Threads from Henry's Web

Tag: Justice

  • Psalm 119:172 – Sing Some More!

    Psalm 119:172 – Sing Some More!

    I will sing praise of your word,
    for all your commands are righteous.

    Though I did not translate literally in either case, I will note that there is a succession of terms used here. Verse 171 has the lips doing the praising, and in this verse, it’s the tongue.

    Why do we praise laws?

    In general, I’d say, we’re inclined to praise laws that prevent other people from doing things we don’t like, but to chafe at laws that restrict our freedom to do what we want. A law is “righteous” if it applies to others, and oppressive if it applies to us.

    The Psalmist describes all God’s judgments as righteous. As I’ve noted before, the Psalm does not specific authorship, but if we look at the traditional Psalmist, David, we can see that while he might not recognize his own guilt easily, when confronted with it by God’s messengers, he was able to acknowledge it. He was a king, but he was also subject to the will of God. (For an example, see 2 Samuel 11, the familiar story of David and Bath Sheba.)

    The problem that many of us have in relating to laws is very simply a lack of empathy. We cannot imagine ourselves in someone else’s circumstances, and thus we often miss what various actions and rules might mean to that other person.

    One of the critical elements of God’s laws is the need to be concerned for others. In Leviticus 19:18, the Israelites are commanded to love their neighbor as they love themselves. Jesus picks this up in his statement of the two laws.

    One cannot carry this law out without empathy. One has to have some understanding of how to apply love to one’s neighbor if one is to actually love that neighbor. When Jesus gives the golden rule, “Do to others as you would have them do to you” (Matthew 7:12), he makes empathy even more important. You again have to be able to think about what your neighbor might want in order to carry out this law.

    Some leave out this empathy in expressing how to fulfill this law. They figure that if they would like something particular done to them, that must be good for their neighbor too. But if you think about it for a moment, you’ll realize that what you’d like is for your neighbor to do to you something that you would like done. That means that to reciprocate, you need to look for something your neighbor would like done and do that.

    Let me illustrate with a simple case. My wife and I are very different. When we were setting out to get married 25 years ago, many thought it would never work. It has. There are several reasons for this, but the key reason is that we recognize and celebrate our differences.

    Jody likes to make a big deal of birthdays. She likes lots of people around. She wants them to have fun. She wants to be part of the crowd. It’s a big show. I like to try to arrange as much of that as I can. Why? Because she likes it. That’s it. I don’t need any other reason. She enjoys that celebration.

    You may imagine that I also enjoy such a celebration, but you’d be wrong. If I could, I’d keep my birthday secret. I don’t mind a few greetings, and appreciate that friends notice, but I don’t want a party or any large gathering of people. I find the idea of getting a bunch of friends together for a meal with cake and all that stuff to be rather annoying. Please, leave me alone and let me enjoy my birthday!

    Jody recognizes what I like, and she will keep things toned down and low key. I really appreciate this.

    This is an example of doing to something else what we would want done to us. Step one is finding out what the other person would like, just as you would prefer that they find out what you would like.

    Let me bring this back to our text. All God’s judgments are proclaimed to be right, and that is praiseworthy. Those who don’t care about someone else wants only laws that work in their own favor. Those who do care, those who have empathy, want laws that work for the good of all.

    Leviticus expresses this “good of all” approach in 19:15, “Do not twist justice in legal matters by favoring the poor or being partial to the rich and powerful. Always judge people fairly.” Fair judgment requires seeing the whole context, something not possible to the self-centered and unempathetic.

    How about trying to really understand what one other person wants today?

    (Featured image generated by Jetpack AI.)

    I want to call attention to two posts on empathy from Energion authors. Idea Summary: Empathy is drawn from the book The God of the Growing Edge by Dr. Bruce Epperly. Empathy is Essential is by Dr. Dolly Berthelot. Both look at empathy and its impact on our actions in society. Dolly is also the author of PERFECTLY SQUARE, a fantasy fable about dealing with change and diversity, something that also requires empathy.

  • Psalm 119:137 – Right

    Psalm 119:137 – Right

    You are righteous, Oh LORD,
    and your judgments are correct.

    Have you ever noticed all the things we say about God that might sound like value judgments?

    Everything from God is love or God is good to God is just or God is righteous. Just how did we make that determination and is it ours to make? Come to think of it, what would we do about it if we happened to be wrong? If we quit worshiping or praising God, speaking of all these wonderful attributes, God would still be God and would still do precisely what God wants. Who could stop God?

    Of course we don’t mean that we have evaluated God and decided that God passes all the God-tests. We really don’t! But at the same time, we’re right ready to complain if God doesn’t pass some of the God tests. In our superior opinion, of course.

    So is there anything worthwhile going on here or are we just repeating stuff because other people have repeated it for how long we don’t know?

    I’d suggest that these kinds of affirmations do serve a very real purpose. They help us remember that we are going somewhere, that there are options for things to be better, and that we do actually matter. If God is good, then there is goodness at the other end of our activities, our lives, and even our universe. It’s not all just a jumbled mess.

    In fact, I have known people who don’t believe in God to make similar affirmations about the world we live in. Like various religious believers, they make these affirmations with various levels of assurance. Sometimes it’s a faint hope that things can get better. At other times it’s a determination.

    Over may years I’ve seen this note after various national elections. I always say that God is in control. As affirmed in Daniel 4, God rules in the kingdoms of men. Sometimes God sets over them the basest of men. In the dialect of English I used there, “basest” is not a compliment.

