is understood as some sort of unique characteristic of the disciple of Jesus and that we are being cautioned to retain this characteristic (saltiness) otherwise we will be good for nothing and trampled under foot. We are cautioned to retain our saltiness so that we are useful to God and that our purpose is to “season” the world. This is a nice sermon.

However, this interpretation assumes that God would be the one tossing us aside if we loose our saltiness. And that seems a bit unlike God. Especially the God of Jesus who always redeems that which is thought to be unredeemable. Do you know who tosses out people to be trampled under foot? Humanity.

However, it is difficult to miss that salt was a common use of currency in the Roman army. The word “salary” comes from the word salt, so I wonder if Jesus is making a connection about the poor and the current economic system of the day. Could it be less that Jesus is not talking about some characteristic but a reflection that the poor were considered as expendable as salt. Could it be that these words of Jesus reflect the ways the rich view the poor? Could it be this is less about God’s actions and more about how humans treat other humans? Could it be that the salt of the earth verse is related to the ways people persecute others?

Consider context of the two previous statement Jesus makes prior to the salt comments:

‘Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. ‘Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Jesus says we are blessed when we are persecuted and that we are to rejoice when we are treated as such. Then Jesus says, “‘You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything, but is thrown out and trampled under foot.”

If salt is thrown out and trampled under foot then it is no longer good for taste. That means it cannot be used for human consumption or to be a product of the marketplace. Salt that looses its saltiness is no longer subject to the economic grind that values people only for what they can produce. Humans think the value of a person is in relationship to what they produce.

I am confident that God thinks differently.

God does not value humans on what we produce or contribute. God values humans because humans are God’s children. And as God’s children, we are called to be with and for one another. That is to say, we are to support and care for one another.

Salt that looses its saltiness is no longer good for the market because it has lost its economic value. However, I wonder if there is redemption for the salt-less?

Salt that has been baptized (that is salt that becomes saltwater) becomes a body makes it easier for people to float. The salt supports others regardless of how it tastes. Saltwater becomes a body of support for others who struggle. In this way, saltwater is not unlike what Jesus talks about in the next verses:

You are the light of the world. A city built on a hill cannot be hidden. No one after lighting a lamp puts it under the bushel basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all in the house.

Saltwater and light on a hill are not in service of themselves or gain value to what they add to the system. They are aids for others who are lost and struggling. The lift up those who are drowning. It lifts up the eyes of those who are lost.

For too long, Christians have tried to safeguard saltiness with a fear that loosing saltiness disappoints God. However, I wonder if this approach fails to imagine that God can redeem the salt-less?

Church is a Bagel

Pastors are asked a lot of different questions, but most questions are variations of categories of questions.

• There are questions in the “belief category” - “what does your church believe?”

• There are questions in the “vision category"” - '“what is the vision of your church?”

• There are the questions in the “tenure category” - “how long are you going to remain the pastor here?”

• There are the questions in the “ministry category” - “does your church have ‘X’ ministry?”

While there are dozens of categories and endless variations of questions, the vast majority of questions have the same underlying assumption that suggests what is most important. The assumption is that there is some thing that holds the groups together. That “some thing” could be a doctrine, vision statement, pastor, ministry, or some other thing. But the assumption is that there is something and that something is important to know.

And it makes sense to ask that question, because that is what just about every other organization would have. However, the church is not an organization but an organism, it is not a community but a communion.

As such, the thing that makes the Church the Church is not what it has, but what it lacks.

Christianity confesses that everyone is a sinner, everyone falls short, everyone is broken, everyone has some lack. Ironically it is that shared lack of “some thing” is what unites a Church. It is like what unites an AA group. It is their lack that unites the group - their lack of consuming alcohol or their lack of control or some other lack. What makes a bagel a bagel is not what it has but what it lacks. It lacks the center, there is a hole in the bagel If you were to fill the center then it would become a bun or something other than a bagel.

It is tempting to create, start and build a church that defined by what it has. Being a part of a group because of what you all have can feel powerful and it is even appropriate at time. But it is not appropriate for the Church because when we do this, we are no longer a church. It becomes something else (such as a ‘community’ or a ‘market’ or a ‘mob’). The defining feature of the church is that it is a communion of people who confess a lack. We lack the answers. We lack sight. We lack compassion. We lack perfection. We lack control.

The Church confesses that it needs a savior because it lacks the ability to save itself.

Many people in the world will try to point out your lack and then try to sell you something to fill that lack. The Church is the only place that I know of that confesses a lack as a feature not as a bug to be corrected.

A Like Minded Church Plays Footsie with The Law of Group Polarization

There are some churches and church pastors who genuinely believe that the most faithful expression of their faith is to be with “like minded people”. Who does not like to be with others who are like minded? I love to be with people who remind me of my favorite person (myself)! Beyond the comfort of being with others who do not challenge us beyond what where we are willing to be challenged, those advocating for a like minded church assume that the church would somehow be better.

It is argued that a like minded church would be more “faithful” or more “efficient”. This assumes that if a group of people could stop arguing about the same issues or people THEN (and only then) could we get to the “business” of making disciples. The like minded church dream assumes that revisiting the same matters is somehow unfaithful. It is as though the like minded church would rather stop wrestling with the same person for so long and walk away with two good hips. The like minded church is suspicious of limping and cannot imagine that there is any blessing in wrestling.

In addition to these basic theological concerns, we ought to have with a like minded church we also should be concerned about the harsh and empirically proven Law of Group Polarization. And what is this law?

Cass R. Sunstein’s paper described like this (bold added):

In a striking empirical regularity, deliberation tends to move groups, and the individuals who compose them, toward a more extreme point in the direction indicated by their own predeliberation judgments. For example, people who are opposed to the minimum wage are likely, after talking to each other, to be still more opposed; people who tend to support gun control are likely, after discussion, to support gun control with considerable enthusiasm; people who believe that global warming is a serious problem are likely, after discussion, to insist on severe measures to prevent global warming. This general phenomenon -- group polarization -has many implications for economic, political, and legal institutions.

You read this right. After being with a like minded group that discusses an issue, you will become more extreme after the discussion than you were before the discussion.

And so here is the great irony, those who advocate for being a church of “like minded people” as a haven against undesired change are playing footsie with the law of group polarization. To put this more plainly, being with others who are like minded will change you and your views - you will become more extreme.

This is the law of group polarization. The temptation to create a like minded church (or country) is powerful, but it is to be rejected for what it is. A pathway to justifying our self-righteousness. And I think we all have read how Jesus feels about self-righteousness.