Two Kings and the Golden Rule
reflections on laboring for a just society
by Troy Cady
“I believe that standing up for the
truth of God is the greatest thing in the world. This is the end of life. The
end of life is not to be happy. The end of life is not to achieve pleasure and
avoid pain. The end of life is to do the will of God, come what may.” -Martin Luther King, Jr.
[i]
These are the words of a man captivated by the vision of a
just society. It is a society that, according to the quote, does “the will of
God, come what may.” It is a noble vision. It is why we strive as we do. It is
why we sacrifice. That is why today in the United States we remember and honor
the work of Martin Luther King, Jr.
Dr. King worked for justice and we continue that good work.
He was an imperfect man, to be sure, but the United States (and, indeed, many
other places in the world) owe him a great debt of gratitude for the tireless,
sacrificial way he put his life on the line for the cause of the oppressed.
Though we remember him most for his efforts concerning the civil rights of
black people in America, his work serves as a model for any endeavor to right the wrongs of injustice, in whatever form it
appears.
My theme in this essay concerns the source from which Dr. King’s
work is derived and the scope of such work. At the close of the essay, I invite
you to consider how we can honor Dr. King by following his example and I invite
you to consider how his legacy is needed now more than ever.
It is well known that Dr. King was an ordained minister. As
a minister myself, I’m especially drawn to that aspect of King’s work. In other
words, I believe King did what he did because of his King. He made that abundantly
clear in his writings, of which the quote at the beginning serves as a small
sample.
The Basis of Dr.
King’s Nonviolent Protest
All great reformers look to those who have gone before for
their inspiration. When the going gets tough, they persevere because they have
firmly fixed in their mind and heart a vision of the future that is derived
from great moments and leaders of the past. King’s inspiration was Jesus and
there is much in the account of Jesus’ sayings and actions that informed King’s
nonviolent way of protesting injustice.
Many people are familiar with sayings from Jesus’ Sermon on
the Mount, for example:
“Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.
Blessed are those who are
persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:9-10)
“Blessed are you when people insult
you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same
way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12)
“You have heard that it was said,
‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil
person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek
also.” (Matthew 5:38-39)
“You have heard that it was said,
‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and
pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in
heaven.” (Matthew 5:43-45a)
“So in everything, do to others
what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
(Matthew 7:12)
That last saying is an interesting one. Most of us know the
middle phrase very well: “…do to others what you would have them do to you…”
We refer to this as the Golden Rule. It’s astounding, to be
sure. It’s astounding because throughout history there has yet to come anyone
to surpass this saying. If everyone kept this one rule, King believed, there
would be no more injustice. It’s what Jesus taught.
That’s why it’s important to keep in mind that the middle
phrase is encased by two other phrases.
Injustice Anywhere…
First, Jesus says, “So, in
everything do to others…”
That is our problem. We don’t keep the Golden Rule “in everything.” That is really what Dr. King
worked towards. He wanted to see us keep the Golden Rule in everything and he
saw that we did not keep it with respect to the lives of black people, so he
directed his efforts towards putting that right.
But we should keep in mind that, though King’s work had a
particular focus, he once said that “injustice
anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
[ii]
In that respect, King’s work was about much more than
racism. It’s also about sexism, ageism and ableism, to name a few. Anyone, by
virtue of being human, should be afforded basic rights, regardless of their
race, sex, age or ability.
While King is remembered for his focus on the issue of race,
Jesus addressed every one of the
injustices listed above. Indeed, that is why Jesus was King’s King.
For example, in Matthew 15 (and the parallel account in Mark
7) there is a story that touches on the question of ageism. I will look at that
text later in this essay, because it presents a fine case that demonstrates in
action what Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount (and what King endeavored
to do).
Before turning to that case, however, we need to look at the
final phrase of the Golden Rule. It, too, is included in Jesus’ vision of a
just society.
What is the Basis of
a Just Society?
I have italicized the last phrase of the Golden Rule: “…do
to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
The word “for” indicates the rationale for “doing to others
what you would have them do to you.” Though it is unpopular to say so, the end
to which Jesus instructed us to practice the Golden Rule was so that we might honor
the Law and the Prophets (that is, to live according to the vision of a just
society as it is presented to us by them). Jesus believed, along with other
Jews of the first century, that living according to the Law and the Prophets
would form a world where humanity and creation would flourish.
