Contributors

Thursday, November 28, 2013

Good Words

Just as the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say “thou shalt not” to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills. How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points? This is a case of exclusion. Can we continue to stand by when food is thrown away while people are starving? This is a case of inequality. Today everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest, where the powerful feed upon the powerless. As a consequence, masses of people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without possibilities, without any means of escape.

Human beings are themselves considered consumer goods to be used and then discarded. We have created a “disposable” culture which is now spreading. It is no longer simply about exploitation and oppression, but something new. Exclusion ultimately has to do with what it means to be a part of the society in which we live; those excluded are no longer society’s underside or its fringes or its disenfranchised – they are no longer even a part of it. The excluded are not the “exploited” but the outcast, the “leftovers”. (Pope Francis, EVANGELII GAUDIUM, November 2013)

Perfect for Thanksgiving Day. Not so perfect if you are conservative. Cue the ad hom and other assorted logical fallacies.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just as the commandment “Thou shalt not kill”…

Nothing like starting from an incorrect translation and building from there. It's "murder", which is a different thing.

Quoting:

The sixth commandment forbids murder. The ethical theology that lies behind this prohibition is the fact that all men and women have been created in the image of God (Ge 1:26–27; 9:6). While Hebrew possesses seven words for killing, the word used here — rāsah — appears only forty–seven times in the OT. If any of these seven words could signify “murder,” where the factors of premeditation and intentionality are present, this is the verb.

Recently, however, some have complained (see Childs, 420, for the bibliography and argument) that many of the instances of this verb relate to blood vengeance and the role of the avenger (gô’ēl in Nu 35; Dt 4:41–43; 19:1–13; Jos 20:3). Without exception, however, in the later periods (e.g., Ps 94:6; Pr 22:13; Isa 1:21; Hos 4:2; 6:9; Jer 7:9) it carries the idea of murder with intentional violence. Every one of these instances stresses the act or allegation of premeditation and deliberateness — and that is at the heart of this verb. Thus this prohibition does not apply to beasts (Ge 9:3), to defending one’s home from nighttime burglars (Ex 22:2), to accidental killings (Dt 19:5), to the execution of murderers by the state (Ge 9:6), or to involvement with one’s nation in certain types of war, as illustrated by Israel’s history. It does apply, however, to self-murder (i.e., suicide), to all accessories to murder (2Sa 12:9), and to those who have authority but fail to use it to punish known murderers (1Ki 21:19).

As Houtman, 3:60, concludes, “In the Decalogue it is especially premeditated manslaughter that is in view. A prohibition of unpremeditated homicide obviously would not fit an apodictic statement… The thrust of the commandment is against deliberate, violent and unlawful killing.”

— Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “Exodus,” in Genesis-Leviticus (vol. 1 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary Revised Edition, ed. Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 482-483.

The rest of the statement you quoted simply points to very real problems and merely accuses — just like you do, Mark — as if the problems are simple to solve, or even solvable and no effort is being made, which is not true.

For example, my wife and I have a friend who is homeless. We invited him to stay with us so we could help him get on his feet. He is not mentally ill in the sense that he needs to be institutionalized. He is perfectly capable of achieving self-sufficiency. But he just wouldn't make the effort. All the help in the world does not matter in the slightest if the homeless person does not put in their own effort. Self-sufficiency requires self-effort.

Eventually he had to move on. Then we took in another friend and her son who had also become homeless. Unlike our first friend, she did the work necessary to regain her self-sufficiency.

That is part of why the problem is so intractable — these are human beings we're dealing with, not machines. You can't just push a button or pull a lever and solve the problem. When it is impossible to solve a problem without those in need being willing to put in their own effort to solve the problem, the problem is not solvable.

For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.
— 2 Thessalonians 3:10

Nikto said...

All the Old Testament tells us is that it's okay for Jews to kill for religious, economic, territorial and political gain. That kind of cynical self-aggrandizement is to be expected for a primitive insular tribal religion that was set up for the benefit of the people who call themselves the Chosen people. By Old Testament logic it would be perfectly fine for today's Israelis to commit genocide against Muslims and assassinate Christian American politicians who don't bend to Netanyahu's demands.

But with Christianity the rules change. Everyone is a potential Christian. It is the religion for all of us, not just the Chosen few. You can't just kill people in war because you're killing Christians-to-be. That didn't apply to the Jews because you had to born to a Jewish mother to be a Jew. In Old Testament Israel, everyone else was an enemy; in modern Christianity, everyone is a potential ally.

The Bible tells us that humans are fallible and prone to error. We know as a matter of fact that many people on death row are innocent. Some have been executed for crimes they did not commit, because of perjury or prosecutorial incompetence, misconduct or malice. The Catholic Church recognizes these facts, and opposes all executions. We imperfect humans do not have sufficient knowledge or wisdom to condemn another to death. Yet right-wing American Christians appear to believe that somehow the judges, prosecutors and police officers employed by the government they distrust so much are infallible when it comes to the application of the death penalty.

Right-wing American Christians choose to interpret the Bible in a way that serves their own personal prejudices and political purposes, in the same way that the Jews wrote the Old Testament in order to promulgate their own view of history and justify their actions. But any modern American who actually reads the Bible will be disgusted by the barbaric, selfish, vengeful, stupid behavior of biblical heroes like Noah and David and God himself.

The Bible is riddled with inconsistencies on the issue of killing, and the Catholic Church has worked through two bloody millennia to come to the conclusion that all killing -- even state-sponsored executions and wars -- is wrong. That represents the true spiritual development of the Catholic Church toward the ideals of forgiveness espoused by Jesus Christ, while right-wing American Christians are still mired in the Old Testament mindset of vengeance and retribution. They are still splitting hairs over exactly what kind of killing is acceptable, and debating the meanings of verbs from a dialect of Hebrew that has been dead for more than 20 centuries.

For people with such a binary, good or evil, black or white view of the world, it's surprising how many shades of gray they can find when they need excuses for killing.

Mark Ward said...

Well said, Nikto. Clearly your view is what is prevailing right now with the new Pope and the Christian Church in general. It might take a few more years but we can already see the shift with pastors like Rob Bell and even my buddy Reverend Jim who is starting to talk more about inequality and peaceful resistance as exemplified by the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Anonymous said...

We'll said Nikto?! Ha ha, you two are a joke and misreprent Christianity every time you write. How many times do you have to be called to the mat before you stop posting trash?

Anonymous said...

Right-wing American Christians choose to interpret the Bible in a way that serves their own personal prejudices and political purposes,

Question for you Nikto:

Authors of words have a meaning they intend to communicate, and that meaning is the only valid "interpretation" of any writing. Do you agree or disagree? (Started 134 days ago and counting)

Or should I simply ask why you keep talking about Belgian waffles?

Anonymous said...

Well said, Nikto.

Not surprising that Mark liked it. Every single sentence was factually wrong.