The Unforgivable Sin

These words, from the third chapter of Mark’s Gospel:

²² And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, “He has Beelzebul, and by the ruler of the demons he casts out demons.” ²³ And he called them to him and spoke to them in parables, “How can Satan cast out Satan? ²⁴ If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. ²⁵ And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. ²⁶ And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but his end has come. ²⁷ But no one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his property without first tying up the strong man; then indeed the house can be plundered. ²⁸ “Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven for their sins and whatever blasphemies they utter, ²⁹ but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness but is guilty of an eternal sin”— ³⁰ for they had said, “He has an unclean spirit.”

Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness but is guilty of an eternal sin. What has caused Jesus to utter these strong words? Earlier in the chapter he healed a man with a withered hand and went on to cure others before calling the Twelve.

He healed people, and the religious leaders said that he was possessed by the devil.

I’ve never preached on this text before, or if I have I don’t remember what I said. I don’t like the idea of an unforgiveable sin; I believe in an abundance of grace and mercy from a God whose ways are not our ways. And if we confess our sins, God forgives.

But this week I’ve found myself returning to this text with new eyes.

Before I continue, I ask you to watch this sermon. It’ll take less than fifteen minutes of your time. If you’ve seen it already, it’s ok. Watch it again. It's an A+ sermon. But especially if you've only heard commentary on this sermon or memes on this sermon, whether slanted to the right or to the left, please watch it and make your own assessment. 

Here is what I heard: Unity is not partisan. Unity is a way of being together by holding multiple perspectives as worthy of respect. We are called to genuinely care for one another even when we disagree with one another. Bishop Budde draws from the Sermon on the Mount, arguably the heart of Jesus' teaching ministry. She asks us to be merciful as God is merciful. She talks about the dignity of every human being. But mercy and compassion, is where she is headed. Refusing to demonize and mock people, and choosing to show compassion and mercy to scared people. 

What did you hear? 

Some Christians think Jesus had a monopoly on mercy, but in truth it's embedded in the Old Testament: God is steadfastly compassionate and merciful and God's people are called to do same. Jesus learned that from the Torah and the Prophets and Sages. But Jesus definitely builds on this and one could argue that's the core of his teaching. What keeps people from God is refusing mercy; what brings people closer to God is showing mercy like that compassionate Samaritan traveler. The last two or three minutes which more have seen is built upon this foundation. Bishop Budde never raises her voice. She remains pastoral and kind. But she speaks the truth, in love.

The commentary I've read and seen from the far right, including so-called Christian pastors, does not disagree with Bishop Budde on content; they just make up lies to support their false god: they call her nasty and rude and not a real bishop. They say that these are left-wing doctrine and that AOC could have written this "sermon." Really? Mercy, compassion, dignity, love? These are left-wing talking points and not the core values of the Gospel?

Does anyone else see that these "pastors" are not engaging in theological debate with Bishop Budde? Rather, they are following in the footsteps of those who blasphemed against Jesus in the first-century. They continue in that same vein of those who claimed Jesus was serving the devil. It's even worse than the Orwellian practice of calling things the opposite of what they are. It's calling what is good and holy and of God, evil and nasty. 

I am personally not sorry that the president and his minions felt uncomfortable when Bishop Budde spoke directly to him. It was the first time I ever believed that he might be capable of experiencing shame. But that shame did not lead to repentance. It lead to what was probably far more predictable: attack mode. This is who the 47th president is. We should not be surprised.

But those who claim the name of Jesus and know how to hold a Bible right side up and who would not be afraid to put their hands on a Bible when taking an oath of office? How they have conducted themselves this past week? 

Deplorable. Maybe even unforgivable.