"The Genesis of Justice"

In the November issue of the Church Newsletter I invited you to suggest topics or questions for today's sermon. Three topics were suggested: (1) morality, (2) forgiveness, particularly related to forgiving one's self, and the (3) Ten Commandments. I will attempt to meld these three topics together.

Most people in our culture know something about the Ten Commandments. There is an old story about a woman who went to the post office to mail a Bible to her son who was in prison. The postal clerk asked her if there was anything breakable in the package. She responded, "Yes, the Ten Commandments!" The commonly held understanding is that the Ten Commandments are ten "oughts" or "ought nots" too frequently violated.

During the last year or two the Ten Commandments have commanded media attention, particularly related to Judge Moore in Alabama whose granite statue of the Ten Commandments was removed by superior court order from the lobby of Judge Moore's courthouse. As you remember that action caused vociferous dismay among some right wing extremists.

In my opinion Judge Moore was wrong on two counts. First he was violating the separation of church and state; topic for several sermons. Secondly he was wrong because his emphasis for placing the Ten Commandments in the court house was focused on control, not nurture. More about that in a moment.

The place to begin is at the beginning. According to Jewish Scripture the Ten Commandments were given to Moses at Mt. Sinai. Some of us are old enough to remember Cecil B. DeMille's movie version of Moses receiving the Commandments: something like a meteor flashes out of the sky and inscribes the Commandments on stone.

That was great cinematography which had little do to with historical fact. Actually the Commandments were based on generally accepted mores throughout most ancient near eastern cultures. Moses was educated. He used generally accepted behavioral codes as one way to help this loose tribe of nomads become a nation.

However for the Israelites there was a big difference in their understanding of these cultural mores. While other ancient cultures had these generally accepted mores, for the Israelites these were a sign or covenant of their understanding of belonging to God. They understood they had been freed from slavery in Egypt; but that freedom was not license. They had been freed from Egyptian slavery to become "slaves" of Yahweh (God).

However, and this is a very big and very important difference, that sense of being "slaves of God" was not anything like the harsh slavery they had endured from their Egyptian task-masters. Rather their new owner's approach was based in "loving kindness."

In other words the Commandments were not understood to be harsh restrictions so much as how people who have been freed from inhumane slavery are to act. Their freedom is in the context of their understanding of God's loving care.

My research for this sermon led me to an interesting book by Alan Dershowitz, the well-known Harvard attorney. I found the book in the Law Library at the University of San Diego. Dershowitz says the Commandments were statements of justice which came out of stories of injustice. He relates the Ten Commandments to the ancient stories of Genesis.

For example, the commandment about honoring one's parents is a response to the dishonor shown to their parents in the stories about Cain and Jacob and Rachel. The commandment about not bearing false witness is a direct response to the story of how Joseph was falsely accused by Potiphar's wife. The first Reading for this Service is a summary of Dershowitz's understanding:

"The genesis of justice is in the narratives of injustice found in the book
of Genesis. . . .what is remarkable is how the Bible uses stories of injustice to
teach about the need for justice." [Alan Dershowitz, "The Genesis of Justice," pp. 257-258]

If anything the Ten Commandments are about social justice, but social justice in the context of the "loving kindness" of God.

Originally the Ten Commandments were not "movie magic." They were not harsh control by an evil task-master. Rather the Commandments were understood to be a covenant with God, based on God's justice and loving kindness. The Israelites had been freed from harsh slavery in Egypt to become "slaves" of the Love of God. The Commandments provided a structure of "loving kindness" or chesed (merciful love) for how a community deals with the "monsters" of inhumanity both outside and within their community. This understanding is made explicit by the Prophet Jeremiah who related the People of God more as "sons" than as "slaves." "They shall be my people and I shall be their God." [Jeremiah 31:33]

However that original understanding has been lost or neglected through the years, most particularly in Western Culture. Here in the United States from our Pilgrims to Judge Moore there has been a long history of understanding the Ten Commandments not as a covenant of loving kindness but as a way to control or to coerce people to behave. In other words, the original intent of the Commandments was, I believe, loving nurture. That original intent has been lost in judgmentalism and control.

