On Entering the Kingdom of God: Part 2

Last week I posted Part 1 of three or four on the topic of those entering the kingdom of God. I noted that sometimes the people most rejected by good church people seem to have a better grip on offering mercy and grace to others than those who see themselves as righteous. Jesus told his listeners such people were "entering the kingdom of God ahead of [religious leaders]." As a religious person, sometimes even a leader, I'm trying to figure out how to better exemplify the values of God's kingdom in my life.

One thing I notice is that religion itself is often a barrier to making better choices. Let's look at two stories from the gospel according to Luke, one coming from Jesus' life and the other a story he told.

The first account is found in Luke 17:11-18. One day Jesus encountered ten lepers who begged him for pity. He told them to go show themselves to the priest. The Levitical law instructed priests to examine skin sores and declare a person "clean" or "unclean" based on his findings. (You can find detailed instructions in Leviticus 13-14, if you're into that sort of thing.) Not until the lepers were on their way did their skin clear up. At that point, one of them turned around and came back to thank Jesus. Jesus noted that ten men were healed and asked why only one came back. But that one was different from the rest. He was a Samaritan, a "foreigner," in Jesus' words.

I've heard several thousand sermons in my life, including at least a few on this passage. One thing I don't remember anyone ever mentioning is that the Samaritan man would have had no incentive to continue on his way to the Jewish priest. Being a Samaritan (from Samaria) was both a cultural and religious designation. He had no place in the Jewish community. Even if the priest agreed to examine him, an all-clear diagnosis would still not allow him to be part of the synagogue, the center of Jewish community. He wasn't a "real" Jew. His heritage was tainted with foreign blood. He was free to return to Jesus because of his lack of religious standing.

Next, let's look at the parable of the Good Samaritan found in Luke 10:25-37. A man is "half dead" by the side of the road after being beaten and robbed. Along comes a Jewish priest and sees the "half dead" man. He crosses the road to stay far from the "half dead" body. Again, we need to go back to Leviticus to comprehend this. There were many things encountered in daily living that left a person "unclean." In fact, the word "unclean" occurs over 100 times in the book of Leviticus. Priests had even stricter rules than ordinary people for avoiding uncleanness. The priest in Jesus' story had good reason to cross the road to avoid that "half dead" man. He could not afford to come close to a human corpse, and the unfortunate traveler was at least halfway to being one.

The next passerby was a Levite. All priests were from the tribe of Levi (one of the twelve sons of Jacob, also know as Israel), but not all Levites were priests. Levites were given no land among the Israelites. They were religious workers and depended on the offerings given by the people for their support. This man would have had religious duties to perform. Although he had fewer restrictions than the priest, he still wouldn't want to end up in an "unclean" state for the sake of a stranger in the ditch. He came close enough to see that the man was "half dead" and probably had enough blood on him to render one unclean until evening and then he, too, passed by on the other side of the road without touching him.

Finally, along came the Samaritan. He didn't have to worry about becoming "unclean." Like the man with leprosy in our first story, he was already and forever "unclean" by Jewish standards. He examined the man, did some first aid, and took him to an inn to recover. He could afford to be kind and generous because he had no religious restrictions holding him back.

Part 1 of this series, in essence, notes that non-religious people are often more gracious than religious people -- offering more generosity, more mercy, and less judgment. Here in these stories in Luke, it appears that religion itself sometimes lies behind that difference. Religion limits how nice we can be by giving us restrictive rules to follow. 

Here is the root of our quandary. The priest and Levite in the story of the Good Samaritan were dedicated to keeping the law. That's why they couldn't stop to help the beaten man. The nine Jewish lepers who didn't turn back to thank Jesus for their healing were doing exactly what Jesus had told them to do and what their religion required of them. The Samaritan had more freedom to express his gratitude.

How often when religious people show a lack of generosity toward others -- whether in material goods or in spirit -- are they making that choice because it's the "right" thing to do? They don't want to appear to approve of sinners or they have already committed their time and energy to religious duties. They desperately want to please God and are making what appears to them to be the choice that will accomplish that goal. They are staying clean!

A number of years ago, as I arrived at church on a special Sunday morning, I saw a disabled vehicle in the church parking lot. I recognized it as belonging to a local man with no end of problems, many of them brought on by his unsavory character. He had already caused me trouble in my public service job and would cause a lot more before finally moving on several years later after being evicted from his housing situation. Still, he was a literal neighbor to the church trying to get his disabled self to another church in the community and obviously not having a good day. I stopped long enough to learn what the issue was and then continued to my assignment for the morning. I'm a good church lady, after all, and need to be conscientious and dependable, especially on those special Sundays. Plus, I had no mechanical skills to offer. Even if I had, there aren't many men who want a woman to fix their vehicle for them. And he hadn't actually asked for my assistance.

As we transitioned between scheduled events that morning I mentioned the disabled vehicle to someone with weaker attachments to the congregation. He seemed shocked that I had left the disabled owner of the disabled vehicle to his own resources and went out to see if he could help, forsaking any commitment he had made for the morning. As it turns out, the man had found a way to move on by then, leaving his vehicle behind (for several weeks, as it turned out).

I was convicted. Why hadn't I looked for someone to help as soon as I arrived? Could I have found a man or two willing to leave their Sunday morning fellowship in their Sunday-go-to-meeting clothes to rescue a stranger with a disabled vehicle? Regrettably, I wasn't sure I could have. We need more "marginal Christians" -- not so well-dressed or dedicated to being there -- with the right resources to offer that sort of service. In short, we need people who are less religious than most of us, people willing to get a little unclean in order to connect with others.

