Paul in the letter to the Romans tries to teach what it means to be human in the way that God wants us to, in the way that Christ modelled, in the way that the Spirit continues to call. The force of these instructions from Paul is quite strong. The grammar of Greek text uses verb tenses that are commands. He is quite adamant that we take action: that we love, rejoice, seek peace, be patient, and offer care.
In the midst of all the confusion, Paul tells them: “If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all”. This is an important recognition that some things in our life are out of our control; we can only do so much within our situations. We can only do so much with what we’re given, we often feel guilty for not doing more when we know full well it is an impossibility to do so.
We cannot control the will of others. We can only focus on us and what we can do. Miriam lent me a book a couple months ago based on the wisdom of the indigenous Toltec people called The 4 Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz. One of the agreements that he proposes for is “Don’t take anything personally.” The reason being, people’s action and reactions to you are based on their own issues and perceptions. We cannot take on their baggage along with our own.
Worry, not about others, not about what we cannot change, but what we can do. How can we promote peace in our relationships? Even if it means, “Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them”? Where does self-defence come in? In abusive and oppressive situations (domestically and internationally) when does enough become enough? Surely we must know that God wants us to be happy and fulfilled, that we can best share goodness and love when we experience the same.
It is human nature to respond to others in the way we’ve been treated. It is also human nature to give away our decisions making ability to others. Such is the hidden trap of democracy, as the people of Iraq are discovering.
There is a local dispute about forced hookup to water. I’m not going to say much about it, for or against. But I will comment that the argument it is not democratic is not true. In a democracy, we elect people to make decisions for us. We surrender our power to these people, that we supposedly trust. Yet the majority, as slim as it may be, will rule. So we also give away our decision making ability to the whole group.
Is it a "gentle dictatorship"? I guess that depends on which side of power you’re on. It’s an imperfect system but it’s the best one we have. Everyone has a say in choosing who our dictator is.
Not only in politics, we give away our moral authority too. We do it with the Bible. We have a question about how to live or treat others, about what is right and wrong and we turn to the Bible. Which is a healthy instinct for a Christian to have. The problem is, the Bible is so complicated and dense at times, that depending on which verses are read, we would find different instructions.
And some of the things that people may think are in the Bible are not actually there! We think, if it’s in the Bible, then that’s that. We don’t stop to check and find out, or think things through for ourselves. Example: "God helps those who help themselves" is nowhere in the Bible, it comes from Ben Franklin and/or Aesop.
So voting in a democracy, reading the Bible are acts of trust. Once we make a choice, we have to believe those in public office, those that translate and interpret scripture have our best interests at heart. Paul might suggest instead to take back responsibility for our own decisions and their consequences, as far as it depends on us. Give our trust to God’s goodness and purpose, using our resources of support, strength and encouragement.
|