The Person who suggested that I preach this sermon about the Ten Commandments was responding to an off-hand remark I had made in one of the study groups I led here. I said I thought the Ten Commandments were over-rated. What I was trying to say is that the people who want the Ten Commandments displayed on courthouse walls have missed the point.

I am talking about morality. In western culture there is a strong sense that morality comes through coercion. The Commandments are seen as symbols of judgment rather than love. Let me try it this way. Too much of the concern for morality in western culture, more particularly in the United States, has been like the monster in Betty's story - morality as something to be feared. The wise crone helps the people become a community by entering into a covenant - joining hands and working together.

The people in the Story had been a loose confederation of frightened people hiding under their beds. They became a community by joining hands and working together, and the "monster" disappeared. The Israelites had been a loose confederation of wandering nomads; the Commandments, given against the background of "loving kindness," helped them become a nation.

I'm talking about an approach to morality which is not coercive. Some of you heard this nurturing approach to morality in the service of child dedication here a couple of Sundays ago. Natalie and Roberto chose a reading from Eastern Scripture about how they hope to teach their Daughter, Liliana:

"In their teachings, superior parents guide their children but do not pull
them along; they urge them to go forward and do not suppress them; they
open the way but do not take them to the place."

I am talking about morality which is the result of nurture not control. People who want the Ten Commandments displayed in the court house have adopted an approach to morality which is coercive not nurturing. They are people who are frightened by what Katherine Anne Porter described as "untidy minds." She says people with "untidy minds" have always been a "nuisance to the military police of orthodoxy." [Katherine Anne Porter, "On a Criticism of Thomas Hardy"]

For me the Ten Commandments are more like fences than leashes. Morality to be real must come from within as a response to nurturing love rather than coercive judgment. I am talking about what it mans to be free to become a human being without being "molded" by restrictions; about how a civilization becomes humane.

Of course there is a danger in what I am saying. Freedom can become, often does become license. Katherine Anne Porter again: "Freedom is a dangerous intoxicant and very few people can tolerate it in any quantity." [The Never Ending Wrong]

I am indebted to my son-in-law who gave me a new appreciation for the Commandments. He helped me see that my off-hand remark about the Ten Commandments being "over-rated" was actually short sighted. When properly understood against their original intent - a covenant of loving kindness - they are appropriate.

In his book, "The Ten Commandments and Human Rights," Walter Harrelson, who teaches religion at Vanderbilt University, points out the problem of "authoritarian religion," which is his term for what I call coercive morality. Harrelson says that kind of coercive, authoritarian religion damages human beings.

However he does not stop there. He also says that all people need ". . . a set of norms that can be relied upon. . . . a set of basic guidelines." This is particularly true in a society where people are "on the move," a society where young people quickly leave the nurture of their parents and religious exploration. Harrelson is emphatic: "We have clearly gone too far into sentimental lawlessness in the name of love and mercy." [p. 9]

This is precisely what happened to the Israelites. The same Jeremiah whose sermons were nurturing also cared enough to call the people to confront their inhumanity. He talked about how they cheated the poor people; about their mis-treatment of one another, after which they went to the worship service. He warned them about thinking the ritual would be all they needed if they continued in their greed.

True morality, as I have said, is based more on nurture than on coercion. However, morality also has some requirements, particularly related to social justice - to how we relate to other human beings. The title and thesis of Harrelson's book are instructive: "The Ten Commandments and Human Rights."

Harrelson re-wrote the Commandments in modern parlance, used as the second Reading for this service. After a careful interpretation of the Commandments, Harrelson relates them to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This understanding of the relationship of morality to human rights is not limited to professional theologians.

I am part of a men's breakfast group which meets every other week in San Diego. We are all retired or semi-retired. A couple of weeks ago, as I thought about this Sermon, I asked my friends, "What would you say if you had to do a sermon about the Ten Commandments?" Almost in chorus they replied, "Talk about the Golden Rule!"

