Virtual Tin Cup

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

Wednesday, December 31, 2008

"You Have Heard It Said . . ."

Refusing to leave well-enough alone, I want to take a look a bit further down Chapter 5 of the Gospel of St. Matthew. After the Beatitudes, with a short interlude on salt and light, we have a long list of sayings, using the formula "You have heard it said . . . but I say to you . . ." This series of sayings is prefaced by Jesus' insistence that he is not abolishing the Law, but fulfilling the Law. I think it important to keep that in mind as we consider this whole series.

One thing it is important to remember is that Jesus is saying all this on his own authority. Pronouncing upon the law was the role of learned teachers; Jesus is insisting he is one. Further, this authority of the Teacher was considered to be something granted by God alone; Jesus is insisting that he has Divine imprimatur for these teachings.

The "You have heard it said . . ." sayings deal with specific commandments: murder, adultery, and issues surrounding the legal practices of the people, including civil complaints, divorce, the rule of vengeance, and creating distinctions of "friend" and "enemy". All of them deal with how we are to live together as a people who proclaim the God of creation and redemption as their sole King. The King in his Court was the sole arbiter of true justice; here, Jesus is telling us that justice is not confined to a simple-minded literal understanding of words like "murder", "adultery", and that Divine favor is not limited to arbitrary distinctions like "friend" and "enemy". As the ekklesia, those called out to be a people different than others, we are a people whose life together is determined by a God of bounteous love and prodigal grace. Murder is not just taking a life; it is destruction of the communal bonds that hold us all together. Adultery is not just marital infidelity, but a surrender to physical desire that breaks the bonds of family that keep the community growing. Divorce might seem like a necessary evil, but it perpetuates the breaking of communal ties that bind us together. Enmity is an artificial category; we are all the recipients of God's grace and forbearance, and therefore entitled to all the love we can share with one another. The false distinctions between friend and enemy are just another way of destroying the communal bonds, a way we divide what God has not only called together, but called to be apart together.

One caveat, I think is necessary. Once again, while it might seem on a cursory reading that Jesus is here setting out all sorts of rules we are obliged to follow, otherwise facing eternal condemnation, I think that the context in which Jesus is offering this set of sayings belies such an interpretation. Remember, Jesus is heightening and tightening the demands placed upon the people who desire to be called God's people. These are not simple rules of personal moral virtue, but a set of understandings within a body of people. They are not rules for living; they are rules for living together. Jesus is insisting that, if we going to be the people of God, we have to live that way. Not just ensuring our adherence to the letter of the Law, but living in the Spirit of the law.

Again, I just don't know how someone could imagine that we liberals would find something not to like about this. Unless, of course, there are liberal Christians who think murder, hatred, enmity, sexual promiscuity, and the general destruction of communal ties is OK.

7 comments:

Democracy Lover said...

Admittedly I am no theologian, but it often seems to me that much of Christian theology has concerned itself with watering down or explaining away the difficult sayings of Jesus. Things like blessing peacemakers and turning the other cheek and loving your enemies are simply too troubling for those who want Christianity to be popular or to be approved by earthly rulers.

Jesus sets up an ideal for moral behavior that is far beyond the ability of most people to comprehend, much less follow. I absolutely agree that Jesus is setting forth rules for living together here and now, not for attaining some posthumous reward. The rules apply not only to relationships with those who, like his Jewish audience, consider themselves the elect of God, but with all of our fellow human beings.

Perhaps the problem you have with conservative Christians is that they are worshiping their assumptions about the nature of the Bible rather than actually trying to follow Jesus' teaching. The literal, internally consistent, every word dictated by God concept is a handy way to re-interpret Jesus' sayings to conform to their worldview.

Dan Trabue said...

They are not rules for living; they are rules for living together. Jesus is insisting that, if we going to be the people of God, we have to live that way.

Yes, yes, yes. Excellent and amen!

Erudite Redneck said...

Context? CONTEXT!?

Heathen.

Geoffrey Kruse-Safford said...

Democracy Lover - I think I'm making the point that Jesus was most definitely not talking "ideal" so much as "possibility".

Dan - Thank you.

ER - I know. According to another recent post by Neil, I'm a Baal worshipper. Bring on those temple prostitutes, people!

Dan Trabue said...

I was just perusing over at the Neilster's place on his comments in regards to the SOTM. One Right-ish commenter noted that what she felt when she reads the SOTM is condemnation.

All that “stands out” to me is how condemned it makes me feel!

How devastating that sounds to me. To read Jesus words about "blessed are ye..." and this:

Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?
Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature?

So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; 29and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?

Therefore do not worry, saying, "What shall we eat?' or "What shall we drink?' or "What shall we wear?' For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.


Who can read this and feel condemnation?

But I suppose that a large part of the SOTM IS the condemnation of religious hypocrites. So, perhaps that is why many on the Right read it and find it to be all about condemnation and impossible-to-attain standards, while "the poor in spirit" (as well as "the poor") read it and find joy and comfort and rest.

You suppose?

Geoffrey Kruse-Safford said...

I just read the comment to which you refer, and the whole thing is sad. I don't think it's so much guilt, as it is setting up the entire Sermon as a series of impossible goals. Obviously, if you think this is all about making a list and checking it twice, you're going to fail every single time. Because, of course, that's not what this is about.

Anyone who feels condemned by the words of Jesus . . . I don't know what to say about that. I don't know that Jesus ever condemned anyone. I can't fathom it.

Dan Trabue said...

Well, he did give the religious and hypocrites (or do I repeat myself?) a pretty hard way to go.

"Blind guides! Fools! Snakes!"

I'd call that pretty condemning.