Contrary to what many claim, Jesus did not simply come to
jettison the Law. Rather, he sought to help us embrace the Law rightly,
interpret it wisely, and observe it without hypocrisy. Jesus’ condemnation was
not the Law itself. It was the way in which the Pharisees had twisted it and
used it as a tool to enslave the populace. Put another way, Jesus sought to
liberate the Law from its Pharisaical trappings, but he did not seek to abolish
it.
He made this clear at the beginning of his Sermon on the
Mount. In Matthew 5:17 Jesus says: “Do not think that I have come to abolish
the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
Indeed, in verse twenty, he directs this statement specifically with respect to
the Pharisees when he says: “For I tell you that unless your righteousness
surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly
not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
I do believe this is the one aspect of Jesus’ ministry that
most modern-day people do not appreciate, including Christians. But, I also
believe Dr. King understood the importance of this part of Jesus’ teaching because
the work to which he dedicated himself indicated such understanding.
What I mean to say is: the last part of the Golden Rule
indicates the value of working for justice on a systemic level, not just an interpersonal level. The Law, to the
first century Jewish person, was a Constitution. It was systemically concerned, even if it needed to be practiced personally.
It presented to them a way of life by
which they would all be governed;
more precisely, it was a vision of “the good life.” When the Law and the
Prophets were fully kept, they believed, all would be well.
What Sets Jesus Apart
in the Cause of Justice
What set Jesus apart as a leader in his day was the authority he exercised with respect to
the Law. The priestly, rabbinic and scholarly community helped the people
embrace, understand and observe the Law as it had been handed down to them.
They were stewards, but over the years their interpretation of the Law and
practice of it became corrupted.
And this is what Jesus addressed, specifically. In some
instances, he upheld what had been handed down to them, seeking to
illuminate the original meaning of the Law. In other instances, he modified
the Law. In still other instances, he overturned the Law, teaching them
those aspects that were no longer needed, no longer in keeping with the spirit in
which the Law was originally given.
In any case, what informed Jesus’ ministry was a vision of a
society where the good Law, as God gives it afresh, is cherished and observed so
that people and creation might flourish.
But, Jesus was also set apart from everyone else because he
wisely pointed out that this System of Law could only be fully embraced as the
human heart underwent a transformation.
Thus, in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus quotes the Law “do
not murder” while observing that the source of murder is in the human heart in
the form of hatred. In a similar way,
Jesus quotes the Law when it says “do not commit adultery” but he goes on to teach that the source of adultery is in the human heart in the form of lust.
Jesus taught that if we learn not to hate, we will not
murder; if we learn not to lust, we will not betray trust. To transform
society, we need to transform the human heart.
But, notice, that is not all Jesus taught. He taught that
personal transformation was necessary to achieve the end to which the Law was
directed; namely, the realization of a just and flourishing society—a world
where God’s will is done “on earth as it is in heaven.”
[iii]
That world is a world of joy and freedom, hope and provision, love and honesty.
It’s a world where no one kills, no one lies, no one cheats, no one steals and
everyone is at peace with one another. It’s a good world.
That’s what the Law championed and that’s what Jesus
championed; namely, personal and systemic goodness.
An Example: What’s Most
Important?
Of course, another aspect that set Jesus apart from the
religious leaders of his day is that he actually practiced what he preached. He
truly upheld the Law and he was truly good from the inside-out. In him, there
was no hypocrisy. Not so, the Pharisees.
In Matthew 15
[iv],
we read how Jesus’ teachings in the Sermon on the Mount applied in a real, live
context. We see Jesus’ concern for both personal transformation and systemic
justice. The story shows us the nature of the conflict between Jesus and the
Pharisees and I want to look at it because we will be better able to grasp the nature
and significance of Dr. King’s work through it (since Dr. King based his engagement
of injustice on the values embodied by Jesus).
At first, you may wonder what the story in Matthew 15 has to
do with the work of Dr. King but it has everything to do with it. It’s an
excellent example of what it means to work for justice holistically (that is, both personally and systemically).
The story begins when the Pharisees and teachers criticize
Jesus and his disciples because they don’t observe the custom of washing hands
before eating. The custom was tied to their life of worship and rooted in the
Levitical code. Jesus answered them with
these words:
“Isaiah was right when he
prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:
‘These people honor me with their
lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’"
One can see at the outset that Jesus seeks to honor the Law
and the Prophets. He does this by quoting the prophet Isaiah. Jesus bases his
ministry on that of the prophets.
