It’s a troubling thought, but have you ever thought about committing suicide?  Many people have at some point in their lives.  For many it is as a consequence of battling a terminal (or even horribly debilitating) illness.  As one AIDS sufferer once commented, “When they tell you that you are going to die, and the only question is whether it is sooner or later, then what is the purpose of living?”  For others suicidal thoughts are a consequence of a complex mixture of depression, loneliness and often mental illness.  For yet another group, suicide appears to be an option to alleviate the suffering of just being one’s self.  Statistics vary, but the Centers for Disease Control’s 1993 report held that LGBT teens were four times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual counterparts. 

Many biblical scholars believe that in Philippians 1:21-30 Paul is wrestling with the idea himself.  He tells his readers, “For to me, living is Christ, and dying is gain” (verse 21).  He continues, “I am hard pressed between the two: my desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better, but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for you” (verses 23-24).  Why would the apostle even entertain such an idea? 

It was not such an odd notion in the world of Paul’s time, especially if the death was connected to a noble cause.  In this case, the death was generally considered by others as an instance of martyrdom.  Probably the most famous suicide from the ancient world was that of Socrates.  Charged with disrespect for the established religious traditions and corrupting the young by challenging them to think differently, the Greek philosopher was condemned to take his own life by a jury of 501 Athenian citizens.  For his part, Socrates considered it preferable to die than to live inauthentically. 

Being LGBT in mixed, or worse, unknown company is difficult.  The threat of violence and alienation looms large in such situations.  Although many courageous LGBT persons confront the challenge head-on, for others it is a far more difficult task, especially in the church.  Although more and more spaces are open to us at work, school and other social arenas, hard work still needs to be done.  Individuals in the LGBT community, most particularly those of color, often wrestle with the authentic and courageous act of embracing publicly their identities and the equally understandable act of avoiding “outing” themselves in situations where they may be confronted with homophobic responses.

	What stories do you know about those who suffer for not being fully themselves?

Something somewhat similar is going on in this passage from Paul.  Imprisoned for preaching the Gospel of Christ, criticized by others in the church, and suffering physically in the process, one can understand how even the now famous apostle might entertain the benefits of “being with Christ. “The authenticity of Paul as an apostle and a human being was at stake.  As we said, many in the LGBT community understand the apostle’s struggle all too well.  Living authentically, being who you are without shame or apology, is a blessing and burden at the same time. 

We see this, too, in the apostle’s comments.   Although he would gladly give up the awesome responsibility of being an apostle, he also realizes that his contribution goes far beyond his own well-being.  He then instructs his readers to adopt the same attitude.  “Only live your life in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ,” says the apostle (verse 27).  The Greek verb used here is somewhat obscured by the translation.  Politeuesthe directs the readers to live their lives as citizens “in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ.”  Living out our faith is never a private matter.  It is eminently public.  To be who we are involves in some way being put on public display. 

Yet, Paul says, “For [God] has graciously granted you the privilege not only of believing in Christ, but of suffering for him as well — since you are having the same struggle that you saw I had and now hear that I still have” (1:29-30).  Although we should avoid encouraging individuals to suffer, especially those in a community who have known persecution all too well, the apostle’s words offer us an alternative to the common social script that tells us that we suffer because there is something wrong with us.  Suffering is a common experience of those who stand for truth in our world.  Living our lives as citizens is a call to be beacons to others.  Rather than characterizing it only in the negative as “suffering,” let us see it as an awesome opportunity. 

Recently, Michael Joseph Brown had a conversation with a musician at a youth camp.  After finding out that he attended a well-known liberal arts college with a superb music department, Michael asked him, “So what made you decide to attend that school?”  Expecting the former student to cite the department’s reputation, ranking by evaluators like U.S. News, or some similar criterion for making such an important decision, the young man told him, “I was so moved when I heard John Timble (not his real name) sing on a recording made by the college choir that I wanted to be just like him.”  We say it so often, but it is true nevertheless.  We have no idea who our witness influences.  John Timble never met this young man, but through his gift he had a profound influence upon his life.

In sum, even as Paul shares his own internal dialogue with the Philippian church about his contemplation on life and death, he concludes that “to remain in the flesh is more necessary for you” (verse 24).  Paul was quite aware that his life was an inspiration and a model for those who, like him, were feeling pressured to be inauthentic in their living.  If you ever have considered suicide, yet you are reading this, there was something that convinced you that “to remain in the flesh is more necessary . . .” even when you could not articulate why. 