I'm back to where I started: the more religious people are, including me, the less generous their lifestyle tends to be. Something is wrong with this picture. How can we embrace a more gracious lifestyle without forsaking our commitment to righteousness?

Check out part 3 for further thoughts concerning this quandary.

On Entering the Kingdom of God: Part 1

I am making my way through the Bible. Again. Always and forever. I read four brief passages almost every day — from 1) the Old Testament*, 2) Psalms or Proverbs, 3) the Gospels, 4) the rest of the New Testament — and am reading again the same words I have read many times before. It takes a lot of exposure to even begin to grasp the message behind some of those words.

I'm slowly moving toward a new understanding with the help both of the Bible and what I observe in the world around me. I'm not there yet, wherever "there" is, but I'm moving that direction. Making progress in my understanding of the kingdom of God is part of why I embrace the label of “progressive” Christian.

To begin, let's look at a scene with two people. One is a young man we’ll call "Arthur." Arthur is a bum. I know he is a bum because others have told me so. He is chronically unemployed, dirty, foul-mouthed, and has an anger management issue that occasionally lands him in the county jail on charges of assault and battery. And resisting law enforcement. And assault of a police officer. When Arthur loses his temper things don't go well for him.

Our other subject is "Margaret." Margaret is a church lady. She's not a particularly nice church lady, but she is certainly dedicated to her faith. Margaret doesn't like Arthur. She doesn't like bums and doesn't want them in her world. She wants to see Arthur become a good, respectable Christian man.

The thing about Arthur is that he has a generous spirit. He tends to extend goodwill toward others. He shows respect and grace for Margaret despite how obvious it is that she despises him. If he manages to get any money, he typically gives it away to those he owes for past kindnesses or those he perceives as needing it more than he does. In the eyes of people like Margaret, and there are many, Arthur's generosity is one more fault among his many faults. He can't hang onto money. He is too generous.

Too generous. Isn't that quite the assessment from people who claim to live by the Bible! Shall I list here all the Bible verses praising generosity and portraying tight-fistedness in a negative light? How did tight-fistedness get recast as a virtue and generosity as a character flaw?

In addition to being too generous, in this world where virtues are seen as character flaws Arthur is too honest. He once landed in jail because, in trying to help the police solve a crime, he implicated himself as playing a role in what happened. He freely confesses to everything Margaret despises about him. In a word, he's guileless.

This brings us to Jesus' words in Matthew 21:31 -- “Jesus said to [the Jewish leaders], ‘Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you’” (NIV). 

The tax collectors and prostitutes. The sinners! Many people despised by those who see themselves as righteous have an innate grasp of concepts dear to the heart of God that tend to escape religious people. They are more generous, more caring, more open, quicker to acknowledge their shortcomings, humbler, kinder -- in between actions and attitudes that negate all of these wonderful attributes. In another setting (Luke 18:9-14) Jesus showed us a picture of a “righteous” man and a sinner praying in the Temple and said it was the one who acknowledged he was a sinner who went home justified.

Personally, I am not a bum. I'm a church lady. I grew up in the church and haven't managed to stray far. I hope I'm a nicer church lady than Margaret. I hope observing people like Arthur has helped me, but probably not enough.

On one hand, we have kind, generous, honest, but short-tempered bums like Arthur. On the other hand, we have judgmental, unkind, short-tempered religious people like Margaret (and sometimes me) who try to conceal their imperfections. Jesus says people like Arthur are entering God's kingdom ahead of people like Margaret (and me). And I believe it. Arthur has a better grasp of mercy and grace. He is more honest about his shortcomings, more accepting of others. He comprehends by nature a lot of things that Margaret (and I) can’t begin to understand.

Where do I want to land? Is it possible to be a kind, generous, humble, merciful, caring church lady? It's certainly not easy! After all, if I don't make clear my disapproval of Arthur's poor lifestyle choices, people might think I have no issue with anything he does. What impact will my failure to condemn Arthur's choices have on those who look to me for guidance? 

Ironically, while it seems that as a good church lady I should point out to Arthur the error of his ways and call him to repentance, it would come across as unkind and judgmental for me to talk to Margaret about her unkind and judgmental spirit. From the nice-church-lady point of view, loving Arthur means hating his sin and the damage it does to himself and others and urging him to repent and do better, but loving Margaret means accepting her sharp tongue and mean spirit and the damage she does to herself and others with grace. After all, she’s not perfect, just forgiven. Something is not right about this.

What do I do? I want to be more generous, caring, and kind -- like Arthur at his best. But my dedication to loving God and others as a dedicated Christian serve me well. I believe that obeying the law of God is not only a righteous choice, but a smart choice, that seeking first the kingdom of God adds much to my life. (re: Matthew 6:33) The law of God is like the law of gravity. Nobody can break it; they can only break themselves against it. I have read the 176 verses of Psalm 119 about how wonderful the law is and believe there is truth in those words. The fact that not many people seem to find delight and wonder in the law of God doesn't mean it isn't there.

There is plenty more to write about this, but for now I want to fall back on Micah 6:8 for guidance: 

"He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. 
    And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
    and to walk humbly with your God" (NIV).

For my own lifestyle choices, I need to "act justly" -- do my best to understand and comply with God's law. In my actions and attitudes toward others, I need to "love mercy" -- love and accept people as they are, warts and all, not insisting they make the same choices I make. And in everything, I need to remember that I am no more deserving of God's mercy than anyone else and acknowledge how short I fall.

See Parts 2  and 3 for more thoughts on this.   

—-

*The key to having four “brief” passages is to read Psalms and Proverbs every year, but take three years to read the rest of the Old Testament.