He doesn’t just quote the prophet, however; he asserts that
the words of the prophet are being
fulfilled even as they speak to one another. Jesus, therefore, serves the
role of a prophet himself. He claims an authority that critiques the status quo. One could say he is not only
the King of Kings, he is also a Prophet of Prophets.
In interpreting the prophet Isaiah, he goes on to say to the
Pharisees: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human
traditions.” (Mark 7:8)
Notice Jesus’ view that the commands are good. He does not
throw them out. What he wants to critique are the “human traditions” that were
entangled with the commands of God.
What is striking about this is that the Pharisees observed
this practice of washing hands because of their adherence to the Levitical
code, which they believed contained a detailed description of how to keep the
Ten Commandments. To the Pharisees, the practice of washing one’s hands was a command, in that sense. Thus, they were
unable to differentiate what was a command and what wasn’t.
This is where Jesus modified
the Law as they knew it and this is what got Jesus into trouble. He was calling
into question their very way of life (which, to them, was a vision of the good
life, keep in mind).
Matthew continues the narrative by including a parable Jesus
told them: “Listen and understand. What goes into someone’s mouth does not
defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.”
(Matthew 15:11)
Peter doesn’t understand what Jesus is saying, so in verse
15 he asks Jesus to explain the parable. Jesus replies:
“Are you still so dull? Don’t you
see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the
body? But the things that come out of a person’s mouth come from the heart, and
these defile them. For out of the heart come evil thoughts—murder, adultery,
sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what defile a
person; but eating with unwashed hands does not defile them.” (Matthew
15:16-20)
Significantly, Mark adds this comment to the story: “In
saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.” (Mark 7:19)
In a single short bit of teaching, Jesus ingeniously
underscores the need for personal transformation and he overturns a key aspect of the Law so powerful it governs the lives
of Jewish people still today: observing kosher dietary restrictions.
So far, in this interaction we have observed Jesus modifying the Law and overturning it. What of upholding it? That aspect, in fact, was
the first thing out of Jesus’ mouth when responding to the initial criticism by
the Pharisees. I skipped over it because I wanted to keep the best for last. Let’s
look now at how Jesus initially responded to the Pharisees, for we will see in
it how he upheld the Law and it will become more apparent how the work of Jesus
links with that of Dr. King.
How Jesus Upheld the
Law and Challenged the System
Certainly, it could be argued that Jesus can be seen
upholding the Law in the exposition we’ve offered already. Even in the instance
where Jesus overturns the Law, he does so because he wants us to embrace the
spirit of the Law, not the letter of it. In other words, even when Jesus
overturns the Law, his intent is to uphold
it, to champion the Law’s vision of a just society.
In this respect, it’s telling what Jesus initially said to
the Pharisees when they criticized him:
“And why do you break the command
of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and
mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But
you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their
father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ they are not to ‘honor their father or
mother’ with it. Thus, you nullify the word of God for the sake of your
tradition.” (Matthew 15:3-6)
Here we see again Jesus’ concern for keeping the
Commandments. To be sure, there is another story of Jesus where he overturns
the death penalty as punishment for sin.
[v]
Thus, Jesus is
not saying here in the
text by Matthew that the Pharisees should put to death anyone who “curses their
father or mother.” The emphasis in his reply is on their hypocrisy, that they do
not keep
the main part of the Law, which
is the Fifth Word to honor one’s father and mother.
That is where Jesus upholds the Law, specifically. He
reiterates the necessity of the Fifth Word of the Decalogue
[vi]
and asserts that the Pharisees, in their religiosity, broke the very
commandment God wants
everyone to
keep.
Basically, the Pharisees were neglecting to bless, honor and
care for their own elderly parents because they were withholding material
support from them. In this way, they were increasing the suffering of the aged.
The irony is that they were doing this because they wanted to give God more. They
thought they were doing a good thing but, far from adhering to the Law, the
Pharisees were breaking it—and thereby creating an unjust society.
In calling out their sin, Jesus addressed the issue of
ageism, common in his time (and in our time, too). It is the practice of
withholding basic human rights especially to the very old (but also to the very
young). It is a matter that concerns society’s “margins” and it was a concern
rooted in the original giving of the Law.