    Inevitably someone then asks me why I bother to vote if I think God rules it all. I think that gets it absolutely backwards. Because God rules, I believe there is a good goal to work toward. Because God rules, I feel I owe the situation the best that I can do. With Dr. Martin Luther King I affirm that ?the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” I immediately want to bend it faster!

    We really have our own choice of hope or despair, and it is a choice. If we choose despair, it will follow us all our days. If we choose hope, we will pursue that all our days.

    Will you choose hope, and righteousness, today?

    (Featured image generated by Adobe Express, which uses Adobe Firefly based on a prompt produced in a discussion with Gemini AI.)

  • Church Sign: An Eye for an Eye

    An Eye for an Eye church sign
    An Eye for an Eye Church Sign

    At first glance, this is a good sign for a Christian.  After all, Jesus replaces “an eye for an eye” with “Do not resist the one who is evil” (Matthew 5:38-39).

    But I think it illustrates the way we fail to understand certain phrases as they were intended.

    “An eye for an eye” or lex talionis was originally also a way to keep the whole world from going blind.  It was intended not to mandate revenge, but to limit it.  Modern Christians understand it as some sort of command to mass mayhem, and are thankful that Jesus overruled it.

    But in fact Jesus simply moved us further along the same path.  Limiting revenge was good.  Forgiveness was even better, though in justice we still find some value in the idea of proportional penalties.

    This sign demonstrates a quite frequent response to the Old Testament, and in many cases to other things that are old.  In seeing the New Testament as good, these Christians have to see the Old Testament as bad.  It is almost as though there was no grace for thousands of years and then suddenly at the appearance of Jesus God’s grace came into being.

    But in fact the grace that Jesus taught was also taught in the Old Tesament, with the teaching accommodated to time and place.

    So yes, I think Jesus improved on the attitude of “an eye for an eye.”  But “an eye for an eye” was, in its time and place, also a forward looking measure of justice.

  • We Can’t Have Acquittals

    . . . is what the former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo Bay, Air Force Colonel Colonel Morris Davis informed a court there he was told by superiors, according to the Washington Post.

    I do believe that we will need some special options for dealing with terror suspects taken in war. Many are not recognizing the fact of war in their criticism of detention. Yet most of the criticism is valid. There is no need to keep people as long as they have. There is no need to prevent civilian review and accountability as they have. It is certainly improper for political pressure to be placed on the prosecutors.

    This is yet another situation in which necessary goals have been pursued in a clumsy manner that creates injustice. What’s going on at Guantanamo Bay is not only immoral, it appears to also be incompetence.

  • Jena 6 Overview at Pursuing Holiness

    OK, I’m generally pretty slow in getting on these political cases, and this is no exception. But Laura is right about this case and the need to get something done. I suspect the online position will not be useful either, but perhaps some mail to the appropriate government officials will help.

    Public opinion, properly applied, helps keep government officials accountable.

  • The Duke Lacrosse Players and Prejudice

    According to this MSNBC commentary, Mike Nifong has received a severe penalty but it is precisely what he deserves:

    Lawyers usually try to understand a fellow practitioner’s blunders and usually reprimand their colleague without issuing the ultimate penalty, the death penalty for a lawyer: disbarment. While it is public disgrace indeed, it also says “you are the worst of the worst and do not deserve to live as a lawyer. You are not trustworthy. The public has to be protected from you.” Plus, it strips Nifong of the only way he knows to make a living. Instead of collecting his pension and retiring, he will have to start from scratch. It is a stunning fall from the height of his power. And it is absolutely the right thing to do. Nifong had many chances to escape this fate, yet he never chose to do the right thing. Not once.

    I agree completely with the article. Prosecutors and other law enforcement officials generally deserve our respect, but they should also be held to a high standard. When they start playing with the truth in order to make political points or because of prejudice, they should be held accountable. Mike Nifong has now been held accountable.

    But the reason this story caught my attention was not quite so noble. You see, when the accusations were first made against the Duke University Lacrosse players I reacted with prejudice. Without fully processing the information, I categorized them as spoiled rich kids trying to take advantage of a poor victim who didn’t have the resources to defend herself. As it turns out I was wrong.

    I don’t know if Nifong reacted as I did. Even if that was where he started from, as the evidence came in, he had every reason to change his mind and correct his actions, yet he did not do so. He couldn’t let his high profile defendants go. As stated in the MSNBC article I quoted above, “. . . he never chose to do the right thing.”

    I was surprised when it turned out that the Lacrosse players were not, in fact, guilty. And why is that? I guess I have a prejudice against the rich, the assumption that their money will get them off. That’s not a good thing. I think many of us do have the flip side of that prejudice, a prejudice against those who are down and out, homeless, vagrant, seemingly out of place. I have heard such prejudice acknowledged many times. But it’s good to realize that we can have a prejudice against the successful as well.

    The one cure of prejudice is a willingness to have your opinions corrected. So many times I have answered “I don’t know” when someone asked me my opinion of some popular case. That’s usually the right answer. In general we don’t know, because we don’t have all the evidence. This would have been another good case in which to say, “I don’t know.”

    This reminds me of a Bible text:

    ?15You shall not render an unjust judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great: with justice you shall judge your neighbor. — Lev. 19:15 (NRSV)*

    *The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version. 1996, c1989. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.