The Golden Rule which we know as "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" is part of all major religions. Some religions state it differently, for example: "Do not do unto others what you would not want others to do unto you." For the men in my breakfast group the Golden Rule summarizes the Ten Commandments.

About fifty, maybe sixty, years ago an Anglican minister, Willliam Barclay wrote about religious faith for people he called, "the plain folks" His books were oriented not toward theologians and ministers but to people like the men in my breakfast group.

Barclay's book about the Commandments is called, "The Plain Man's Guide to Ethics." He says the Commandments were never meant to be a "body of rules and regulations. . . . (Rather) they give a certain attitude of reverence to God and respect for one's fellow human beings." [William Barclay, "The Plain Man's Guide to Ethics," pp. 12-13]

So, where are we? The Ten Commandments were originally generally accepted mores of ancient Near Eastern cultures. Moses and the Israelites reformed or renewed these mores in Jewish religion as a way to express how people who are "slaves" to loving kindness are to act. They were, in my opinion, never meant to coerce behavior. Rather having received God's "loving kindness" they are to be a nation of justice to embody "loving kindness" to themselves and others.

That original meaning was, unfortunately lost, particularly in Western culture, so that the Commandments have been used as a way to coerce morality, or to control others. Some people want them posted in the Courthouse as a method of restraint. In other words these "military police of orthodoxy" use the Ten Commandments as leashes.

The Commandments provide fences, principles of human relations, of social justice. My friends in the breakfast group are right, as is Walter Harrelson, theologian at Vanderbilt, as was William Barclay, long deceased Anglican minister, as is Alan Dershowitz. The key to the Commandments is justice based in loving kindness.

However, you and I both know that sometimes we fail in this business of loving kindness and justice. Sometimes we do not relate well to others. Someone cuts us off in traffic and . . . well you know. Someone in our family frustrates us and we . . . well, you know. We feel guilty and have trouble forgiving ourselves. How do we forgive ourselves when we feel guilty, knowing full well that we have not been true to these principles of humane conduct? How do we forgive ourselves when we have been not victims but perpetrators of injustice?

We need to be freed from slavery. The ancient Israelites were slaves in Egypt; we are slaves to our guilty feelings. The key will be to find the freedom of acceptance. The key to forgiving ourselves is acceptance. Accept those times when we made mistakes and make amends as possible. Accept those times when we have not done as well as we wanted, and do better.

Most of all, accept ourselves for who we are, persons who have been freed to a life of loving kindness. Our self-acceptance is rooted in knowing we are accepted. Paul Tillich says it best:

"You are accepted. You are accepted, accepted by that which is greater
than you and the name of which you do not know. Do not ask for the name
now; perhaps you will find it later. Do not try to do anything now; perhaps
later you will do much. Do not seek for anything; do not perform anything;
do not intend anything. Simply accept the fact that you are are accepted!"
[Paul Tillich, "You Are Accepted," in The Shaking of the Foundations, p.162]

The monsters of guilt and authoritarian morality and sentimental lawlessness will melt away and in their place we will find a humane human community of nurturing love as we accept one another and ourselves. Amen.

Reading for November 27, 2005

"The genesis of justice is in the narratives of injustice found in the book of Genesis. . . . What is remarkable is how the Bible uses stories of injustice to teach about the need for justice" [Alan Dershowitz, "The Genesis of Justice," pp. 257-258]

"1. Do not have more than a single ultimate allegiance.
2. Do not give ultimate loyalty to any earthly reality.
3. Do not use the power of religion to harm others.
4. Do not treat with contempt the times set aside for rest.
5. Do not treat with contempt members of the family.
6. Do not do violence against fellow human beings.
7. Do not violate the commitment of sexual love.
8. Do not claim the life or good of others.
9. Do not damage others through misuse of human speech.
10. Do not lust after the life or good of others."
(Walter Harrelson, "The Ten Commandments and Human Rights," p. 192)