[vii]
What Happened Next
and How Jesus Responded
Jesus called out their sin and challenged their system.
Predictably, the Pharisees take offense.
Jesus’ disciples draw his attention to this. They say: “Do
you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?”
And Jesus answers: “Every plant that my heavenly Father has
not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them; they are blind guides. If
the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.”
I love the New Living Translation of this text. It renders
the expression “leave them” as “ignore them.” It reads in a matter-of-fact
fashion.
Because this piece is intended to highlight the work of Dr.
King, let’s apply this exposition now to his work.
Concerning Dr. King
Above, I wanted to look closely at the work of Jesus so we
can see how Dr. King followed his example. MLK followed suit in several
respects, five of which I mention below.
As the work of justice is never done and wide in scope (and
we still have a long way to go concerning race relations in America), I invite
you to consider these principles as we honor the examples of Jesus and Dr. King
by our words and actions.
First, to work for
justice is to work for personal transformation. Both Jesus and Dr. King
model this for us. In his lecture upon receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964,
Dr. King said:
“There is a sort
of poverty of the spirit which stands in glaring contrast to our scientific and
technological abundance. The richer we have become materially, the poorer we
have become morally and spiritually. We have learned to fly the air like birds
and swim the sea like fish, but we have not learned the simple art of living
together as brothers.
“Every man lives
in two realms, the internal and the external. The internal is that realm of
spiritual ends expressed in art, literature, morals, and religion. The external
is that complex of devices, techniques, mechanisms, and instrumentalities by
means of which we live. Our problem today is that we have allowed the internal
to become lost in the external. We have allowed the means by which we live to
outdistance the ends for which we live…This is the serious predicament, the
deep and haunting problem confronting modern man. If we are to survive today,
our moral and spiritual ‘lag’ must be eliminated.”
Second, it is not enough to work for personal
transformation. We must also endeavor to
change the system itself that nurtures injustice.
In their book Divided
by Faith (which concerns race relations in America) authors Michael O. Emerson
and Christian Smith document the propensity of white Christians to cite
personal and interpersonal issues in fighting racism, but a reluctance (or
inability) to see the problem of racial injustice in systemic terms. White people
often content themselves with stating “I’m not a racist” while at the same time
ignoring there are other factors that make a society racially unjust beyond
personal attitudes or behaviors.
Yet, the black church in America sees the inequity clearly—because
they experience the injustice first-hand. A black person may experience an
individual white person who is not a racist, but that does not mean the black
community enjoys equity in the system.
Even as Dr. King worked to raise our consciousness regarding
the dignity of every person, he worked practically (systemically) to secure the
right of black people in America to enjoy the same liberties as white people. He
sought to change the system, as did Jesus.
Third, we should follow the example of Jesus and Dr. King by
simply speaking truth to power. That
is what prophets do and today we are in need of such prophets.
Consider the power of these ideas. Dr. King (like Jesus) trusted
in the proclamation of the simple truth. Notice how, like a prophet, Dr. King
draws from the biblical tradition in this excerpt from his Nobel prize lecture.
“We still have a long, long way to
go before the dream of freedom is a reality for the Negro in the United States.
To put it figuratively in biblical language, we have left the dusty soils of
Egypt and crossed a Red Sea whose waters had for years been hardened by a long
and piercing winter of massive resistance. But before we reach the majestic
shores of the Promised Land, there is a frustrating and bewildering wilderness
ahead. We must still face prodigious hilltops of opposition and gigantic
mountains of resistance. But with patient and firm determination we will press
on until every valley of despair is exalted to new peaks of hope, until every
mountain of pride and irrationality is made low by the leveling process of
humility and compassion; until the rough places of injustice are transformed
into a smooth plane of equality of opportunity; and until the crooked places of
prejudice are transformed by the straightening process of bright-eyed wisdom.”
These words are filled with inherent power because of their
truth. Thus, in working for justice do not fight power with more power. Simply
speak truth to power and simply trust in the power of truth.
Fourth, I believe that Dr. King’s approach followed the
example of Jesus in exercising wisdom as to how to respond when faced with
opposition.
“Ignore them,” Jesus said.
There were many who opposed Dr. King’s message and they were
vocal and forceful in their opposition. But, what did Dr. King do? He ignored
them and carried on proclaiming the truth, taking a stand for justice. Like
Jesus, he paid for it with his life, but the truth prevailed and many were
changed because of it.
