User:Peter1c/Judge Not

= Judge not, lest ye be judged. =
 * On the one hand, there is the type of sinner whom, in present-day language, we would call ‘oppressor.’ Their basic sin consists in oppressing, placing intolerable burdens on others, acting unjustly and so on. On the other hand, there are those who sin ‘from weakness’ or those ‘legally considered sinners’ according to the dominant religious view. Jesus takes a very different approach to each group. He offers salvation to all, and makes demands of all, but in a very different way. He directly demands a radical conversion of the first group, an active cessation from oppressing. For these, the coming of the Kingdom is above all a radical need to stop being oppressors.
 * Jon Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator (1991), pp. 96-97

In light of this distinction between sins of weakness and sins of oppression, we can ask:


 * (1) in verses where Jesus advises against judging, which type of sin is in question?


 * (2) in verses where Jesus judges, which type of sin is he judging?

I think we will find that in verses where Jesus warns against judging (e.g. Jn 8:7), the sin in question is sin of weakness. I think we will find that in verses where Jesus does judge (e.g. Mt 23:13), the sin in question is sin of oppression.

Sobrino's clarification of the distinction between sins of weakness and sins of oppression opens up a possible way to respond to sin: condemn the oppressor, as the prophets do, "Woe to those who deprive the poor of their rights" (Isa 10:2) while refusing to judge sins of weakness, "Let the one who has not sinned cast the first stone."

You'll notice this is precisely the opposite of what we customarily do.

In particular, the idea that we should not judge a ruling system to which we acquiesce is entirely dangerous and false. The ruling system is not the powerless adulteress. If we refuse to judge the ruling system, our refusal comes not out of motives of mercy but out of motives of cowardice, comfort and peace of mind. If we don't judge the system we acquiesce to, we become collaborators in its crimes.

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, obey out of conscience and not just fear. But this doesn't mean the ruling powers are not judged. The prophets demand we hold a plumb line up to rulers and ruling systems and see if they uphold principles they claim to uphold (Amos 7:8).

Caesar called himself the son of god, and demanded worship. This is where early Christians drew the line, and refused even when it meant martyrdom. In other words, there is a material life where it is acceptable to acquiesce to empire, and a spiritual life where we are free from all human authority, where we pursue perfection of the spirit in subjection to no limitation but the highest capacity of the spirit itself. Here in the spiritual life it is sacrilege to accept Caesar's claim to be the son of god.

Now, today, the ruling power claims to be democracy. Is this claim true? Princeton political scientists Gilens and Page show there is no correlation between the interests of poor people and the outcome of legislative decisions, and a very high correlation with the interests of the very rich. United States empire comes up with fabricated causes for war and invades. When fabricated causes are seen to be fabricated, everyone just forgets about it and the next war begins. Let's not sugar coat the reality of imperialism: empire invades because it's profitable. There is no reason to concede an exceptional status to the United States empire. United States empire is as merciless and ruthless as any other empire in history. The goal is the same as every other empire: to seek rapid increase in wealth and power with no concern whatsoever for the suffering this quest for wealth and power inflicts on the poor and helpless.

When we bow down to empire, is it because we see how well empire lives up to ideals it claims to uphold? Or is it because if we don't bow down to empire, empire will imprison and martyr us? I don't think it takes much reflection to see, it is because empire is mighty that we worship empire, not because empire is right.

In practical life everyone has conceded to the authority of empire, so there is no way to function in practical life without, in the practical part of the mind, accepting empire's way of looking at things. For Paul, acquiescence to empire in our jobs is not sin. Paul keeps building tents during his apostleship (Acts 18:3]). Paul advises Corinthians not to quit their jobs, as many were tempted to do when they learned the true nature of the evil empire they worked for (1 Cor 7:20, 1 Thess 4:11).

At work we must obey. But in spiritual life we are free to understand the truth. Rulers and ruling systems inevitably destroy each other in their rapacious quest for power. Rulers of this world are coming to nothing. Eventually you run out of places to invade. It is false to put our faith, our hope, our trust in empire. The classic apology for acquiescence to empire was that private vices like greed and ambition can become public benefits if they are channeled by wise legislators. But if legislators too have private vices like greed and ambition, how exactly can this work? When legislators take bribes, in what sense can we say that the ruling system is even measuring productivity at all?

One example: because legislators take bribes from oil and coal companies, oil and coal companies are not compelled to pay downstream environmental costs of their fuels. Costs are imposed on helpless victims without compensation. Coastal cities flooded by rising oceans and migrants fleeing dying deserts will not be entitled to compensation from oil and coal companies that produced the climate change causing these effects. Downstream costs are imposed on poor and helpless people, while profits are privatized and funneled into offshore accounts used to pay bribes to legislators.

The rulers of this world are coming to nothing. It is wrong to put our faith, our hope, our trust in them. Rulers take bribes. Rulers oppress the poor. Rulers attack the helpless and ignore the desperate and hopeless. Woe to those who deprive the poor of their rights.

"Archolatry" is the idolization of rulers. To idolize the victors in the war for power and resources is to accept "might makes right" as a fundamental moral principle. This is how the entire commercial system operates. Acquiescence to power is a given. Might makes right in the business world. Whoever has money is a potential customer, a potential investor. The homeless, the helpless, the refugee, the poor and oppressed, they are irrelevant. The planet is irrelevant. Cash is power.

Maybe instead of sugar coating this really unsavory life of acquiescence to the evil empire, we can instead carve out a spiritual part of life where "might makes right" is no longer accepted as a moral principle, where we pursue perfection of the spirit without subjection to immoral, corrupt, unjust ruling powers that take bribes and deprive the poor of their rights.