Jesus, sits down with his disciples and the crowd and, in Matthew’s mind, sits down with Matthew’s church. He Begins to teach. Its not an incidental detail that Matthew sees him sitting down on a mountainside when he takes up the Torah, the law that, in Israel’s tradition, Moses brought down the mountain to give to the people of God. Matthew sees Jesus, now on this mountain, taking that word, that law and giving it again to live in a radically new community, in the last days of history at the edge of the kingdom.
‘You shall not murder.’ There is the commandment. Jesus takes it, and tells his listeners they must keep a still more rigorous way, beyond its letter: I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment.
You have heard that it was said,‘You shall not commit adultery.’
There is the commandment. Jesus takes it and tells his listeners they must keep a more rigorous way: everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
“It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ There is the commandment of Moses. He takes it and teaches that if anyone divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. Matthew’s understanding seems to be that Jesus taught that marriage could only be broken by adultery. If a man divorced a woman and she was compelled to remarry, that was still adultery—a relationship outside the first marriage—but it was the man who divorced her who bore the guilt. That very complexity speaks to how the Sermon on the Mount and Matthew’s telling of it are deeply embedded in the particular circumstances of a place, were about flourishing life in the complexity of a place: Palestine of the first century. And all our interpretations, our centuries of layered interpretations, these are embedded in lived experience too. That’s where inspiration happens. And where wounding happens.
I wonder if some of you grew up with your experience of desire, of delight in someone else, condemned as lust—something to be put away, cut off. For some of you, divorce is part of your story. Leaving, loosing a marriage and finding love and getting married again to someone else is part of your story. I wonder if this text has been placed around your neck by somebody. Even now, this text is used to argue that cruelty and abuse are no grounds for dissolving and escaping a relationship—not argued in the abstract, but spoken into the face of actual heartbroken people.
We diminish ourselves if we take pieces of our Scripture and put them away. But we are not the Church unless we are seeking how, if this is a living Word of the God who’s love and mercy we have seen in the face and cross of Jesus, this Scripture breathes love, breathes compassion, breathes joy into us, in our lives and bodies.
Jesus speaks of a way to be together, a way to live out our deep longing to be connected and known, which is the image of the Trinity in us. We can can only be human tangled up with others. Jesus speaks about a way to be faithful to one another, to care for each other, to be steadfast for each other,in ways that make the risk of opening ourselves possible. That is the thread—the thread that runs through Jesus’ warning against anger that cuts us off from one another. It runs through the concreteness of Jesus’ sense of marriage as absolute entwinement. And it runs through the way Jesus speaks about lust (and I must note here how indebted I am to Bromleigh Mcleneghan and Laurie Jungling who have, along with Archbishop Williams, helped me enormously in my thinking about this difficult idea). Lust is not the inborn sense of delight that we embodied ones have in each other—thats part of the gift—but desire disconnected from regarding a person as a person. Lust isn’t, as Margaret Farley writes, really a “response to, or union with, or affirmation of” a person at all. As much as we think about it as a matter of eyes, its a kind of unseeing, a reflection of our need where all the gorgeous, complex, longing of another person’s heart is. Its a kind of hiding from the holy risk of knowing and being known. Nothing is risked, nothing is known. And in that way lust is unfaithfulness to this person, and to ourselves.
There’s another way that the divine promise of knowing and being known runs through this passage. And it has to do with the very idea of our anger, our desire, our thoughts being seen by God.
That idea first terrified me when I was in second grade. A friend was over and we were playing in my bedroom, facing each other across a pile of legos. Whatever I was building broke, and I spat out the first phoneme of a very, very significant word before tearing off. He stared at me, mouth slack. Instantly desperate to escape the judgement in his face, I blurted, “I didn’t say it!” And he said with terrible, flat, solemnity, “you thought it.” And he went on: God knew I thought it. And it was sin to even think it, and God would need to somehow understand that I was very sorry. Honestly, people, this is how our personal theology happens.
And I was sorry. I didn’t want to be a kid who said or thought that word. And I was really freaked out that God was watching thoughts in my head, and that I could get in trouble for what was in there. That seemed completely unmanageable. Especially because every time I thought about how sorry I was, and decided to express that in some silent way to God, I would also think of that word. It did not disappear; it was still floating in mind, right in front of God. And this is what it can sound like, and this is what it can do when the good news we get is that God knows our secret thoughts. That might be exactly how it feels to you when, almost every Sunday, about the first thing we do is declare it as a cosmic fact that, to God all hearts are open, all desires known. No secrets are hid.
Words are only bad in our way of using them, by what we use them to build or break between us. At the same time, I look back and wish there was some way my seven-year-old self could have been shown how that almost-word was a little upwelling of the anger at myself over my inability to get things right, that would boil over into the lives of other people. I think there was something in me seen by God, and something God longed for me to know. And I wish that knowing I how was seen had also meant knowing that I really, really wasn’t alone.
To say that all hearts are open, all desires known, is not a warning. Its good news. You are not a secret, though, it feels that way. There are places in us that we are desperately afraid are corrupted, that we want to hide, that we believe are disqualifying. There are the places in us that we want desperately to be seen, but nobody will ever, ever, ever ask the question that lets us say it. And could we even make it understandable? This is what Elizabeth Cady Stanton once, with staggering insight, described as the “immeasurable solitude of self.” But it is not, in fact, true solitude, which she herself acknowledged: it is a solitude into which “only omniscience is permitted to enter.”
The point is not that God is watching your thoughts and you need to have better thoughts. The point is that God is always our companion, everywhere in the vast inner reaches of ourselves. And everything there is transparent to grace.
How does that companionship change us? How does recognizing that our innermost thoughts and everything in their basement, are seen by Christ, and that the perfect judgment and perfect mercy of God is always happening for us moment by moment, thought by thought, change us? That, friends, is how Jesus transforms us into free people, shaped to love and forgive and delight in each other.