This way of working for justice is especially under threat
today, I do believe. But “ignoring one’s detractors” especially follows from
the third principle of simply speaking truth to power. The two go hand-in-hand.
If we really believe in the power of the truth, we don’t have to engage in a
tit-for-tat regarding every bit of opposition we face.
Yet, far from exercising discernment regarding wise
responses to one’s detractors, we nitpick at every jot and tittle someone
offers in disagreement. I find this is
true
especially on Facebook these days.
I cannot think of a time in the last three months when
someone posted a political opinion that wasn’t met with counter-argument,
counter-counter-argument and counter-counter-counter-argument…you get the idea.
And in a most unwise and uncivil fashion.
I can’t help but feel those types of interactions dishonor
the great heritage of civil discourse we have inherited from people like Dr.
King.
The word of Jesus and the example of Dr. King to simply “ignore
them” is in sore need of observance, I feel.
In the time it takes to answer our detractors, we could write ten times
as much buoyed by a positive vision of hope, vision, freedom and joy.
If “the best critique of the bad is the practice of the good”,
to maintain focus on writing and speaking the good comes in a close second. There
will always be naysayers. Don’t worry about them. Just do and speak what’s
true, good and noble. Trust in the power of truth.
A fifth lesson we can learn from Jesus and Dr. King as we
endeavor to work for justice is this: don’t
give up; persevere, even if it costs your life.
If you are ever faced with the choice to die for the truth
or to live while hiding the truth, choose the former. Most of us will not have
to die for the truth, thankfully. Most of us will simply need to persevere speaking truth to power,
working for systemic justice, softening (and, simultaneously, strengthening) our own hearts.
We need to persevere, because, as we are aware, there is
still much to be done in the interest of justice.
It is sobering that more than half a century after Dr. King
received the Nobel prize many feel these words which he spoke in his lecture
are apt for today, too, but in a different way. In speaking of the progress
that has been made, Dr. King said:
“Another indication that progress
is being made was found in the recent presidential election in the United
States. The American people revealed great maturity by overwhelmingly rejecting
a presidential candidate who had become identified with extremism, racism, and
retrogression. The voters of our nation rendered a telling blow to the radical
right. They defeated those elements in our society which seek to pit white
against Negro and lead the nation down a dangerous Fascist path.”
Those words, and the fact that I include those words in this
essay, no doubt will raise the anger of some of my readers. All I have to say
is: when I read those words earlier today they struck a chord of truth in me
that I cannot deny. The “extremism” of which Dr. King speaks presents a danger
not only to America but to Europe and many other places in the world.
That is why I am a minister. That is why I write. I believe
that, with God’s help, we are able to become more gracious and loving. I
believe that trust in God engenders trust in each other. I believe we can lay
down our weapons and defenses, open our arms like the crucified Christ and
experience the freedom and resurrection that attends such forgiveness,
compassion and mercy. I believe in a gentler way; I believe in the power of
gentleness. I believe humility is strong and courage can be kind. I believe the
lamb can lay down with the lion. I believe that with humans this seems
impossible, but with God (with the Truth of God), all things are possible.
We honor Dr. King best by working for justice the way Jesus
worked for justice. May we truly fulfill the Golden Rule by working for justice
in everything we do: personally,
systemically, speaking truth to power, captivated not by the opposition, but by
a vision of love, even if it means ultimate sacrifice.
Amen.
[i]
from
A Testament of Hope: The Essential
Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. edited by James M.
Washington.
[ii] from
“Letter from the Birmingham Jail” (italics mine)
[iv] In
my exposition, I also draw from Mark’s parallel account of this same incident,
since Mark includes a few additional (yet complementary) details. It’s found in
Mark 7.
[v] That
story is in John 8:1-11.
[vi] …which
we refer to as the Fifth Commandment.
[vii]
Originally, the Law to “honor your parents” was especially directed at adult
children of elderly parents. The concern was the honor one grants a parent when
the adult child cares for their parents who are no longer able to care for
themselves. It’s a question of human dignity as we age and it represents a
significant issue of social justice. Today, we interpret the Fifth Word mainly
with respect to young children. This is the subject of another essay, but it is
the very thing Jesus wanted to restore that had become distorted to his first
century listeners. I include it here to demonstrate the need to work for
justice on a systemic level, beyond the personal ramifications.