We can be at our lowest point, yet our lives are valuable to someone else.  Not only are we unaware of how our individual lives influence those we’ve never met; if we stay stuck in a place of believing our lives are no longer valuable, we deny others the positive influence of our very being in the world.  Understanding this doesn’t have to be a burden.  Living a life “worthy of the Gospel of Christ” is not about perfection.  It’s about bringing the best of what we have to become all God has created us to be.  Each day it’s different — some better, some worse — but each day brings with it an opportunity to inspire even in the smallest way.

	Does God call us to be superheroes?  Does God expect us to accomplish the nearly impossible?  Or, does God call us to be exactly who were are, allowing who we are to be used by God for things great and small?

If Paul is wrestling with a reason for continuing in the sometimes arduous task of discipleship, the parable in Matthew 20:1-16 addresses the question of reward.  The workers in the parable, day laborers, were among the poorest people in the ancient world.  The story begins with a landowner hiring a group of laborers to work in his vineyard for “the usual daily wage” (verse 2).  He then hires four additional groups of workers, agreeing to pay them nothing in particular.  At the end of the day, the landowner has all the workers paid the same amount, the usual daily wage.  Matthew 20:10 says, “Now when the first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received the usual daily wage.”  They grumbled.  Such an act violated their sense of fairness.  Of course, those who work harder should get paid more.  This is just commonsense reasoning. 

Yet, the landowner reminds them that they received exactly what they agreed to — the usual daily wage (verse 13).  The problem is not really the wage, but the landowner’s generosity.  He asks, “Are you envious because I am generous?” (verse 15).  Frankly, they are.  Although they had agreed to work for the usual daily wage, once they saw others who had not worked as long or as hard as they had, the wage suddenly became insufficient.  In an all-too-human way, the workers want to impose their own standard of equitable distribution on the landowner. 

Of course, we could make an easy identification of LGBT people with those who began to work later in the day.  In many ways, this would be understandable.  The struggle for civil rights by people of color and women has its roots in the early history of the United States.  Historically, our LGBT struggle was formally initiated much later.  We should be sensitive to the complaints of African Americans, as well as others, who feel like their labors have paved the way for us without receiving a greater payment for their efforts.  LGBT individuals are not trying to usurp the hard work of women or persons of color.  Instead of making this a contest of who has worked longer, we maintain that we share the struggle against heterosexism with its patriarchy, racial prejudice, social marginalization and exclusion.  In truth, if it had not been for the suffragist (later feminist) and civil rights movements, the opportunity for a movement among LGBT persons may never have happened.

 At the same time, within the LGBT community, the corrosive tendency may arise to play the role of the early workers as well.  As the movement grows and becomes more inclusive, some within our ranks may think that they too deserve greater payment — whether recognition, rights, acclaim or status — than those who have come into our ranks only recently.  No matter how open we believe we are, our human measure of what is fair or just usually applies primarily to our own cause, and secondarily to “them” (whoever they may be).  This parable is so powerful because it defies human logic and stands the notion of what is fair on its head.  It reminds us that we cannot create God in our own image, nor can we be the judges of God’s generosity.  It reminds us that the work of inclusion is not a matter of who has worked longer because  we all receive the reward — payment and reward are the same word in Greek — for which we are co-workers.

	How can we promote the various movements for social justice as part of a singular movement of God?

Since this parable is about the operations of the “kingdom of heaven,” the story highlights how human beings attempt to make inclusion in the community their decision rather than God’s decision.  The landowner is not seeking to disadvantage the first group of workers.  No worker in this parable receives less than needed.  Rather the landowner wants to care for those who did not have the opportunity to earn an entire day’s pay.  Unfortunately, the parable highlights our inability at times to see beyond our own personal concerns. 

Any act of inclusion is going to disgruntle some who believe they are deserving of more.  The most famous example in the United States may be the failed push for Affirmative Action.  This week’s parable, distinctive to Matthew’s gospel, highlights the idea that God operates in a radically generous and inclusive manner.  The church, God’s community, is to be a place where this generosity and inclusion are lived out.

	How does inclusion challenge us, even when we claim it is the very thing we desire?